Should the Tour Championship Winner Win the FedExCup?

[jamo]

Curious to hear what people think after reading this: http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/20802971/golf-double-winners-east-lake-bound-get-overshadowed-tour-championship-fedex-cup-finale

I'm of two minds. On one hand most playoffs are set up like that. It doesn't matter if you dominate the regular season if you fall apart in the playoffs. It doesn't even matter if you dominate the first few playoff rounds if you fall apart in the championship.

On the other hand, I can't really explain it well but it just doesn't sit right. Golf isn't like the other sports where it's 1-on-1 in the championship. If someone sneaks into the 29th spot in the Tour Championship and then wins it ... is that really what we want?

[boogielicious]

5 minutes ago, jamo said:

Curious to hear what people think after reading this: http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/20802971/golf-double-winners-east-lake-bound-get-overshadowed-tour-championship-fedex-cup-finale

I'm of two minds. On one hand most playoffs are set up like that. It doesn't matter if you dominate the regular season if you fall apart in the playoffs. It doesn't even matter if you dominate the first few playoff rounds if you fall apart in the championship.

On the other hand, I can't really explain it well but it just doesn't sit right. Golf isn't like the other sports where it's 1-on-1 in the championship. If someone sneaks into the 29th spot in the Tour Championship and then wins it ... is that really what we want?

It seems it is set up more like NASCAR, which is really a points race series. But in this case, the Cup winner isn't 'playing it safe' in the finale. I guarantee JT, Casey and others were trying their hardest to win the tournament. Golf is hard as we know and winning tournaments is even harder.

[iacas]

I would vote no in the poll. Otherwise it’s just a $12M tournament prize. You have to qualify to play but that’s it.

[saevel25]

14 minutes ago, jamo said:

On the other hand, I can't really explain it well but it just doesn't sit right. Golf isn't like the other sports where it's 1-on-1 in the championship. If someone sneaks into the 29th spot in the Tour Championship and then wins it ... is that really what we want?

The only way they make it like other tournaments is if they went to a match play bracket.

I never associated the Tour Championship as a winner take all tournament. I know it has a lot of points associated with it, Xander jumped 23 spots.

He also has 3 less wins than Justin Thomas and 8 less top tens on the season. Justin Thomas won 20% of the tournaments he played in. Was in the top 10% 50% of the time. That is just better than Tiger Wood's 1997 season. It was pretty damn impressive.

I would say I rather celebrate the season over one tournament.

[GolfLug]

54 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

The only way they make it like other tournaments is if they went to a match play bracket.

I never associated the Tour Championship as a winner take all tournament. I know it has a lot of points associated with it, Xander jumped 23 spots.

He also has 3 less wins than Justin Thomas and 8 less top tens on the season. Justin Thomas won 20% of the tournaments he played in. Was in the top 10% 50% of the time. That is just better than Tiger Wood's 1997 season. It was pretty damn impressive.

I would say I rather celebrate the season over one tournament.

+1. I cannot add anything more original to this post.   

[David in FL]

Heck no.

Doing so would defeat the whole purpose of a season long competition that ultimately recognizes the individual who plays best the entire year.

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

I would vote no in the poll. Otherwise it’s just a $12M tournament prize. You have to qualify to play but that’s it.

Agree completely. And it's not like the purses on these championships are peanuts. Xander came out just fine.

[skydog]

As the poll is I would vote no, but I do think the playoff system needs some changing.

Shacklleford has lobbied for a tour championship + 1 scenario to separate the tour championship from the mathematical confusion of the fedex points system. With the future schedule slated to end on Labor day weekend, host the tour championship (with top 30 in points) that Thurs-Sunday. The winner of the tour championship is crowned on Sunday and then the following day (labor day Monday) the top six in points compete in a one day stroke play finale for winner take all $10 million. I think this idea makes a lot of sense and would make for some great TV.

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2017/9/25/hows-this-for-a-tour-championship-plus-one-scenario.html

Edited September 25, 2017 by skydog

[DeadMan]

I voted no, and I agree with pretty much everything said already.

One thing to add, though. This is only the 3rd time the FedEx hasn't been won by the person who won the Tour Championship. (2008: Vijay; 2009: Tiger) So it's not happening all that often.

[rehmwa]

No

The winner of the Tour Champ wins the tournament.  It's already a tournament win

Fedex Cup is a points race, not a tournament.  It's about the whole season, not one tournament.

these are two completely different things, seems pointless to combine them in any way.

 

the points system is not complicated, not sure why people think so, it's just what it is.  I actually think contriving the final round points system to force a top 5 to be the winner is not in the spirit of a true points merit system.

The current system can actually have someone win every single tournament of the regular season and then come in 2nd at the Tour Championship - and he doesn't win the cup.....that seems more flawed.

Edited September 25, 2017 by rehmwa

[billchao]

3 hours ago, jamo said:

On one hand most playoffs are set up like that. It doesn't matter if you dominate the regular season if you fall apart in the playoffs. It doesn't even matter if you dominate the first few playoff rounds if you fall apart in the championship.

I voted no; I like the way it is set up now. I know other sports are set up with a playoff format where the winner takes all, but the championship winning team isn't necessarily the best team in any given year.

[skydog]

9 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

the points system is not complicated, not sure why people think so, it's just what it is. 

It's based on an algorithm and is in no way fan friendly or transparent. I'm not sure how it could be called anything besides complicated.

I'm not saying do away with the point system. I just think it would be fun to have a final day playoff where points are thrown out the window and it comes down to easy to follow stroke play so that Steve Sands isn't having to give us updates every 30 minutes on 20 different outcome permutations.

[rehmwa]

23 minutes ago, skydog said:

It's based on an algorithm and is in no way fan friendly or transparent. I'm not sure how it could be called anything besides complicated.

Algorithms aren't necessarily complicated

• 1st place gets so many points
• 2nd place gets so many points
• 3rd place gets so many points
• split up the ties

It's not rocket science. Seems pretty clear to me.

And I'm not a fan of the 'permutations' either.  They should simply just keep the projected points summary up there and ignore all the other (what if) stuff they do - I find it tedious and unnecessary also.

Though I understand the other comment about it seeming 'fun' to have a final finish.  But that means the final result is NOT about the best season-long results.  Seems pointless to do that - every single tournament is about the best player of the weekend - we get that every week already.

Edited September 25, 2017 by rehmwa

[skydog]

15 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

  But that means the final result is NOT about the best season-long results.  Seems pointless to do that - every single tournament is about the best player of the weekend - we get that every week already.

Top 6 in season long points would determine who gets into the final day playoff so season long results still matter....but the past gets thrown out on the final day (same as in any other sports' playoff final) and it's winner take all. Would make for way better TV IMO.

Edited September 25, 2017 by skydog

[shanksalot]

In my mind why have the full season if you are going to have a one tournament RACE? The way it is set up is fine and from time to time I am sure they will tweak it some. 

[Golfingdad]

4 hours ago, jamo said:

Curious to hear what people think after reading this: http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/20802971/golf-double-winners-east-lake-bound-get-overshadowed-tour-championship-fedex-cup-finale

I'm of two minds. On one hand most playoffs are set up like that. It doesn't matter if you dominate the regular season if you fall apart in the playoffs. It doesn't even matter if you dominate the first few playoff rounds if you fall apart in the championship.

On the other hand, I can't really explain it well but it just doesn't sit right. Golf isn't like the other sports where it's 1-on-1 in the championship. If someone sneaks into the 29th spot in the Tour Championship and then wins it ... is that really what we want?

I agree with this post, however, I voted yes in your poll (not strongly, but just to throw an idea out there).  Totally agree that it wouldn't quite seem right if Dufner (who was 30th coming in) won in a playoff over Spieth (who was 1st coming in) and "stole" the Cup from him, but they could alter that by tweaking the parameters such that Dufner wouldn't be in the final tournament.  They could either add a 5th playoff tournament and only have the top 10-15 guys competing in that one.  If they did that and went with current standings, those 10 would be JT, Spieth, Schauffele, DJ, Rahm, Leishman, Rickie, Hideki, Rose and Koepka.  That's a solid group and I could see all of them being "deserving" of the Cup title with a win in the next tournament.

Or, similarly but not, they could just tweak the quailifers for the current tournament.  Instead of going 125, 100, 70, 30, they could go 100, 70, 40, 20, or 100, 70, 30, 15 or something.  Same concept.

Ultimately, I like the concept of the Fedex Cup and I think it's a big improvement over prior to having a playoff system where the season just petered out to nothing after the PGA Championship.  There's really nothing wrong with it the way it is, but a change could also be fun.  Honestly, if there was one change to be made, rather than tweaking the formulas, I'd vote for them to treat the Tour Championship more like a major and move it around the country to nice clubs that maybe just barely miss the cut for the majors, rather than keeping it in Atlanta every year.

[NJpatbee]

I did not vote in the poll due to apathy.  The FedEx Cup is a great financial reward for the golfer that wins it but for myself I see it as a good marketing way to get players and announcers to say "FedEx" as often as possible - and it works.  The playoffs are good competitive golf but each tournament can stand on its own.  As a fan, winning the FedEx Cup is a nice tribute and big payday for the pro, but just does not have the luster as a major or some of the other premiere tournaments.  But then again, I just said FedEx three times so it is mission accomplished by Fed Ex (that makes 5 times). 

[Mr. Desmond]

For me, the FedEx Cup should recognize the best player based on his work over the one year season.

It does not always produce that player.

The playoff race thins down the field. It seems like any player in the final 30 has an opportunity to win the Cup. Don't think that is ideal. I'd extend it one more day and get the top 4 players in points in a foursome to end it. Why not? It would be more dramatic.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Mr. Desmond