2016 NCAA Golf Championships

[disaster]

5 hours ago, iacas said:

You can't have alternates because, what, you could swap someone out if they're not playing well.

The team is the team. No changes.

(And really, injuries are pretty darn rare in golf…)

That's not a good reason. Neither is the fact that "a team" is 5 (heck, where exactly is 5 a golf team?) - that's just the current rules, and the discussion is all about changing them.

 

I would prefer a system like we have it here in Germany in your league system: You have x players (we have 8, but of course 5 is fine also), but you also have 1 or 2 alternates. You can always substitute one of the 8 players by one of the alternates before their first tee shot. The reason does not matter, whether he plays like crap on that day or whether he is injured. This avoids having a situation like in the NCAA finals where the had to give away one point, but it also avoids the problem of faking in an injury if somebody plays poorly, because every other team has the right to change on player also.

[iacas]

8 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

I'm not disputing what the current rules are.  Just pointing out that that is all they are ... The current rules.  They've only been doing match play for 8 or so years.

Well, no, they haven't really. You can't swap players mid-stream in multi-round tournaments, either, and those are played with five players, too. "Teams" in college golf have been five players for a long, long time. At every level of the game, including my team in Division III.

If you can bring 8 players, that will also further reward schools with bigger budgets for travel, lodging, and food. Golf is what it is - do you really want the bigger programs to have another advantage over the smaller ones?

4 hours ago, disaster said:

That's not a good reason. Neither is the fact that "a team" is 5 (heck, where exactly is 5 a golf team?) - that's just the current rules, and the discussion is all about changing them.

I don't support changing them at all. You pick the five guys you want to go into battle with and then you go to battle. Bummer that an injury happened, but opening that rule would leave it open for abuse.

Heck, I already think it's bad enough the NCAA clearly allows more than one coach to give instruction/advice to golfers. We obeyed the rule, even though I brought an "assistant" with me.

[Golfingdad]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Well, no, they haven't really. You can't swap players mid-stream in multi-round tournaments, either, and those are played with five players, too. "Teams" in college golf have been five players for a long, long time. At every level of the game, including my team in Division III.

If you can bring 8 players, that will also further reward schools with bigger budgets for travel, lodging, and food. Golf is what it is - do you really want the bigger programs to have another advantage over the smaller ones?

I don't support changing them at all. You pick the five guys you want to go into battle with and then you go to battle. Bummer that an injury happened, but opening that rule would leave it open for abuse.

Heck, I already think it's bad enough the NCAA clearly allows more than one coach to give instruction/advice to golfers. We obeyed the rule, even though I brought an "assistant" with me.

I said at the beginning that I agreed there wasn't a problem that needed changing. I just took issue with your argument, which was a version of the circular "you can't do that (consider a different rule) because then that would be against the (current) rules" argument.

In a discussion about whether or not a rule could be changed or amended, that type of argument doesn't make sense.

[iacas]

24 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I said at the beginning that I agreed there wasn't a problem that needed changing. I just took issue with your argument, which was a version of the circular "you can't do that (consider a different rule) because then that would be against the (current) rules" argument.

In a discussion about whether or not a rule could be changed or amended, that type of argument doesn't make sense.

All rules are arbitrary. So either that rule makes sense, or no rules make sense.

[rehmwa]

12 hours ago, iacas said:

The "team" in golf is five players. It's not 8, or 10, or 15. Or even 6.

Five.

Unless someone is injured, then it's 4

and unfortunately, a person on the other team also doesn't get to play for his school in a national championship

 

I know the argument "it is what it is" is the be-all end-all when discussing rules with avid golfers, but In my opinion, the current rule does a great dis-service to the players on both teams (gladly it doesn't come in play that often?).  I think it would be a great one to reconsider.  I'd think coaches would submit that recommendation for the sake of their players.

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

All rules are arbitrary. So either that rule makes sense, or no rules make sense.

I agree with this, but they can also be changed.  (I do like consistency with the general philosophy of the sport as a general guideline though.)

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Unless someone is injured, then it's 4

No, still five. He conceded his match. He could have played. They didn't play 4-on-4.

7 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I know the argument "it is what it is" is the be-all end-all when discussing rules with avid golfers, but In my opinion, the current rule does a great dis-service to the players on both teams (gladly it doesn't come in play that often?).  I think it would be a great one to reconsider.  I'd think coaches would submit that recommendation for the sake of their players.

I think it would do a disservice to other players, as well as the players in the matches. Again, your team is set: you shouldn't be looking over your shoulder if you make a bogey or lose a hole. You shouldn't be pulled if the conditions change and a bomber is waiting to take your place. You shouldn't have an advantage if your team has 8 players and can afford to fly them, feed them, and lodge them. Etc.

[rehmwa]

"No, still five. He conceded his match"   you know what I meant about the 4 players and I understand what you mean about 5 players, this isn't adding anything.  I'll change it to 4 'playing' if one demands clarity.  And it doesn't take away from the fact that young Foushee didn't get to experience the round of a lifetime and a chance to win a point in the usual fashion.

I understand your other paragraph (but you are assuming that specific rules on when an alternate can be used would be very broad and not refined to address resulting concerns based on abuse of the situation) - so that's making us talk past each other a bit here.  I won't debate that without a better idea of how having an alternate would be defined under new rules other than note if there was a rule change, that the committee would likely put more thought into it than just say, "sure, alternate is fine, plug him in whenever one feels like it".

Good thing it doesn't happen often anyway.  anyway, it's just hypotheticals - good discussion

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

"No, still five. He conceded his match"   you know what I meant about the 4 players and I understand what you mean about 5 players, this isn't adding anything.  I'll change it to 4 'playing' if one demands clarity.  And it doesn't take away from the fact that young Foushee didn't get to experience the round of a lifetime and a chance to win a point in the usual fashion.

Bad luck. But so?

I bet that if you ask him in three months if he was guaranteed to be the national champ or to play in a match and possibly lose, he'd take the former. It's not like he was a passenger all year or anything.

It was still five, though, and I disagree it's not adding anything. It wasn't four-on-four. It was five-on-five, and a match was conceded. A match, a hole, a stroke - can be conceded at almost any time. That's all that happened.

What if Beau had been only injured slightly? What if it happened two minutes before his tee time? Is it fair to swap out an opponent that soon before a match begins?

Too many grey areas, and again, for something that almost never happens.

10 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I understand your other paragraph (but you are assuming that specific rules on when an alternate can be used would be very broad and not refined to address resulting concerns based on abuse of the situation) - so that's making us talk past each other a bit here.  I won't debate that without a better idea of how having an alternate would be defined under new rules other than note if there was a rule change, that the committee would likely put more thought into it than just say, "sure, alternate is fine, plug him in whenever one feels like it".

Better, IMO, and easier to just keep it the way it is.

And it's the "better" that matters more.

[colin007]

man, that hurt me just watching Beau swing and see his shoulder almost pop out....

did they show Beaus mom?  from what i remember, she was very appealing to the eyes.

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, colin007 said:

man, that hurt me just watching Beau swing and see his shoulder almost pop out....

What I don't get is… why not let go with the left hand and finish with just your right hand on the club?

[Golfingdad]

32 minutes ago, iacas said:

I think it would do a disservice to other players, as well as the players in the matches. Again, your team is set: you shouldn't be looking over your shoulder if you make a bogey or lose a hole. You shouldn't be pulled if the conditions change and a bomber is waiting to take your place. You shouldn't have an advantage if your team has 8 players and can afford to fly them, feed them, and lodge them. Etc.

I disagree.  Why shouldn't they be looking over their shoulder?  That's the case week to week already, isn't it?  What's the difference if you also add in the option to change round to round?  It wouldn't be any different than something like the early sessions of the Ryder Cup or Walker Cup (where many of these kids already play or hope to play) where they may sit out a session based on their performance in a previous session.

The below articles mention some of your points, but one of them makes a fair compromise:  allow a sub only in the postseason.

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/ryan-lavner/hossler-incident-could-lead-ncaa-substitution-change/

http://golfweek.com/2016/06/01/time-consider-allowing-substitutes-college-golf/

And this isn't a new idea either ... the article below is from 12/1/14 ...

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/a-simple-but-far-reaching-rule

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

That's the case week to week already, isn't it?

Not within the week.

4 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

What's the difference if you also add in the option to change round to round?

It's mid-tournament. You choose the team by which you enter the tournament. Each week is a new tournament, so you can change week to week. But not within a tournament.

4 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

It wouldn't be any different than something like the early sessions of the Ryder Cup or Walker Cup (where many of these kids already play or hope to play) where they may sit out a session based on their performance in a previous session.

Yeah, it is, because the conditions of the competition don't allow for anyone but the 12 players to play. The U.S. can't bench Phil because he's playing like crap and pull in a player who didn't make the original 12 players. In the Ryder Cup, the team size is 12 - not 14, 17, "any eligible player," etc.

4 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

The below articles mention some of your points, but one of them makes a fair compromise: allow a sub only in the postseason.

What you see as fair I don't. The team is the team.

Why should a team who can afford to fly, lodge, and feed twelve players have an advantage over a smaller school with a smaller budget (beyond the advantages they already likely enjoy)?

[GolfLug]

15 minutes ago, iacas said:

What I don't get is… why not let go with the left hand and finish with just your right hand on the club?

Honestly I didn't think he was thinking that hard. But yes he really seemed to aggravate the left shoulder more by hanging on to the club in the crazy windmill finish. Maybe instinctively easier for him to let go of the right in the blurr of moment.

[Golfingdad]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Not within the week.

It's mid-tournament. You choose the team by which you enter the tournament. Each week is a new tournament, so you can change week to week. But not within a tournament.

Yeah, it is, because the conditions of the competition don't allow for anyone but the 12 players to play. The U.S. can't bench Phil because he's playing like crap and pull in a player who didn't make the original 12 players. In the Ryder Cup, the team size is 12 - not 14, 17, "any eligible player," etc.

What you see as fair I don't. The team is the team.

Why should a team who can afford to fly, lodge, and feed twelve players have an advantage over a smaller school with a smaller budget (beyond the advantages they already likely enjoy)?

Well then ... we're agreeing to disagree.  Your arguments boil down to "these are the rules now and I like them" and I'm simply saying they could explore a change and I'd be fine with it.  You wouldn't.  That's fine too.

[iacas]

1 minute ago, GolfLug said:

Honestly I didn't think he was thinking that hard. But yes he really seemed to aggravate the left shoulder more by hanging on to the club in the crazy windmill finish. Maybe instinctively easier for him to let go of the right in the blurr of moment.

Yeah, maybe. I get that there wasn't much time to think about it, but in order to prevent further damage, I like to think I might have given it some thought and tried to figure something out.

Plus my right-arm-only swing is better than my lefty-only swing.

Just now, Golfingdad said:

Well then ... we're agreeing to disagree.  Your arguments boil down to "these are the rules now and I like them" and I'm simply saying they could explore a change and I'd be fine with it.  You wouldn't.  That's fine too.

No, that's not what my argument boils down to. I've given reasons, and one of them is included in the text you quoted.

Heck, in the first article you linked to, the first thing they discuss is job security, not how it would improve the "fairness" of the competition.

[iacas]

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/college-golfs-beau-hossler-rule-in-limbo-after-ncaa-tables-substitution-proposal

Quote

College golf’s ongoing saga over whether to allow substitutions during tournament play has taken another awkward twist. The NCAA Division I Competition Oversight Committee has tabled a recommendation from the Men’s D-I Golf Committee that would allow coaches to replace players in their lineups at postseason events, referred to by some as the “Beau Hossler” rule after the University of Texas All-American had to sit out of the NCAA Championship match last spring with a torn labrum, leaving the Longhorns with only four players to compete against eventual champion Oregon’s five.

FWIW, though my position for the regular season hasn't changed, and though I'd still prefer that bigger teams not be given the advantage of flying, housing, feeding, etc. larger teams, I'm softer on changing the rule in the "post-season" than for all tournaments.

Two other things to consider…

Quote

 

The Oversight Committee noted that it had received support for the “substitution concept” in match-play competition, but the same was not the case for the stroke-play portion of tournaments. Because of the difference in opinions for the two formats, both of which are used at the NCAA Championship, the Oversight Committee announced that it has held off on taking any action.

Arguably, the decision to table the recommendation might best reflect the current messy split among coaches regarding the idea. In concept, the ability to replace an injured player in a lineup is something many coaches support, particularly after seeing what happened to Texas last spring when it had to play four on five in the championship match. But defining what constitutes an injury that would allow for a change in the lineup is a sticking point, one that was so difficult that the Men’s Golf Committee decided to avoid it entirely by stating that replacements could be made at coaches’ discretion.

 

The match play/stroke play difference(s), and the idea of what constitutes an "injury."