2014 Ryder Cup Discussion Thread

[saevel25]

Yes it makes perfect sense, I think it must be one of those "American-English" sort of things.. Ya know..

Not really. You must be speaking the "Queens" English. She needs to go back to grammar school.

[Gunther]

Not really. You must be speaking the "Queens" English. She needs to go back to grammar school. :-D

Haha, right. Yes, I was messing around a bit myself. But truly, when you hear a fan of a particular team referring to his team by we or us, it's a red flag that the dude is either a dork or far too invested. But really, not germane to this discussion. Just another one my posts that don't really say anything.

[turtleback]

Does the President's Cup have the same format as the Ryder Cup? Best ball and alternate shot on days 1/2 and then singles on the 3rd day? If not, I think it behooves the PGA of America to adjust the President's Cup format to match the Ryder Cup.

Even better, while I know it won't happen, would be to get the PGA of America out of the Ryder Cup altogether.  It made sense when the PGA included the tournament players, but they do not any more and the PGA of America has demonstrated a complete inability to put a system in place that ensures continuity and gives us reasonable choices for captains.

The problem is the USA Organization of its Ryder Cup Team -- the process of selecting a Captain and organizing and forming a team.

Once upon a time, the USA could trot out better talent with an inferior organization and win, because of its individual players.

No more.

Exactly my point, and the ones who created the (lack of) organization for the Ryder Cup team are the PGA of America..  Why would we think that guys who are great at giving lessons to regular folks and running their pro shop would have any expertise whatsoever in the field of top level tournament golf.  Do we really need to be subjected to Ted Bishop's "unconventional" approach or Tom Watson's "gut".

I know, was pulling his leg to a certain degree. Shouldn't be ambiguous though - there's only 1 'The Open Championship'. I don't see many people making sure they call it "The US Masters" to avoid confusion with The Australian Masters :)

It's the oldest Major, has been called The Open Championship for over 150 years. Don't really see why anyone should have the need to rename it, especially on a golf forum :)

Calling it the British Open was good enough for Bobby Jones and Harry Vardon and Jack Nicklaus (to name 3 guys in the all time best discussion who cover a very wide time frame and were all students of the history fo the game ) when they were writing their books.  Calling it "The" Open became rather arrogant once there was more than one.  People recognized that but in the last 20 years or so the British and our own media here decided to start making a big thing about it,  Feel free to call the Masters the US Masters.  Feel free to call the British Open, The Open. You can even feel free to feel all superior because you call it the Open and we call it the British Open.

But do not be surprised if some of us just laugh at that pretentiousness.

[Nosevi]

Turtle, I was kidding. Well, to a certain degree...... I couldn't care less if someone in the States wants to call it the British Open. I really and truthfully couldn't. Matters not one jot to me :) But there have been those, mostly if not all in the States, that say the name should be changed to reflect the fact it isn't the only Open. The name is not The Open Championship of Golf to be arogant. It was what it was called 150 odd years ago. It is massively more arrogant to presume to change the name of someone else's tournament. By all means call it whatever you want. But don't think the name should ever be changed in order to be more acceptable or easier to differentiate to the American public. Why should it be? People can call it whatever they choose, really, no issue at all. But it's called The Open Championship. That's its name. Not presumptious, not arrogant, not anything. It's just what it happens to be called :)

[RandallT]

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/9/30/european-tour-allowed-mcginley-to-influence-tourney-grouping.html

Many admire Captain Paul McGinley's attention to detail but does there become an eye-roll, oy-vey, get-a-life, winning isn't everything moment?

After reading Doug Ferguson's story about the European Tour allowing the captain to control early round pairings to help players from say, Team Lake Nona, get to know those playing the actual European Tour, is, a tad excessive.

Graeme McDowell and Victor Dubuisson playing together in the French Open was no accident.

McGinley wanted them for foursomes at Gleneagles, and they wound up winning both their matches.

"I was able to get Victor and Graeme on the same page," he said. "I controlled the draws on the European Tour during the summer, and every time Graeme came to play in Europe, he played with Victor. They didn't know what I was planning, but I had planned that they would be partners."

Hmmm. Does the PGA do this at all? Could Tom Watson have had his planned pairings matched in PGA Tour events?

[FarawayFairways]

I think Westwood and Donaldson were paired to play alongside each other at Celtic Manor the week before too? Mind you, had Phil (I'm taking time off to concentrate on the Ryder Cup) Mickelson decided to play with his partner and come over a week early, as Bradley was also available, they were unlikely to be denied if making a similar request

[MS256]

Haha, right. Yes, I was messing around a bit myself. But truly, when you hear a fan of a particular team referring to his team by we or us, it's a red flag that the dude is either a dork or far too invested. But really, not germane to this discussion. Just another one my posts that don't really say anything.

Just off of the top of my head I can't think of anybody I know that's not a sports fan. Some are fanatical about it and some don't pay much attention until something like a championship game.

Every single one of those people would say "we" when referring to their favorite team. We would consider the person that corrected us for saying it the dork in the room.

[Golfingdad]

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/9/30/european-tour-allowed-mcginley-to-influence-tourney-grouping.html

Hmmm. Does the PGA do this at all? Could Tom Watson have had his planned pairings matched in PGA Tour events?

The PGA of America is the one in charge of the Ryder Cup stuff, and they are a completely different organization that the PGA TOUR, so I'm going to guess no.

[Crim]

Just off of the top of my head I can't think of anybody I know that's not a sports fan.

Whoa...seriously?

I know a ton of people that can't stand sports. Most are eccentric theater/artsy folk though.

[weekend hacker1]

Yes, that's what it is generally referred to here to avoid confusion with the U.S. Open. "The Open Championship" is fairly ambiguous.

It's not ambiguous at all. It's been the name of the tournament since 1860. The US Open came 35 years later, and has a different name.

[weekend hacker1]

Yes, that's what it is generally referred to here to avoid confusion with the U.S. Open. "The Open Championship" is fairly ambiguous.

In fact, calling it the British Open is ambiguous, given that it has been held once outside Britain...

[mvmac]

It's not ambiguous at all. It's been the name of the tournament since 1860. The US Open came 35 years later, and has a different name.

In fact, calling it the British Open is ambiguous, given that it has been held once outside Britain...

Ok back on topic please

[Gunther]

Just off of the top of my head I can't think of anybody I know that's not a sports fan. Some are fanatical about it and some don't pay much attention until something like a championship game. Every single one of those people would say "we" when referring to their favorite team. We would consider the person that corrected us for saying it the dork in the room.

Ya, that wouldn't fly in my world. You'd get exactly the same type of comment that started this mini-topic: what position do you play on team? Or somesuch. Not an issue really but when complimenting my team I say they are great, not we are great. Seems a bit presumptuous the other way. How bout that Ryder Cup??

[Golfingdad]

Ya, that wouldn't fly in my world. You'd get exactly the same type of comment that started this mini-topic: what position do you play on team? Or somesuch.

Not an issue really but when complimenting my team I say they are great, not we are great. Seems a bit presumptuous the other way.

How bout that Ryder Cup??

I agree with @MS256 that it's quite common over here, however, I agree with you that it's very silly.  I sometimes will snicker at people I know when they talk like that, and will also sometimes ask them your same question.

Better yet are people who are diehard fans of college sports teams with no actual ties to said college.  To me, having gone to the school, or having a close relative that's gone to the school, or living in the same town as the school, all make for perfectly acceptable reasons to be fanatic about said school.  Anything else I don't get.

[Nosevi]

Quote:

Ok back on topic please

The thing is I think it actually is on topic. In a round about sort of way.

Why do the US keep losing the Ryder Cup - that's kind of what we're talking about. Both teams field great golfers, both teams want to win, but the Europeans keep getting it done. Why?

How many European players 'high fived' the picture of Seve coming down the tunnel to the first tee. What lengths did Paul McGinley go to to make sure the rookies knew the guys they would play with and those players knew their 'mentors'? He had a 'short list' of about 50 players that might make it onto the team prior to the event and he had a plan for all of them. How many European players raise their game, even just a tad, because it's the Ryder Cup and they're playing for their team not just themselves?

Why does it matter to these guys?

When the European team take the field they are, in their eyes, doing something that goes over and above just playing in a 'normal' tournament. The history of the competition is important as are the great players who have competed in it previously. I truly don't think the US players feel the same. They appear to be trying to win...... but for themselves....... and right now. The European players are playing for each other but also for their country, continent and tour. And the history of the event is important to them.

So yep, what's in a name? Who cares what the Open Championship is called or what the winer is refered to as? Well, the answer is we do. Not because we're being arrognat or want to be 'better' than the US Open. If you think that you're totally and utterly missing the point. It's because there's a long history there and you don't just chuck that away because it makes it easier for casual observers on ABC to understand.

Similarly the US players in the Ryder Cup don't 'get it'. They aren't playing for the likes of Seve or numerous other greats of the game that have gone before. They're playing for themselves. And other than the odd Cup here and there my call is they're going to keep on losing.

[Golfingdad]

The thing is I think it actually is on topic. In a round about sort of way.

Why do the US keep losing the Ryder Cup - that's kind of what we're talking about. Both teams field great golfers, both teams want to win, but the Europeans keep getting it done. Why?

How many European players 'high fived' the picture of Seve coming down the tunnel to the first tee. What lengths did Paul McGinley go to to make sure the rookies knew the guys they would play with and those players knew their 'mentors'? He had a 'short list' of about 50 players that might make it onto the team prior to the event and he had a plan for all of them. How many European players raise their game, even just a tad, because it's the Ryder Cup and they're playing for their team not just themselves?

Why does it matter to these guys?

When the European team take the field they are, in their eyes, doing something that goes over and above just playing in a 'normal' tournament. The history of the competition is important as are the great players who have competed in it previously. I truly don't think the US players feel the same. They appear to be trying to win...... but for themselves....... and right now. The European players are playing for each other but also for their country, continent and tour. And the history of the event is important to them.

So yep, what's in a name? Who cares what the Open Championship is called or what the winer is refered to as? Well, the answer is we do. Not because we're being arrognat or want to be 'better' than the US Open. If you think that you're totally and utterly missing the point. It's because there's a long history there and you don't just chuck that away because it makes it easier for casual observers on ABC to understand.

Similarly the US players in the Ryder Cup don't 'get it'. They aren't playing for the likes of Seve or numerous other greats of the game that have gone before. They're playing for themselves. And other than the odd Cup here and there my call is they're going to keep on losing.

I believe all of that to be complete nonsense.  The USA didn't lose because they didn't try as hard or because they didn't care as much.  They lost because they got smoked in foursomes.  I think that comes down to two things:

1. They need to prepare how to play that format better - which (I believe) is mostly on the Captain to put together the right pairs and make sure that they are on the same page (like McGinley apparently did for months in advance)
2. They need a captain who has a clue.  Not one who chooses octogenarian vice captains who can't relate, who doesn't talk with his team, and who's wishy-washy and clueless about who to pair and when.

Once those are fixed, then it's basically an even match and the chips can fall where they may.

[Gunther]

I believe all of that to be complete nonsense.  The USA didn't lose because they didn't try as hard or because they didn't care as much.  They lost because they got smoked in foursomes.  I think that comes down to two things: [LIST=1] [*] They need to prepare how to play that format better - which (I believe) is mostly on the Captain to put together the right pairs and make sure that they are on the same page (like McGinley apparently did for months in advance) [*] They need a captain who has a clue.  Not one who chooses octogenarian vice captains who can't relate, who doesn't talk with his team, and who's wishy-washy and clueless about who to pair and when. [/LIST] Once those are fixed, then it's basically an even match and the chips can fall where they may.

And there you have it folks. I saw on Twitter that not 5 min after the Ryder Cup was over, Dufner tweeted something like, "Azinger 2016." And he wasn't even part of the team.

[Nosevi]

I believe all of that to be complete nonsense.  The USA didn't lose because they didn't try as hard or because they didn't care as much.  They lost because they got smoked in foursomes.  I think that comes down to two things:

1. They need to prepare how to play that format better - which (I believe) is mostly on the Captain to put together the right pairs and make sure that they are on the same page (like McGinley apparently did for months in advance)
2. They need a captain who has a clue.  Not one who chooses octogenarian vice captains who can't relate, who doesn't talk with his team, and who's wishy-washy and clueless about who to pair and when.

Once those are fixed, then it's basically an even match and the chips can fall where they may.

Maybe. I just don't see the passion from most of the US players that I see in many of the Europeans. At least if it is there, it's different.

You've won 2 out of the last 10 Ryder Cups. This time it was foursomes, last time singles, time before it was the Sunday regardless of format (in fact 4 balll on Sunday you lost 3 1/2 to 1/2).........

Possibly you're right and it's all about the captain (for what it's worth I thought Tom Watson was not a good choice as captain and I didn't change my opinion over the course of the tournament) but I do think the players need to take a little of the responsibility when things go wrong time and again, regardless of captain.