Should the Tour Championship Winner Win the FedExCup?

[jamo]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Desmond said:

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

Devil's advocate a bit here: but then why ramp up the point totals in the playoffs? Why have playoffs at all? Playoffs in any sport aren't designed to tell you who the best player/team has been throughout the whole season, they tell you who played the best during the playoffs. The money list (or the FedExCup points list at the end of the season) do a fine enough job of telling you who had the best year.

[David in FL]

21 minutes ago, jamo said:

Devil's advocate a bit here: but then why ramp up the point totals in the playoffs? Why have playoffs at all? Playoffs in any sport aren't designed to tell you who the best player/team has been throughout the whole season, they tell you who played the best during the playoffs. The money list (or the FedExCup points list at the end of the season) do a fine enough job of telling you who had the best year.

Simple.  

Because it keeps more top players engaged in the final 4 tournaments because they can make up significant ground if they play well.  Keeping more top players engaged increases interest, viewership, and subsequent sponsor revenue.  Everyone wins.

 

[Mr. Desmond]

52 minutes ago, jamo said:

Devil's advocate a bit here: but then why ramp up the point totals in the playoffs? Why have playoffs at all? Playoffs in any sport aren't designed to tell you who the best player/team has been throughout the whole season, they tell you who played the best during the playoffs. The money list (or the FedExCup points list at the end of the season) do a fine enough job of telling you who had the best year.

I think the original idea was to create drama and to keep the top players ... playing. The playoffs result in more money, which keeps those players ... playing. Tough to turn down $10m, or even $3.5m when you only have 30 players in a no cut tourney.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Mr. Desmond

[Golfingdad]

2 hours ago, David in FL said:

Simple.  

Because it keeps more top players engaged in the final 4 tournaments because they can make up significant ground if they play well.  Keeping more top players engaged increases interest, viewership, and subsequent sponsor revenue.  Everyone wins.

But this isn't an answer to the question he asked.  He didn't ask why they ramp up the points or have playoffs at all, he asked why @Mr. Desmond would condone playoffs or weighted point totals considering he said that the Fedex Cup should recognize the best player based on his work over the one year season.

[David in FL]

8 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

But this isn't an answer to the question he asked.  He didn't ask why they ramp up the points or have playoffs at all, he asked why @Mr. Desmond would condone playoffs or weighted point totals considering he said that the Fedex Cup should recognize the best player based on his work over the one year season.

It does recognize the best player overall, while balancing a desire to maintain interest, from the players, the fans, and the sponsors.

 

Edited September 25, 2017 by David in FL

[rehmwa]

3 minutes ago, David in FL said:

It does recognize the best player overall, while balancing a de$ire to maintain intere$t, from the player$, the fan$, and the $ponsor$.

 

I made a few changes here.  But I agree with you totally.

If there was no viewership, then the best player of the season would just be points only and not weighted to give more points at the end of the season....Let alone manipulate the points for the "winner of the top 5 wins it all" option.

Gotta keep it entertaining.  That's the purpose.  that, and to let big companies spout on about good charities (which I also appreciate).

[Groucho Valentine]

The "playoffs" were created to get Tiger and Phil to play more in the fall, and now that they are both no longer competitive the system seems even more contrived to me. A part of me thinks whoever wins the tour championship should win the whole thing, but  that probably doesn't jive with sponsors and TV who want the stars to drive the narrative about the playoffs.  

As its designed, its not really a playoff, but a year long competition. So in that sense its fair that the player that has the best overall year wins it all.

But if you really want to have a playoff, run it down the last 50 or something at the tour championship at let them do 36 medal and matchplay the final 32 over the weekend. Id like that format. 

Edited September 25, 2017 by Groucho Valentine

[rehmwa]

9 minutes ago, Groucho Valentine said:

But if you really want to have a playoff,

I'll continue to note that they do have a playoff.  It's four stroke play tournaments that reduce the field each step and ends in a winner in the final tournament called the Tour Championship Tournament.  They tour champion this year was a rookie name Schaffle (or something like that).  (the fact that it's stroke play instead of match recuction, etc etc etc is inconsequential other than personal format preference)

And then there's another thing that different.  It's call the Fedex Cup - it's a bit of a contrived thing that tries to name the best overall player of the year based on the season total while also pandering to people that have short term memories and need for instant gratification.  Some guy named "thomas" something or other won that..

 

I think we're actually talking now not about who has the best season, but REALLY about what we all think would be great TV for the masses to end the season.  I can appreciate that.

[No Mulligans]

I voted no.  Even the best player's chance of winning an individual tournament is not very good, perhaps less than 1 out of 10.  If you are going to try to reward the player of the year in a competition having the whole season count makes a lot more sense.

This turned out great in my opinion, Xander won a tournament, the player of the year won the FedEx cup.

[Undr Par]

To the OP.... I'm just as you are, kinda of torn between yes they should change it & no keep it the same..but I say keep it the way it is.

My reason is the 2nd part of your answer in your original question, for me it wouldn't be exciting to see the 29th or 30th ranked guy win & thus be rewarded for 1 great weekend & that being the last in the Tour Championship, when it's a great possibility he didn't even win a tournament all season.

I can live with it being the way it is, after all nothing in life is perfect so all we can do is go with what makes it the closest to the best, and it is imho.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Undr Par

[Mr. Desmond]

This is not a bad payout for being in the Top 30 of the FedEx Cup Playoff Race. Looks a bit top heavy at #1, but I think that's done for the publicity ... "$10m is at stake!" As stated above, it is motivation for the top players to play during the year to improve their Cup position.

1st — $10 million 2nd — $3 million 3rd — $2 million 4th — $1.5 million 5th — $1 million
6th — $800,000 7th — $700,000 8th — $600,000 9th — $550,000 10th — $500,000
.... 30th still gets $175k. and then #31-150 are allocated another $10m.

Should it be this way? Why not? It gets top players playing and one end of year tourney has two payouts - FedEx and the Eastlake Tournament itself. Heck, I just want it to motivate my 11 yr old to play more golf. "Look, son, if he makes this putt, he gets $10m!" Son: "Really? Dad, can we go play?" Dad:" I wish you loved the game like I do, but I'll settle for this for now..."

Edited September 26, 2017 by Mr. Desmond

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ....

I am happy for both Justin Thomas and Xander Schauffele. Each man got their just rewards.

I have never been a fan of the Fed Ex Cup playoffs for a variety of reasons that I personally won't go into here. These days the only PGA Tour competitions I have real interest in are the four Grand Slam majors, the Players Championship, the Ryder Cup and Presidents Cup.

I will say this in support of the Tour Championship -- it is a season championship within itself, offering a 3-year exemption (it's 5-years for the Fed Ex) to the Players Championship plus all regular open and invitational PGA Tour events (excluding the majors, WGCs, CIMB, Tournament of Champions and CJ Cup). I have no problem if on occasion the Tour Championship and Fed Ex Cup end up being won by different players.

So There!

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport
 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Frank-0-Sport

[Antneye]

I voted to change it, but it really all depends on what you are looking for.  If you want it to mirror a season championship playoff then you go to match play and let the winner take the title.  (I like that because I love the concept of the season earning you a right to compete for the big trophy).

But I don't really care much either way.

[Toby]

I would take the top 30 from the year.. keeping points as they are now..

I would have 5 playoff courses across the USA... Play 54 holes only no cuts everyone starts with zero points

winner gets 3k points last place gets 100

the points would be from 3000-100  at the end of the 5 playoff courses add the points and have your winner..

 

[Buckeyebowman]

I voted no. Basically the FedEx Cup is a season long competition, while the Tour Championship is a "sprint" at the end of the race, even though it's all based on FedEx points. It was interesting watching how players would move up and down the ranks based on performance.

Seems they have this figured out pretty well. NASCAR has tried how many iterations of something like this?