Michael Arkush: Improving the PGA Playoffs
Dear Mr. Finchem:
I look forward to the playoffs in every sport, even hockey, but, with all due respect Mr. Commissioner, the system you and your highly devoted staff in Ponte Vedra devised – the FedEx Cup playoffs – isn't very exciting. For one thing, my enthusiasm, like many I suppose, is reserved for golf's four majors, the Ryder Cup, the Players and maybe a handful of other special events.
Don't misunderstand me. I'm pleased the season will conclude in late September instead of November, but it's still too late. There will be more attention focused on Philip Rivers than Phil Mickelson. Besides, eight months of the PGA Tour is more than enough.
Unlike a lot of naysayers, however, here are a few suggestions to improve the PGA Tour playoffs.
FORMAT
One-hundred forty-four players is way too many for a postseason's opening round. Compare it to the other sports. If there are approximately 200 professionals who compete fairly regularly (at least 17 starts) on the tour, then roughly 75 percent are being allowed to participate in the playoffs. That would be akin to affording 23 of baseball's 30 teams a chance to capture the World Series, or 24 of the 32 NFL squads the opportunity to win the Super Bowl.
While it would take a torrid stretch by a player near the bottom of the standings to win it all, it could happen, and that doesn't seem fair. It would be like the Baltimore Orioles winning 11 in a row and suddenly becoming World Series champions.
Only the top 64 money winners should be eligible for the first round. Looking at this season's standings that would exclude such notable names as Davis Love III, Mike Weir, and Chris DiMarco. So what? Do these three really belong in the playoffs? What precisely have they accomplished in 2007? Between them, in 60 starts, they've recorded only six top 10s.
Making the playoffs should be difficult, but determining who advances shouldn't be tough. That's why it's important you figure out a less complicated points system for the first two rounds. Even Stephen Hawking would have trouble keeping track of the FedEx Cup points.
For the first leg, slice the list from 64 to 32. Again, that would eliminate a lot of big names but that's the price for poor performance in any format. Then, for the second round, cut the list from 32 to 16, setting up the possibility of a very dramatic conclusion.
For the Tour Championship, use strictly match play over a four-day period. Either way, the final would almost surely be a battle between two of the world's greatest players. We won't wind up with a dud like the World Match Play has produced too often in the past.
Also, limit the final duel to 18 holes, not 36, and please, please, please no consolation match. Nobody cares who takes third place.
As for the prize money, it doesn't matter how many zeroes you put up there for the winner. Does anyone know how much Tiger made for winning the PGA? Of course not. But they do know he won his 13th major.
VENUE
The final event requires a great setting every year. This year's courses for the playoffs (Westchester, TPC Boston, Cog Hill, East Lake) are top-notch facilities, but if you polled golf fans, very few could describe in detail a single hole on any of those courses. Keeping them in the rotation for the first two rounds is fine, but the last event should be held every year at a course people recognize – courses like Pebble Beach, Riviera, Sawgrass, etc.
Of course, the tour might have to cough up a lot of dough to secure use of those courses for a whole week, but it would be worth it. Picture this: Tiger and Phil are all square as they reach the famous par-3 17th island hole at Sawgrass. The wind would be blowing.
The tension would build. The ratings would be huge.
TIMING
Why not end the season on the first week of September instead of the third? This way, you won't conflict with the launch of the NFL season, the 800-pound gorilla in pro sports. Start the playoffs the week after the PGA Championship to give the final major of the year more drama. Also at stake would be the remaining berths in the first round of the playoffs.
A major championship is an intense experience, and no doubt some of the premier players may prefer to rest the following week. But that didn't stop the tour in the past from holding a World Golf Championship event immediately after the PGA. Besides, next year the Tour Championship will take place the week before the Ryder Cup at Valhalla. How are players on both sides possibly going to have enough energy left for that intense spectacle?
Also, three tournaments, instead of the current four, are plenty. If it were only three, perhaps a certain new dad from Orlando wouldn't have skipped the first FedEx Cup event.
So I hope you consider these ideas, Mr. Commissioner. There is no reason the playoffs in professional golf shouldn't be a late summer classic. With my postseason setup, you'd have one.
Sincerely,
Michael Arkush
Yahoo! Sports
I look forward to the playoffs in every sport, even hockey, but, with all due respect Mr. Commissioner, the system you and your highly devoted staff in Ponte Vedra devised – the FedEx Cup playoffs – isn't very exciting. For one thing, my enthusiasm, like many I suppose, is reserved for golf's four majors, the Ryder Cup, the Players and maybe a handful of other special events.
Don't misunderstand me. I'm pleased the season will conclude in late September instead of November, but it's still too late. There will be more attention focused on Philip Rivers than Phil Mickelson. Besides, eight months of the PGA Tour is more than enough.
Unlike a lot of naysayers, however, here are a few suggestions to improve the PGA Tour playoffs.
FORMAT
One-hundred forty-four players is way too many for a postseason's opening round. Compare it to the other sports. If there are approximately 200 professionals who compete fairly regularly (at least 17 starts) on the tour, then roughly 75 percent are being allowed to participate in the playoffs. That would be akin to affording 23 of baseball's 30 teams a chance to capture the World Series, or 24 of the 32 NFL squads the opportunity to win the Super Bowl.
While it would take a torrid stretch by a player near the bottom of the standings to win it all, it could happen, and that doesn't seem fair. It would be like the Baltimore Orioles winning 11 in a row and suddenly becoming World Series champions.
Only the top 64 money winners should be eligible for the first round. Looking at this season's standings that would exclude such notable names as Davis Love III, Mike Weir, and Chris DiMarco. So what? Do these three really belong in the playoffs? What precisely have they accomplished in 2007? Between them, in 60 starts, they've recorded only six top 10s.
Making the playoffs should be difficult, but determining who advances shouldn't be tough. That's why it's important you figure out a less complicated points system for the first two rounds. Even Stephen Hawking would have trouble keeping track of the FedEx Cup points.
For the first leg, slice the list from 64 to 32. Again, that would eliminate a lot of big names but that's the price for poor performance in any format. Then, for the second round, cut the list from 32 to 16, setting up the possibility of a very dramatic conclusion.
For the Tour Championship, use strictly match play over a four-day period. Either way, the final would almost surely be a battle between two of the world's greatest players. We won't wind up with a dud like the World Match Play has produced too often in the past.
Also, limit the final duel to 18 holes, not 36, and please, please, please no consolation match. Nobody cares who takes third place.
As for the prize money, it doesn't matter how many zeroes you put up there for the winner. Does anyone know how much Tiger made for winning the PGA? Of course not. But they do know he won his 13th major.
VENUE
The final event requires a great setting every year. This year's courses for the playoffs (Westchester, TPC Boston, Cog Hill, East Lake) are top-notch facilities, but if you polled golf fans, very few could describe in detail a single hole on any of those courses. Keeping them in the rotation for the first two rounds is fine, but the last event should be held every year at a course people recognize – courses like Pebble Beach, Riviera, Sawgrass, etc.
Of course, the tour might have to cough up a lot of dough to secure use of those courses for a whole week, but it would be worth it. Picture this: Tiger and Phil are all square as they reach the famous par-3 17th island hole at Sawgrass. The wind would be blowing.
The tension would build. The ratings would be huge.
TIMING
Why not end the season on the first week of September instead of the third? This way, you won't conflict with the launch of the NFL season, the 800-pound gorilla in pro sports. Start the playoffs the week after the PGA Championship to give the final major of the year more drama. Also at stake would be the remaining berths in the first round of the playoffs.
A major championship is an intense experience, and no doubt some of the premier players may prefer to rest the following week. But that didn't stop the tour in the past from holding a World Golf Championship event immediately after the PGA. Besides, next year the Tour Championship will take place the week before the Ryder Cup at Valhalla. How are players on both sides possibly going to have enough energy left for that intense spectacle?
Also, three tournaments, instead of the current four, are plenty. If it were only three, perhaps a certain new dad from Orlando wouldn't have skipped the first FedEx Cup event.
So I hope you consider these ideas, Mr. Commissioner. There is no reason the playoffs in professional golf shouldn't be a late summer classic. With my postseason setup, you'd have one.
Sincerely,
Michael Arkush
Yahoo! Sports
posted by Daily Observer at 10:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home