PLAYERS Not a Major

[iacas]

I'm writing the Trap Five column this week on the top five reasons the "PLAYERS" is not a major.

I'll start off with one reason: It's too new. The Masters began in 1934 and is currently the youngest tournament. The PLAYERS started in 1982. Nothing started during the age of Miami Vice, fluorescent "jams," jelly shoes, and slap bracelets should count as a major.

Please feel free to add your reasons.

[Cleveland Gunmetal]

I completely agree. You can't just start a tournament, make the purse one of the richest in golf and call it a major. Same thing with all the World Golf Events. Great tournaments but a step below a major. There's much more to it, starting with the fact that it is simply too new. There needs to be history. The players have to want it more than anything. It has to count as a major, which it doesn't. There also needs to be something unique about a major. Whether it's the slick, tricky greens of Augusta, the heavy rough of the US Open or the Links style and pot bunkers of the British Open. However, one could say that this tournament is much like the PGA Championship. Sort of takes something from the other majors to make it a nice all around test. And it does that and it is a great tournament and it does have the famous 17th hole... but this tournament doesn't "feel" like a major. The media doesn't treat it like one and it doesn't have that magic feeling around it prior to the start of play. I don't think all of the players treat it like a major either, publicly they may not say that but they don't. However, that isn't going to stop me from really enjoying watching this tournament. If I recall the coverage is excellent and I'm sure the golf will be even better.

[MGP]

I couldn't agree more. The Majors are the Majors. No additons, no subtractions... regardless how much big media and it's $$$ want to gin up a new one.

For a long time I even had a hard time with the PGA as the 4th major. I'll give them that one though as it's as old as the PGA tour and it's their championship.

Frankly, I'm not real thrilled about the whole Fedex Cup thing either. The first thing that struck me about it was "Oh great, NASCAR for golf!" Pure manufactured drama for the sake of advertising dollars.

I've always agreed with the notion that sports is entertainment but thought it was in a different category than say movies or TV where basically anything new or different or contrived is OK as long as people like it and enjoy it.

Sports however are a contest and if the the contest is staged or contrived it isn't really all that compelling (see "professional" wrestling ) Sports has an uncertainty in it's outcome and sometimes that's what makes it so compelling. Big media absolutely hates this as they want to be in control of all aspects of their product. They want guaranteed drama, conflict and controversy even if they have to manufacture it to get it. Sports, by nature is a bit unpredictable and "real" and I hope they never succeed in getting rid of that element of it.

Many sports, like golf, are also rich in tradition. Part of the appeal of golf is that it is basically still the same game that's been played for 100's of years. The Majors are the epitome of that tradition and we love to compare what Tiger has done against Jack... or Arnie... back through time. I say don't mess with them or it just makes the game a cheap imitation of what it's been thorugh all the years.

[iacas]

I couldn't agree more. The Majors are the Majors. No additons, no subtractions... regardless how much big media and it's $$$ want to gin up a new one.

I completely agree. You can't just start a tournament, make the purse one of the richest in golf and call it a major. Same thing with all the World Golf Events.

Thanks for the commentary. I'm looking for actual, singular, self-contained "reasons" though, so that I can write a

Trap Five article about the "top five reasons the PLAYERS is not a Major." So, if you can pull out individual reasons, that'd help.

[Cleveland Gunmetal]

Thanks for the commentary. I'm looking for actual, singular, self-contained "reasons" though, so that I can write a

Well coming up with actual, self-contained reasons are difficult.

I think the fact that nothing really stands out about this tournament is a reason. Sure, the 17th hole but there isn't a certain aspect or element of the course/tournament that makes it unique. Nothing that separates it from say, the World Golf events (which also have high purses and an elite field). Is that a reason? I don't know. But that's why I think some have trouble accepting even the PGA Championship as a major.

[Cleveland Gunmetal]

Also... isn't this owned and run by the PGA Tour? I may be wrong... but I think it is, opposed to the 4 majors which have a separate party involved, ie USGA (US OPEN), Augusta National (Masters).

Also read something that states that this does not count as a official event on the European Tour, unlike the 3 other majors held in the US.

[Matt P]

First, there is simply no aura around the event, the players go their for the purse, not a chance at history. No matter how hard it tries you cannot create a new major, it will just happen over time and probably needs a defining moment.

Second, the name of the tournament has issues, The Players Championship. There is already a "player's championship" and it is called the PGA Championship. I think that might be why they have taken to calling it the Players. However, the Players sounds like a hand me down Masters. In essence they have ripped off two of the majors names.

The fun thing about the tournamet though is it is a very challenging course and it is fun to watch the pros struggle on 17.

[niblick]

History. All the greats from the game's early years have history and wins at the majors. If Hogan, Snead, Nelson, Jones, Sarazen, Vardon and Hagen never competed, it's not a major championship.

[Ogg]

I am going to disagree with all of you. The Players has THE best field of any tournament throughout the year. It has a tremendous golf course and an incredible purse. Does history make a major? No, or else the majors would have never started. The course can play hard without making it ridiculous like the USGA does. It has a better field than the Masters and the British.

Winning a tournament against the best field in golf should make it Major status hands down.

[ragontona]

Railroad ties do not a major championship course make.

[iacas]

Well coming up with actual, self-contained reasons are difficult.

Here are some of the candidates I came up with:

It's Too New Finchem and Beaman are no Bobby Jones It Can Be Fifth Best without Being a Major Pete Dye is no Alistair MacKenzie Grand Slam = Four

Also... isn't this owned and run by the PGA Tour? I may be wrong... but I think it is, opposed to the 4 majors which have a separate party involved, ie USGA (US OPEN), Augusta National (Masters).

Sure, but I don't know why that would be a reason it can't be a major. Then we'd have five tournaments all run by different organizations.

Also read something that states that this does not count as a official event on the European Tour, unlike the 3 other majors held in the US.

You may be right about that... Hmmm. Interesting.

First, there is simply no aura around the event, the players go their for the purse, not a chance at history.

Well put. A large purse does not a major make.

Second, the name of the tournament has issues, The Players Championship.

As you know, it's not called that anymore. It's called "The Players" just like "The Masters." They dropped "Championship" (and, for awhile, called it "The PLAYERS").

There is already a "player's championship" and it is called the PGA Championship. I think that might be why they have taken to calling it the Players.

I don't think that's why. I think it has more to do with the name of The Masters.

The "P" in "PGA" stands for "Professional" anyway. I haven't ever heard the PGA Champ called a "player's championship" in any form. As you said, it's more a rip-off of The Masters than anything - I can agree with that.

[LarryK]

The Players is not a major because it is not a true "championship" -- regardless of what the promoters choose to call it.

The US Open is the USGA championship. It is the United States championship of amateur and professional golf combined.

The British Open is the championship of the United Kingdom (if not all of Europe) and is therefore the championship of the very birthplace of golf.

The PGA was , for most of its history, the professional championship, although the Tour Championship and the Fed Ex Cup have done their best to reduce its importance. One could argue that the pros should only get one championship to crown their champion and that that tournament should be a major. But make up your mind, fer cryin' out loud. How many Super Bowls does the NFL play?

The Masters is the lone exception to the championship = major argument. And that's the problem. Because Bobby Jones' friendly get together evolved into something much bigger based on strength of field and tradition, others with a bad case of ego or mere over-enthusiasm apparently want to see if they can make history by actually manufacturing it through sheer hype. They don't seem to understand that you don't create a "major" via majority vote or mere designation. It happens by acclamation.

[Cleveland Gunmetal]

Erik - I did check and the European Tour does have it's own version of the Players. I think it's called Dubai Players Championship or something like that. I don't even know if it falls during the same week but I doubt it.

[Ogg]

How is the Players not a true championship? It has THE BEST field in all of the tournaments played. Isn't that what you want? The best competing against the best? So far I have seen only one "reason" and that is It Can Be Fifth Best without Being a Major which is still dubious at best. If you have read about the changes to the course, it is being raved about.

So we have a great course, with great finishes, a wonderful 17th hole and the best field of all the golf tournaments in the world. The only thing missing now is a media annointment of it being a major.

[Cleveland Gunmetal]

How is the Players not a true championship? It has THE BEST field in all of the tournaments played. Isn't that what you want? The best competing against the best? So far I have seen only one "reason" and that is It Can Be Fifth Best without Being a Major which is still dubious at best. If you have read about the changes to the course, it is being raved about.

It has the best field because it offers the most money. That doesn't make it a major. Also, what about the World Golf Events? They have the greatest players in the world competing, and usually on great courses, Doral, Firestone, etc. Do we now have to annoint a 6th and 7th major. Hell, let's make the match play event a major too. Afterall it does have the top 64 rated players with high purses.

[golfchief]

This is a tough one but the view from here is you don't build a major it just turns into one. My reasons are.

1. The Masters started as an Invitational tournament by the club, Having Bobby Jones as a member was a bonus to get the best players around to come play their new course, they came to play against Bobby Jones on a course he help design and he told them it was the best course they will ever play and at the time they put up the biggest purse. Who could turn down a chance to beat Bobby Jones on his own course. The rest is History.

2. U.S. Open/ British Open was started when many amatures from the private clubs was playing and shooting scores the was as good or better than the pro's of the time and they also new of amatures that could not afford to be members but could beat par on most of their rounds. Putting Amatures against the pros sounded like a good idea at the time and they were right.

[Ogg]

So what, it offers the most money. It still has the best field. What makes a major a major anyway? History? No, since they all had to start at some point. Money? Nope. Right now it is just media annointment. The Masters is special because they do things their way. So I suppose if the PGA Tour started calling fans spectator's it might give them more of a sense of entitlement?

I would think that a tournament should be judged on it's field strength anyway. So afr I still haven't seen any good arguments on why it shouldn't be a major and I have seen a poor defense on why majors are what they are anyway. I think the Open Championship says it best when they declare the champion golfer of the year as the winner.

[Guest]

I disagree guys. The history of Sawgrass is in it's own league. Not only the history of the other majors, which stands alone but I think TPC could easily be a major event. Even more now that the renovation is completed. It is by far the best and hardest course I have ever played and the Pro's have said the same. It has the most picturest hole (s) in the world. The attraction and spectator response it probably second best to the Masters.