The Crux of the FedEx Cup Conundrum
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 5, 2008 2:55 PM EST
Email
PrintBob Verdi - I think, unintentionally - sums up very well why the FedEx Cup has struggled to gain traction with fans, any real sense of prestige, and a clear future.
Sports fans, casual or compulsive, are trained to follow the money, but playoffs are different. The winning share at Super Bowl XLII was $78,000 per player, a number you would have to look up if you even cared, which you probably didn't because America's biggest game is about the glory. The winner's share for the World Series was less than the minimum salary of $390,000. Again, the sum is obscure because the Fall Classic is about the ring. Playoffs are when athletes in mainstream sports take the unkindest cut of all, no salaries. But golf's playoff is all about money when, ideally, it wouldn't be. After burying the list of wage-earners throughout the season in deference to those FedEx point standings, the tour reverses field in the postseason and asks us to be infatuated by the very payroll call Super Bowls and World Series eschew. Whether $10 million carries enough cachet is almost a side issue. Probably not, even in a strained economy. For a big-bang conclusion, the FedEx Cup cannot depend on the sound of a cash register, and that requires more than tweaking the points system.
The problem is that golf already has four events that are not about the money. They're the majors. The rest of the schedule, save for maybe the Players and the WGCs (depending on who you are), is about money. Why? Because there really isn't another good reason for players to play in the other events. Money drives more than three-quarters of the Tour's season.
Since the PGA Tour cannot create four new majors - much less even a fifth one - it needs to use the carrot of money to get the players interested. They figured that the same approach would work on fans because it would get the best players involved these events and then mystify them with the amount of money doled out at the Tour Championship. Basically, they hoped that people would watch for the same reason that they always do: Tiger would be playing. Then, with Tiger gone, I think Ponte Vedra had no illusions about what would happen to Playoff ratings. They just hoped that fans would keep their eyes glued on lesser known players battling it out for millions, kind of like the World Series of Poker.
This is golf's dual conundrum. Tiger drives ratings and so do the majors. Without either on any given week, fan interest wanes. You cannot replace Tiger, clearly. And equally as clear is that you cannot replace the majors.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
oh please...
…Verdi is catching up to US. These are the exact same things we have been saying all year.
This is NOT the PGA Tour’s money – this is FED EX’S money. They are the ones providing the carrot. The Tour could have done just as well without all the nonsense surrounding the Fed Ex Cup by renaming the Tour Championship to something with a little less finallity to it.
The Tour is going to run into a real problem in anywhere from 6 months to 10 years when Tiger retires. If they don’t have someone or someone’s to carry the star load with a lot of competition – things like the Fed Ex Cup are going to dry up and blow away.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I agree
I know we’re on the forefront of golf news and opinion :)
I just recorded the show for the week and this is something I kind of touched on in the context of Leisurecorp and the Euro Tour. It’s worse for Europe because everyone is so jazzed about one company provided an enormous investment into the Tour. But they may suffer because they’re a real estate company.
At least FedEx is only in on a gimmick pool of money. They don’t sustain the Tour’s operations. If FedEx walks away from the Cup, the PGA Tour can continue on. If Leisurecorp walks away from the Euro Tour….that might be really bad.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 5, 2008 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
have you not heard ???
…ALL is well with the world – everything will be “healed” (his word – not mine) – Obama the Great will be in charge of things come January. All Hail !! :-/
Funniest thing I have heard on the radio from last week – Obama interview where he vows to bankrupt coal production plants. A caller from West Virginia called and pointed out that Washington DC gets its power from a generating station that runs on….you guessed it…coal.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
No Tiger?
Ya know, if there’d never been a Tiger Woods there would never have been a FedEx Cup.
Anyway, if the PGA Tour wants to use money to lure the best players to an end-of-year playoff, fine. But to think that fans would be motivated to watch because the prize is $10M is misguided. Personally, I’d rather see them competing for the title, “Champion Golfer of the Year.”
way to go D...
…blame Tiger for all this mess !! :-)
I agree with you on the money – the amount doesn’t really matter to golf fans – we don’t get any of it.
Afraid Champion Golfer of the Year is already taken – the British Open.
When you have a floating ranking system like golf or tennis, you really can’t name calendar year champion. Rankings roll over for 2 years – which is another big mess. If we moved the WGC match play to the end of the year – you might be able to have something like March Madness – but golf doesn’t really draw like the NCAA. Once Tiger or Phil go out, people drop off. They don’t pull for the Cinderella Story.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
A match play World Championship
would be awesome if we had an annual ranking system to equalize the global tours
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 5, 2008 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
exactly
My suggestion was an unstated plug to make the Open the final major of the year.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t this mess supposedly modeled on that thing where people drive in circles? If so, it’s a flawed model. Golf has four major championships that every tour player salivates at the prospect of participating in, let alone winning. Driving in circles does not. The “youngest” major, as elsewhere stated, is 75 years old. I don’t believe golf was broken. The Tour is only looking for a way to line the pockets of superstars, who really don’t need the money anyway. The PGA Tour is screwed up.
Longevity
Didn’t the Superbowl almost die in its early years before it took hold?
I have some pretty severe criticism about the FedEx Cup, but even with a perfect formula, I don’t think it’s very realistic to expect it to achieve the status of comparable events that are decades old. I think that goes for whether we’re talking about golf’s majors, or other sporting championships. The “youngest” major, The Masters is coming up on 75 years and also nearly failed in its early years.
The FedEx cup isn’t going to achieve any real status until its beginnings start to fog in people’s memory, even if the formula is absolutely perfected.
Totally agree
This kind of thing takes time to develop – and they’re definitely working on it. The Tour deserves credit for listening to criticism from all sides and try to integrate good suggestions into future iterations. They will get it right in time, I think. Just don’t try to make it bigger than the majors, or even the fifth major.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 5, 2008 5:31 PM EST up reply actions
now THIS is some good stuff...
The Superbowl started slow, but picked up speed pretty quickly. By year three they were pretty stable.
Can’t agree with you, Ryan. Taking suggestions from every direction is a recipe for disaster. Nothing screws up a project like a committee. Compromise is the language of the devil…and all those good ol’ cliche’s. :-) I do, however, share your hopeful optimism that eventually they will get it right, but they need to do what THEY think will work best and tell the media to take a hike. Their job is to report – not to dictate policy.
D – I have to ask – why finish the ranking year in July with the British Open ?
Professional golf is one of those weird games where one person wins – and the rest of the field makes less – but they aren’t called “losers” except in match play. The only “losers” in a stroke play event are the guys who go home on Friday empty handed. TV doesn’t care for match play because of the lack of control – plus – these guys play stroke play all year except for the WGC Match Play. If you’re going to have a championship tournament to decide the champion for the year – you should play the same game you play the rest of the season.
What do you think ? Steal the ADT format for the PGA Tour and have a shootout ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I really do feel
That a lot of good suggestions have been made. Some come from the fringe and can be transformed into good ones. That doesn’t mean that every suggestion should be considered.
I would love for the ADT format to continue, but that would need a more formal name for the PGA Tour to be confident in ripping it off. :)
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 5, 2008 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
here's the problem..
…person A says “do this” – person B says “no – do THIS” – person C says “you’re both idiots MY plan is best”…and so on and so on and so on.
Then the people who have to do the actual work have the pressure of 3 or 4 additional nuckleheads who don’t have any responsiblilities in the situation who, if their plan is not picked, they will skewer the people who DO have to do the work. So, if they are a bunch of people who don’t want to make a decision because of what someone will say, they will try to take 4 suggestions that may or may not be worthwhile just to try to appease these butt-insky’s.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
your words are justification
Why not finish annual ranking in July? As CG said:
When you have a floating ranking system like golf or tennis, you really can’t name calendar year champion.
The tournament conducted at the ancestral home of golf in mid-summer would be the perfect time and place to conclude annual rankings.
it's a nice sentiment...
…but the PGA Tour season starts in January and runs through November.
The floating ranking system covers results over a 2 year period and are updated from week to week.
What you’re talking about is having everybody start at zero in January, and build ranking points up to a cut off where they start the playoffs where they play a tournament (or series of tournaments) and the whoever comes out on top is the champ for the season.
The two aren’t compatible – but the PGA Tour keeps trying to push them together with the Fed Ex Cup…and if Tiger doesn’t win – the whole thing gets painted as a sham. Trying to do too many things at the same time – and they don’t work together.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I think you can have an annual global system
But, not until 2010. That’s when the Euro Tour season actually starts in January, like the PGA Tour.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 6, 2008 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
no I'm not
I’m not saying anything about starting at zero in January.
Golf doesn’t need an annual champion. Golf has the Masters, the US Open, The British Open and the PGA Championship. If the Tour is arguing for a fifth major, why don’t they just say so?
"annual ranking"
that means a 12 month period – which means you have to start at zero each ranking season – whether it is January to December or July to June like you suggested.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
You’re arguing for some sort of championship that determines the best golfer of the year outside of who’s earned the most money that year or who is ranked number one in the world, have I got that right? If so, please tell us what you think that should look like.
wasn't me
you said you wanted ANNUAL championship. You brought up “Champion Golfer of the Year”. Annual means 12 months or a season. Just using your words.
What I was saying is that the tours need to decide what it is they want.
If they want annual champions, the present two year system needs to go away.
If they want the floating system – then this idea of the Fed Ex Cup champion being the champion of the year has to go away.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
annual champion
The Tour wants some way to determine a champion. I only suggested using the British to decide the champion because it takes place at the ancestral home of golf. I have no desire to change the way the Tour was run three years ago. Throw out the FEC with the bathwater and good riddance.
Too late
They’re making 3.0 changes now :)
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 6, 2008 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
To succeed, the changes must include a stern warning to Tiger: Never get injured again and while he’s at it, never retire.
Grand conspiracy
We could always just rig the golf world for a few years so that a young phenom could rise like Woods has.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 6, 2008 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
Andy Brown at GolfSwingSecretsRevealed.com confesses:
I must confess I am not overly impressed by these proposed changes. End of the day we must remember that the Fed-Ex Cup is supposed to crown the best player through the season and so we cannot be in a situation where the player who was thirtieth on the list suddenly finds himself with the Fed-Ex Cup in hand all because of one championship.
Of course if the PGA Tour bosses are willing to drop the garb of the ‘best player in the season’ thing that they have got going then we can explore a lot of other possibilities which includes the playoffs. People are honestly tired of plain old strokeplay events and even without the best players a matchplay event is any day much more fascinating.
So all they need to do is ensure that there is a proper way to celebrate the best player through the season and use the overflowing coffers of FedEx to coronate the ‘gimmick champion’ if you may for that is the only thing that might ease the headache. Too much number crunching is definitely not advisable and I have not seen someone come up with the perfect balance that ensures television viability as well as fairness.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
