PGA Tour - What Do You Think of These Observations?

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ....

SOME POINTS

(1) ... Since its inception in 1987, the Tour Championship, whether open to the Top 30 Money Winners (1987-2006) or the Top 30 in Fed Ex Cup Points (2007-GodKnowsWhen), has almost always been devoid of drama in deciding Leading Money Winner, Player of the Year and (before 2010) Fed Ex Cup Champion. There were only a couple of times (1989 and 1996) when the Leading Money Winner and Player-of-the-Year Titles were really at issue.

(2) ... Because it is open only to the Top 30 (Money or Points), and because no replacements for vacancies among the Top 30 are allowed, the Tour Championship lacks the drama of deciding the Top 30 race, which determines who qualifies for the Masters, US Open, British Open and CA-Doral Invitational.

(3) ... The Fed Ex Cup playoff events (and WGC's) are the very same ones each year. No other PGA Tour events share in the Fed Ex Cup or WGC experience. This hurts a lot of events who never see (if at all) the superstars play.

(4) ... The current standard prize money distribution formula for PGA Tour events has a difference ratio between 1st place and 70th place of 90-1 (In a $5,000,000 event, that's $900,000-1st, $10,000-70th). There needs to be a restructuring of the standard distribution formula so that the difference ratio between 1st and 70th place is lowered to at least 50-1 (it can be even lower than that!). A narrower difference ratio between 1st and 70th place could make for a fairer playing field in-so-far-as all money races (1st - Top 30 - Top 70 - Top 125 - Top 150) are concerned.

(5) ... Despite the emergence of a few 20-somethings this year, limited playing opportunities still exist for Nationwide Tour and Q-School Graduates. To help these players, the Top 125 Money Winner exemption category should be reduced to Top 90. Other exemptions favorable to Nationwide Tour and Q-School players should also be introduced.

(6) ... Why have a Thursday-to-Sunday season finale in late September on Sunday afternoon during NFL and MLB games, when you can instead have it in early November, running Monday thru Thursday in Prime Time from Hawaii!!!! If you do that, then scrap the points system and playoffs, go back to a money based season-long championship, rotate higher than usual purses among randomly selected events each year, and then have your Top 50-or-so players (replacements allowed) compete in the Final Event.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

[Shindig]

(4) ... The current standard prize money distribution formula for PGA Tour events has a difference ratio between 1st place and 70th place of 90-1 (In a $5,000,000 event, that's $900,000-1st, $10,000-70th). There needs to be a restructuring of the standard distribution formula so that the difference ratio between 1st and 70th place is lowered to at least 50-1 (it can be even lower than that!). A narrower difference ratio between 1st and 70th place could make for a fairer playing field in-so-far-as all money races (1st - Top 30 - Top 70 - Top 125 - Top 150) are concerned.

I disagree sharply. I'd rather see a larger discrepency in payouts, especially in the 30-70 range ; I don't want the guys who make the cut on the number to phone it in for a few days. In addition to the MDF rule, I'd love it if something could light a fire under these folks and get the competing more, or at least a better reward for those that do. Motivate more those who are fighting for their card to do better from mediocrity. And then again, look who won after making the cut on the number this year.

[shades9323]

Greetings ....

No way that would ever happen. Which station would be crazy enough to preempt their regular prime time programming for something that just wont draw?

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ...

My Feedback -- and some clarifications as well.

1 ... In proposing a season-ending event in Hawaii, in November, and in prime-time from Monday to Thursday, it is not necessary for the same broadcast network to show it every year. Just rotate it among CBS, NBC and either Fox or ABC. The broadcast network need only show the final round live on Thursday, and could have the option of airing either a one-hour third round highlight show or limited live third round coverage on Wednesday. Coverage of the first two or three rounds could be handled by either TGC or TNT, as ESPN's networks are busy with both pro and college football at this point in the year.

2 ... It is true on some occasions that races for Leading Money Winner (if not Fed Ex) and/or Player-of-the-Year may already be decided by the start of the season-ending event. What would help draw fan interest is if we could have some years like what we have in this year of 2010, where no one is dominating (or, more importantly, over-dominating) the tour, and there's a big element of suspense going into the Tour Championship. Years of domination have their place, but years where the final outcome of several races is in doubt are needed as often as they can happen.

3 .. About restructuring the prize money distribution formula - to some this might seem like giving bigger rewards to "mediocre" players. But consider scenarios created if the Top 125 Money Winner Category is lowered to Top 90 and the Top 150 Money Winner Category is lowered to Top 120. Consider also taking the "Beyond Top 150" Money Winner Category, re-naming it "Beyond Top 120" and then splitting it in two (121-160 and, about 2 levels down, 161-240). What may happen as a result is that the "mediocre" players, although maybe earning a little more money than before, could find themselves facing the loss of exempt status, and so they would have to play one or two more events each year in order to maintain their status.

BTW - In one of my personally created purse re-structure models, the difference ratio between first and second place is 1.93+to-1 vs the current ratio of 1.67-to-1. For first and third, I have the ratio at 2.89+-to-1 vs the current mark of 2.65+-to-1. In other words, let's have a re-structured distribution that puts a greater emphasis on winning an event, rather than just placing high in it.

Another BTW - All event purses do -NOT- have to go up in any modified re-distribution scenario. Rather, set a uniform minimum level for all events (except majors and certain others) each year. To encourage participation of star players, purses would be increased by at least 20% at selected events each year. In a money-based rather than points-based competitive enviroment, this would help a number of events who don't always see the big names play.


4 ... PGA Tour members are required to play at least 15 events per year in order to retain full playing priviledges. If I'm right, Veteran Members (at least 150 career cuts made, unspecified minimum years of play time) need only play at least 12 events per year. Change that to -MINIMUM ROUNDS PLAYED- ... IE, at least 60 rounds rather 15 events; for Veterans, at least 48 rounds rather than 12 events. You would then have scenarios where players miss cuts to the point where they are compelled to add an event or two to their schedule in order to meet the rounds played requirements.

5 ... There are TWO and ONLY TWO conditions for winning the $10 million Fed Ex Cup Grand Prize - Be a full-time PGA Tour Member -AND- earn more points than anyone else. The chase for all that loot might be a bit more interesting if the Grand Prize was $5 million unconditional, and $10 million conditional (X number of tournament wins during the year, with permutations therein).

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

[majorchamp]

on a different note, I find it completely ridiculous 3 major champions in 2010 did not play in the Fed Ex Cup. That is pathetic the way the Fed Ex Cup is setup in that regard.

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ...

The Fed Ex Cup is a competition limited to regular PGA Tour members who earn enough points to qualify.

There are plenty of other events where the winners of the 4 Grand Slam majors can get together, such as the WGC events, the SBS Championship and the Players Championship.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

[majorchamp]

Greetings ...

just like certain events get you exemptions into The Masters, U.S. Open, etc... I think if you happen to win one of the 4 prestigious Major Championships (which is the PGA Tours cream of the crop tournaments), you should be given an exemption into the Fed Ex Cup 1st event. It's up to the players at that point to try and advance, but I think its fair request they amend the rules for 2011 to allow for this.

[Shanks A Million]

I disagree sharply. I'd rather see a larger discrepency in payouts, especially in the 30-70 range ; I don't want the guys who make the cut on the number to phone it in for a few days. In addition to the MDF rule, I'd love it if something could light a fire under these folks and get the competing more, or at least a better reward for those that do. Motivate more those who are fighting for their card to do better from mediocrity. And then again, look who won after making the cut on the number this year.

I'd like it to be even larger again still. Give the winner something like 500k, but second place should be more like 20k, at best. These guys make way, way, way too much money, even if they don't win, and with sponsor bonuses, it's even worse. The guys who have never even won are living in palacial manisons. It used to be, if you didn't win, you weren't making money. Make it that way again.

[jamo]

I'd like it to be even larger again still. Give the winner something like 500k, but second place should be more like 20k, at best. These guys make way, way, way too much money, even if they don't win, and with sponsor bonuses, it's even worse. The guys who have never even won are living in palacial manisons. It used to be, if you didn't win, you weren't making money. Make it that way again.

That's not really economically viable. If you lower the purse that much you will see loads of guys just going to the Euro Tour.

I actually think it's good the way it is. If you make it less spread out like the OP is suggesting there is just no good that can come out of it. If you do what Shanks is suggesting (and Shindig to a degree) you are taking a long term step back in talent. What do people always say in the Tiger v Jack debate? Jack had a few really good players to compete against, but the Tour is much deeper now. If you make it harder for non winners to make a living you are making it harder for them to justify making professional golf their job. You might start to get good players not playing golf because if they don't win 3 times a year they just can't make enough money.

[shades9323]

Greetings ...

lol

Thursday is the biggest night of the week on tv. None of the major networks are going to want to show a little watched golf event instead of their bread and butter tv shows. Nobody cares about golf.

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ...

Consider also this proposed suggestion

Barring an acceptable - and provable - mitigating circumstance, any player who wins a PGA Tour event (other than the Grand Slam majors, which the Tour does not control) one year but then does not defend said title the next year will be penalized by having 10% of his total official money (and/or points) earned in the calendar year that the "non-defense offense" occurs declared unofficial! Such a penalty is sure to impact a player's standing on any given money or points list. You combine this idea with those for minimum rounds played vs minimum events played as well as reducing the Top 125 Money Winner Category to Top 90 (as well as Top 150 to Top 120) and I think you would see a marked difference in performances from many players as a result.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

[sean_miller]

lol

I concur. The only reason anyone watches now is because they know who's playing (or scheduled to play) in advance and they know who to cheer for. Nobody cares who's playing the best, they want to see stars. Even if some of those stars languish somewhere between 90 - 150 on the money list.

[JWL1957]

The golf season is already too long for me. After the PGA is finished........ so am I. The Ryder Cup and Presidents Cup are the only exceptions.

The tour championship to me is like watching a beauty pageant....... all glitz.

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ...

Appreciate feedback from everyone.

I'm wondering if anyone put two-and-two together concerning the combination effect of Minimum Rounds Played vs Minimum Events Played, along the the reduction of Top 125 Money Winners to Top 90 (and Top 150 Money Winners to Top 120).

About my suggestions on revising prize money distribution, consider this ---

With regards to the current standard PGA Tour distribution method, and using a $5,000,000 purse for illustration, the difference ratio between 1st ($900,000) and 2nd ($540,000) is 1.667-1. Between 1st and 3rd ($340,000), 2.647-1. Between 1st and 4th ($240,000), 3.750-1. Between 1st and a 2-way tie for 2nd ($440,000), 2.045-1. Between 1st and a 3-way tie for 2nd ($373,334), 2.679-1.

One of my own distribution formula models has the following difference ratios .... Between 1st and 2nd, 2.000-1. Between 1st and 3rd, 3.333-1. Between 1st and 4th. 5.000-1. Between 1st and a 2-way tie for 2nd, 2.500-1. Between 1st and a 3-way tie for 2nd, 2.994-1.

What conclusions would you draw from the changed ratios?

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport