Designated Tournaments List: To Get the Best to Play, or Simply Fill Out Fields?

For months now, there has been conversation in PGA Tour cicles about the hypothetical creation of a list of "designated tournaments," those events which are struggling so much to attract decent fields that the Tour would create a policy to compel/force better players to compete in them. This way, those sponsors and fans for those weak events would be happy, and perhaps the Tour would face less difficulty in replenishing and retaining title sponsors.

Last week at the Greenbrier, the PGA Tour's 16 member Player Advisory Council (PAC) approved a conceptual notion of the designated tournament policy. That vote then leads into a detailed policy which could be approved by the Tour's Policy Board in time for a fall educational campaign and 2011 implementation.

Since this process began, one of the more interesting things is that few players have openly complained about the potential that better and stronger players could be forced to take spots in fields. After all, the argument is often made - most recently in the case of Ray Halbritter - that mockeries for exemptions and the invitational-laden schedule hurt the same guys that often fill out the weaker PGA Tour events.

So why no complaining about designated tournaments? Is it that the players see the marketing light and realize the broad potential benefits of spreading out (too thin? nah) the best players' schedules? I don't think so.

Perhaps the real reason for the groundswell of support is that the PGA Tour in 2010 is having difficulty in completing fields with B and C-list players, much less getting the top tier alpha dogs to play.

Steve Marino just up and withdrew from Greenbrier last week. Rich Beem routinely skips playing tournaments - including invitationals - for which he is eligible. The Reno event opposite the Open Championship couldn't even get a full field.

The first two alternates for that aforementioned Ray Halbritter spot weren't there. Where was the uproar from those guys on the alternates list that were going to be denied a chance to play? Halbritter's narcissism aside, the truth is that he would have at least played.  Kirk Triplett - the number one alternate for Turning Stone - has only played eight times this year to this point.  He sits at 179 on the money list.  Intuitively, he might want the spot, right?

The likes of John Daly also populate the Tour.  Though a rare bird, these guys refuse to attempt Q-school.  They don't make a special effort to Monday qualify.  Frankly, they would rather write letters for exemptions and hope for the best than pound it out to get a card.

For many of the guys that are way far down on the priority list, they need opportunities.  It can be tough for them to get starts.  Even still, until about the 200s on the PGA Tour money list, players are getting at close to 20 starts.  Three guys who are having good years - winners Stu Appleby and Matt Bettencourt, as well as Brendon de Jonge - have the most starts of anyone on Tour.  

When talking about spots for guys on the PGA Tour, there may be way too many invitationals, no-cut events, and limited fields, but maybe there are plenty of spots on Tour after all.