U.S. Should Consider Something like Seve Cup

[FarawayFairways]

I'm not an advocate of doing the thing that makes the most short term money. I'm not even an advocate of doing the thing that makes the most money, even if I happen to think that's winning, so in this case would be a mutual benefit by coincidence !!! But I'm curious ....

What event would have the largest commercial appeal

A North versus South match featuring 24 American players and 2 captaincy teams of Americans

or

The US versus Australia and few Southern Africans

I ask becuase Europe has the 'Seve Trophy' where the UK & Ireland play continental Europe. It's low key and doesn't command a television audience of any note. What it is being used for increasingly is a training ground. Most of the top players don't play it anymore (don't need to) and to be honest, we don't learn anything by them participating other than a handful passing on experience. In the past Rory's played it, but no longer does. I think Poulter might have been the senior pro on the last round with Lawrie

Basically 24 emerging European players play it and in effect bond, train, and learn in an environment that replicates aspects fo the team match play. We've seen the deadly partnership of Dubuisson and Super Joost form!!! Beware.

Mind you, I should say that we saw Stephen Gallacher flop in it, yet that wasn't enough to prevent McGinley picking him!!! It doesn't always work. McGinley got away with his mistakes (or his team bailed him out) Watson didn't

[FarawayFairways]

Just for context, this was posted a couple of hours ago in the Fred Couples thread where the issues of the Presidents Cup was being questioned, but for some reaosn has shown up here as a new thread

[billchao]

Just for context, this was posted a couple of hours ago in the Fred Couples thread where the issues of the Presidents Cup was being questioned, but for some reaosn has shown up here as a new thread

Because it was off topic in that other thread, where the topic was Fred Couples making comments on Tom Watson and the RYDER Cup.

[jamo]

If I had to choose between U.S. North vs. U.S. South or U.S. vs. AUS+RSA, I'd choose the former because the latter would be a bloodbath (and also very similar to the Presidents Cup). Wait, now I'm confused. Do you mean U.S. North and South or North America vs. South America?

[FarawayFairways]

Because it was off topic in that other thread, where the topic was Fred Couples making comments on Tom Watson and the RYDER Cup.

Even though the proceeding post was about reforming or removing the Presidents Cup from the roster and mine a resposne to that. I trust you moved that as well?

No - didn't think so

So someone block quotes me in the previous post, turns the issue (legitimately) into an open question about how America might like to use the Presidents Cup, by way of preparing for the Ryder Cup. I respond to it, (legitimately) and you remove it and create a new thread! Very poor moderating I'm afraid

[billchao]

Even though the proceeding post was about reforming or removing the Presidents Cup from the roster and mine a resposne to that. I trust you moved that as well?

No, because the preceding post was discussing the Ryder Cup. The poster only mentioned the Presidents Cup once as a random suggestion (somewhat facetiously, mind you) towards improving the Americans' performance in the Ryder Cup. [quote name="FarawayFairways" url="/t/78614/u-s-should-consider-something-like-seve-cup#post_1084685"] No - didn't think so So someone block quotes me in the previous post, turns the issue (legitimately) into an open question about how America might like to use the Presidents Cup, by way of preparing for the Ryder Cup. I respond to it, (legitimately) and you remove it and create a new thread! Very poor moderating I'm afraid [/quote]Two things: [list] [*]You didn't quote anyone, so it was unclear that you were responding to someone at all. Doesn't change the fact that what you wrote was off topic. [*]Moving off topic posts and discussion into their own threads where they can be discussed properly is exactly what good moderating is. It keeps threads clean and easy to read through.[/list] Look, your train of thought merits its own discussion. I don't see what the big deal is about. Discuss it others here, or don't. Up to you :-)

[FarawayFairways]

"up to me"

You're quite right, I'll take that decision, and I see you've been interefering with posts again

Any board depends on its contributions and what its membership wants to talk about. It is the contributors that define the board not its moderators. Officious moderators who seek to become the centre of attention will usually do more damage than good.  If you'd looked back at the thread in question you'd realise it was full of suggestions about how America might improve it's Ryder Cup performance (plenty that don't include box quotes too as if that makes any any difference and is in your T&C;'s). Threads will drift in the direction of the flow that the members take them from time to time. You should embrace this in name of free speech as they usually get back on track without soem commissar continually ruining them. The only scope you leave I'm afraid is narrative, so might as well put up a ticker of RSS newsfeed to inform people of what the latest Fred Couples statement is rather than invite people to broaden it out and comment.

Sadly you're palpably struggling to realise this, and frankly if you're going to intervene to impose your own will on the direction threads take then there really is little point continuing with this place.

[billchao]

@FarawayFairways , please stick to the topic here. Your post (which was off topic enough to warrant being moved to its OWN thread) is the topic, not your opinions of my moderation.

Any board depends on its contributions and what its membership wants to talk about. It is the contributors that define the board not its moderators.

Absolutely. Of course, the membership also enjoys threads full of relevant discussion that isn't cluttered with confusing, off-topic posts. When that happens, moderators move posts to clean it up.

Officious moderators who seek to become the centre of attention will usually do more damage than good.

The irony is, nobody would have known your post had been moderated at all if you didn't bring it up. Who's the one that wants to be the center of attention?

If you'd looked back at the thread in question you'd realise it was full of suggestions about how America might improve it's Ryder Cup performance (plenty that don't include box quotes too as if that makes any any difference and is in your T&C;'s).

Yup, it sure was. And your post has absolutely nothing to do with it. Nothing. There isn't a single mention of the Ryder Cup in it.

Threads will drift in the direction of the flow that the members take them from time to time. You should embrace this in name of free speech as they usually get back on track without soem commissar continually ruining them. The only scope you leave I'm afraid is narrative, so might as well put up a ticker of RSS newsfeed to inform people of what the latest Fred Couples statement is rather than invite people to broaden it out and comment.

I'm completely baffled as to how you fail to realize that your post was off-topic in the other thread. Somehow moving it here prevents people from commenting? I don't get it.

You wanted to talk about proposing changes to the Presidents Cup or possibly creating something like the Seve Cup in America. Here it is, in it's own dedicated thread. Even had someone comment on it, too, but you didn't address anything he brought up.

Sadly you're palpably struggling to realise this, and frankly if you're going to intervene to impose your own will on the direction threads take then there really is little point continuing with this place.

Have a nice day

[pabird]

Anyone for golf

[Phil McGleno]

So the idea is to have the US players play in a yearly or biannual 'training match' against somebody? Sounds good.-Lets do it. The stars wont play in it but thats fine-The young ones who hope to play in it will be eager to because it could make them a more appealing captains pick. Bring back 4 picks.

[Shorty]

What event would have the largest commercial appeal

A North versus South match featuring 24 American players and 2 captaincy teams of Americans

or

The US versus Australia and few Southern Africans

None.

As it is, the Presidents Cup is only interesting for some people some of the time. For example Australian viewers when it is played in, say, Melbourne.

The U.S. players have to pretend they find it important. The non U.S., non Euro players have to like it because it's that or nothing. And a poor relation to the Ryder Cup.

Most people like the Ryder Cup because it has history and drama and the disturbing pattern it has taken on over the least decade, and what it reveals about U.S. players.

Any other competition would be as interesting as a silly season cashfest with very little (or zero) commercial interest/potential.

[David in FL]

None. As it is, the Presidents Cup is only interesting for some people some of the time. For example Australian viewers when it is played in, say, Melbourne. The U.S. players have to pretend they find it important. The non U.S., non Euro players have to like it because it's that or nothing. And a poor relation to the Ryder Cup. Most people like the Ryder Cup because it has history and drama and the disturbing pattern it has taken on over the least decade, and what it reveals about U.S. players. Any other competition would be as interesting as a silly season cashfest with very little (or zero) commercial interest/potential.

I agree with every word. We've finally gotten rid of most of the silly season nonsense. Let's keep it that way!