This rookie's performance brings a few thoughts...
1. He validated the top 20 on the nationwide getting on tour. He looks to be the first golfer who was 16-20 on the previous Nationwide money list to earn his card since the PGA went from the top 15 to 20.
2. The Player's Championship needs to consider him for playing this year even if he doesn't win. He has earned more money than last year's 125th money winner. He looks to be first alternate right now.
3. Almost a repeat of number two. However, there ought to be an exemption category for nonwinners who play well. Anyone who isn't consider qulaifications as a champion, but has earned more money than last year's 125th money winner ought to have priority over last year's top 125 but under tour winners.
This rookie's performance brings a few thoughts...
1. He validated the top 20 on the nationwide getting on tour. He looks to be the first golfer who was 16-20 on the previous Nationwide money list to earn his card since the PGA went from the top 15 to 20.
2. The Player's Championship needs to consider him for playing this year even if he doesn't win. He has earned more money than last year's 125th money winner. He looks to be first alternate right now.
3. Almost a repeat of number two. However, there ought to be an exemption category for nonwinners who play well. Anyone who isn't consider qulaifications as a champion, but has earned more money than last year's 125th money winner ought to have priority over last year's top 125 but under tour winners.
The only problem with #2 and #3...they guys that finished 125th or better did it over an entire season. Nathan Green looks like a good player but two events hardly makes a career. He finished in the top five in both but there is a lot of golf left to be played between now and the Players Championship. Second, to pinpoint the guy that was 125th is as arbitrary as picking the guy that was 89th. The 125th guy on last year's money list could be off to a rough start or may not have played the first two or three events of the year?
Nathan Green DID look good though, at least for awhile. His tee shots were awesome. If nothing else, he is going to be someone fun to watch just like Bubba.
I watched Nathan play well during the Australasian Tour's summer stretch of big championships. He was especially fine at the PGA Championship. That fine form has obviously carried over into his debut season on the PGA TOUR.
It will be interesting to see if Nathan now rests on his laurels, or if he can manage to keep up his steady play. With his 2007 TOUR card all but wrapped up, he'll have to set some higher goals for himself.
I have to say that I have really enjoyed watching Nathan Green so far this season. I think the time is coming very soon for someone new to steal the thunder of the big five and it could very well be Nathan. I also like him a lot because we have the same first name. Sorry for all of the Tigers or Phills out there.
This rookie's performance brings a few thoughts...
1. He validated the top 20 on the nationwide getting on tour. He looks to be the first golfer who was 16-20 on the previous Nationwide money list to earn his card since the PGA went from the top 15 to 20.
2. The Player's Championship needs to consider him for playing this year even if he doesn't win. He has earned more money than last year's 125th money winner. He looks to be first alternate right now.
3. Almost a repeat of number two. However, there ought to be an exemption category for nonwinners who play well. Anyone who isn't consider qulaifications as a champion, but has earned more money than last year's 125th money winner ought to have priority over last year's top 125 but under tour winners.
Why should you consider a guy because he plays good for TWO TOURNAMENTS? If he's good enough over the entire 2006 season let him earn his way on to the 2007 Player's Championship just like everybody else.
This is not a knock on Nathan Green. The guys obviously got potential and he's played well, but I don't think you should throw everything at a guys feet just because he's off to a good start.
Why should you consider a guy because he plays good for TWO TOURNAMENTS? If he's good enough over the entire 2006 season let him earn his way on to the 2007 Player's Championship just like everybody else.
This is not a knock on Nathan Green. The guys obviously got potential and he's played well, but I don't think you should throw everything at a guys feet just because he's off to a good start.
What is more impressive, $650,000 in two events or taking a whole season to do it? Also, there's the case that some of the previous top 125 earned much of their money before last year's Player's Championship. The Player's Championship may have the best 100/125 players, but not the best 125/150.
Why should you consider a guy because he plays good for TWO TOURNAMENTS? If he's good enough over the entire 2006 season let him earn his way on to the 2007 Player's Championship just like everybody else.
This is not a knock on Nathan Green. The guys obviously got potential and he's played well, but I don't think you should throw everything at a guys feet just because he's off to a good start.
Do the top money winners like the PGA Championship does. Have the top 125 from 2005 Bay Hill through 2006 Honda, and we will have a stronger field. It will take into account those who started well this year. If Nathan Green makes it, fine. If not, then those were just two good events.
January 30th, 2006, 07:49 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
