golfrewind.com

Greetings ...

Recently, one Lee Buck Trevino (click-here here for interview) expressed his concern that the younger, talented up and coming players - IE, those coming off the Nationwide Tour or out of the Q-School - do not have many playing opportunies on the PGA Tour due to the Top 125 Money Winner category.

Trevino suggested that the Top 125 be reduced to Top 90.

For many years, I have felt that the Money Leader threshold figure of Top 125 was way too much. The PGA Tour should bring it down to at least Top 100, if not Top 90.

If we bring down the "top" threshold from 125 to 100, we can then give Nationwide Tour players more opportunities to compete in PGA Tour events.

If you look at the current PGA Tour Exemption Categories, you'll note that the Non-Member Top 125 Earnings Equivalancy category (#21) comes before the Major Medical (#22) and Nationwide Tour 3-time winner/Money Leader (#23) categories.

If it was up to me, I'd move the Non-Member Top 125 category (to be renamed Non-Member Top 100) below that for the Nationwide Tour 3-winner/Money Leader category. Then I would expand the Nationwide category to include the 2nd thru 5th Nationwide money finishers along the with the Nationwide Money Leader, as well as the winner of the Nationwide Tour Championship.

You'll also note that among the current active categories that there is one category for the previous year's Nationwide 3-time winners (#23) and another for the current year's 3-time Nationwide Tour winners (#26). If it were up to me, I'd put current year 3-time Nationwide winners in the same category with previous year 3-time Nationwide winners.

The current Category-25, Top 20 Nationwide Tour Money Leaders and Low 30-plus Q-School scorers would be expanded to include the 21st thru 25th Nationwide Money Leaders.

I would add three new categories at lower places in the exemption order---
» Winners of 1 or 2 Nationwide Tour events during the current year
» Nationwide Tour event winners within the last three years
» Players among positions 26 thru 40, previous year's Nationwide Money List

I would expand Sponsor Invitations (Current Category-12) from 8 to 12 as follows ---
4 - Unrestricted. Includes Amateurs with plus-2 handicap
4 - PGA Tour Regular, Life or Past Champion Members
4 - Players among Nationwide Tour Top 25 Money Leaders / Low 30-Plus from Q-School

In addition, I would limit Regular PGA Tour members to a max of 20 sponsor invites per year, as well as a max of 15 Top-10 and ties (Current Category-24) exemption uses per year.

As for Non-Member professionals, any that are among the Top 75 on the World Rankings at the end of the previous year would get three unconditional exemptions into events. I would impose tougher conditions in-so-far-as becoming a Special Temporary Member or achieving Non-Member Top 100 (ex-125) status.

Here's a complete listing of My Suggested Exemption Category Revisions

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

What do you want the PGA Tiour to be?

If you want it to be the USA players development ground,cut the exemptions and encourage more Nationwide players.

If you want the best in the world, relax the 15 tournament rule and focus on world rankings rather than top 125. Top foriegn players need to committ to the US Tour rather than cherry pick,as Monty has proven.

Greetings

In so far as foreign players are concerned, my suggested revisions include --

1. If non-member Internationals are among the Top 75 in World Rankings at the end of a given year, they can be exempt in 3 PGA Tour open events the next year. That is in addition to seven sponsor invitations and five Top-10 and ties exemptions.

2. Current PGA Tour rules limit non-member Internationals to 12 events per year. The count of 12 includes the 4 Grand Slam Majors and 3 official money World Golf Championships. I would change the count to 10, but NOT include the 4 majors or the 3 WGCs.

If my suggestion RE how many events for non-member Internationals had been in effect since, say, the year 2000, then 2005 US Open Champion Michael Campbell would have benefitted from it. He would not have gotten into trouble for failing to honor a 2003 agreement to play as a full-time member, and in all likelihood would be competing over here regularly without ever having to become a full-time member. I suspect many other Internationals might be encouraged to do likewise if my suggestion was actually in effect.

I don't think there is a problem with the US Tour insisting on minimum number of events to retain a card. With the Majors and WGC events counting for both Tours it shouldn't be a burden to keep playing privileges on the US and European Tours if someone is good enough.

As for the Nationwide/Q-schoolers, there is a delicate balance to keep between the up-and-comers and the fading stars. But I do think that Q-schoolers particularly bust their backsides to come through that gruelling process and should get the best shot possible at proving they can cut it at the top level. They shouldn't have to scrap for places at events.

Oh , me, too! International travel is somewhat easier today than it was a while back...on the one hand that could mean that it'd be easier for "foreign" (I prefer "international") players to make more US tourneys but on the other hand it also makes it easier for them to travel to other venues despite the fact the purses may be smaller but let's not forget appearance fees. I think it's time for world ranking to play a part in eligibility.

Shade

If I remember correctly, more than 9/10 nationwide and q school entrants to the premier tour fail to retain their card. How would reducing the threshold from 125 to 90 help the standard of American golf.
It is not the standard of American golf that has gone down, it is the standard of the ROW which has gone up and the huge gap that existed a few decades ago is now a lot smaller.

The US PGA tour is the premiere venue for world golf...in no way would I want to see it watered down with less than the best...I would like to see more world talent featured on a regular basis...as for the up and comers, if they are good enough they will make it in...I don't want to watch developing talent on Sunday or have the field weakened in favor of increasing oppurtunities for those who can't make it in with the current system...

Greetings ...

The current method of prize money distribution for PGA Tour events is, in my opinion, most unfair. I have constructed two alternative methods that the PGA Tour might want to take a look at.

The two proposed methods take very little off the top prizes, and offer much more money for lower finishing players. The result - a fairer competitive balance. It's just a question of whether or not the PGA Tour wants to adopt one of these radical new methods.

Click-on here for »» Actual & Proposed PGA Tour Prize Money Distribution Methods.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

Greetings ...

Consider various Money List Thresholds ---

Top 20: British Open
Top 30: US Open
Top 40: Masters
Top 70: Most Invitationals, except Colonial (Top 80)
Top 125: PGA Tour Full One Year Exemption
Top 150: Direct Pass to Final Stage of Q-School

The current distribution method results in small payouts among the lower places. This doesn't help a player trying to reach one of the above thresholds.

But if you have a distribution method that guarantees payouts absolutely no worse than $20,000 or $30,000 (depending on which method is adopted) rather than $10,000-or-less in any given tournament with a purse $5 million or more, that's a dramatic change! Of course, it's even more dramatic if several players are contending for a given threshold and each of them has a very good chance of overtaking all the others.

Pity that the upcoming Fed Ex Cup would make some of this quite moot.

Prize distribution the way it is now (thank you Frank-O-Sport for the data) and taking last years 125th place money (Nick Price at $626,736), a player who is just looking to finish in the Top 40 will have to play in 29 tournaments w/o improving on 40th position.

My question is... Which player is less talented? Player A who is grinding out a living playing in 29 events and finishing no worse than 40 or Player B who goes out and wins a tournament with a purse of $900,000 and misses the cut in every tournament for the rest of the year? Player B seems to have coasted through the year and will still make more money than Player A.

Other than next years Mercedes, what tournaments (Major or "mini" major) would Player B get an invite due to his win?

Greetings ...

Back in 1999, the Augusta National Tournament Committee made changes to the invitational criteria for the Masters Tournament. Among those changes was the elimination of the category where all PGA Tour event winners received an automatic invitation to the Masters. Among the new categories invoked was this one - "Top 40 Players on the previous year's PGA Tour Official Money List."

The Augusta membership felt that players should be judged on how they perform throughout the entire season, not just one given week, especially if the player won an event other than a Grand Slam Major or the Players Championship. It is true that Augusta National is affiliated with the International group that, along with the PGA Tour, runs the World Golf Championships. And yet, Augusta gives no special preference to winners of those events!!

So, you can win any official money event other than a Grand Slam Major or the Players Championship, and it doesn't matter if the event won is a WGC, or the Tour Championship, or the Byron Nelson, Colonial, Memorial, Pebble Beach, Wachovia, Western, Canadian. John Deere, Disney, Hawaii or the Southern Farm Bureau classic - because it is not what you did that one particular week that matters any more. It is the SUM OF EVERYTHING YOU DID in all of the weeks of a given PGA Tour season that matter, in-so-far-as Augusta National is concerned.

Check out the PGA Tour Money List as of Oct 15. As it stands now, ELEVEN PLAYERS who have won events this year are outside the Top 40. They have only two events out of the remaining three to make the Top 40, because the third event - the Tour Championship (yet another PGA Tour Wonder-Blunder) - is restricted to the Top 30 Money Winners!

If any of those 11 players don't make up ground this year, they'll have to seek out other ways to secure an Augusta Invitation in 2007.

I think Augusta got it right here - how about you?

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

Greetings ....

First, An Update: 10-19-2006
Golfweek's Jeff Rude has started what appears to a 2-or-more-part series dealing with PGA Tour Exemptions.

Here's a link to the first part »» Rude: Something's Broke - the 2nd part will be published next week.


Now from the Sublime to the Ridiculous - Pass the Bikini Wax
Gary McCord - Yes! THAT Gary McCord - was the one who submitted the idea that evolved into the All-Exempt Tour.

Only once did McCord finish among the Top 60 (when that was the threshold for keeping a Tour Card) - 59th in 1975. And only twice did he finish among the Top 125 since that became the standard in 1983. McCord's highest money list finish in the "Top 125 Era" was 86th in 1984, when he was the leader of the PGA Tour's Putting Stat Category.

Click-on here to see his »» 1984 Statistics Record

So, now you know Who-Dunnit!

Yo! LeagueGolf - Based on your earlier comments, I've modified a few of my suggested revisions regarding Nationwide Tour players. Some would get to play a lot, and some would get only limited opportunities.

Suggested Exemption Category Revisions

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

The PGA tour is a classic example of a trade union at work. The only players that matter are the usual top 70 and ties that we see playing over the weekend. When #125 earns more than $600k per year it's clear that he's overpaid for what he does either as a player or for the game in general. I do not deny that these guys can play but winners should earn a decent living and the followers should make expenses!

Why not change the purse arrangements so that only the Top 40 get a check? The rest plus the Nationwide Tour guys get judged on stroke average - sure some of the courses will be different - and the leaders take up the slack.

This will make sure the guys try their hearts out, are part of a "dynamic" tour where poor performance is punished quickly and good performance on a minor tour rewarded just as quickly. It will eliminate the q-school blues as entrants to the NW tour will be able to get to the top quickly if they are good enough.

Greetings .....

I have done some rough counts on each of the current PGA Tour Exemption Categories.

There are at least 116 exempt players in the first 19 categories preceeding the Top 125 Money Winners (Category 20). The count of 116 does not include pre-1970 winners of the US Open or PGA Championship.

There are at least 73 players who reside within categories 20 thru 24, so we are up to 189 overall. Category 20 (Top 125 Money Winners) alone has 53 players.

There are 48 players in Category 25 (Nationwide Top 20 / Q-School Top 30) alone - now we are up to at least 237.

With regards to categories after #25, the counts can't be measured precisely, but I would not be surprised if the counts total up anywhere from 80 to 100 players.

What it all means? Over 300-some-odd guys trying for 144 to 156 spots in each of the "open" PGA Tour events on the schedule. Not all try each week, and of course not all who do try get into the event.

At least you get an idea of what it is like.

Category # ... Estimated Player Count

1 ... 13 (excludes pre-1970 US Open/PGA)
2 ... 6
3 ... 1
4 ... 5
5 ... 1
6 ... 2
7 ... 2
8 ... 0
9 ... 55
10 ... 8 (4 USA, 2 Europe, 2 Int)
11 ... 4 (3 Top 50, 1 Top 25)
12 ... 8
13 ... 2
14 ... 1
15 ... 1
16 ... 2
17 ... 4
18 ... ??
19 ... 1 Total = at least 116
-------------------------------------------------------------
20 ... 53
21 ... 3
22 ... 6
23 ... 2
24 ... 9 Total = 116 + 73 = at least 189
-------------------------------------------------------------
25 ... 48 Total = 189 + 48 = at least 237
26 ... ??
27 ... 1
28 ... 12
29 ... 3
30 ... ??
31 ... ??
32 ... 1
33 ... ?? (why team winners?)
34 ... ??

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

but just my observations...(I don't have time to read the whole exemptions list...I have to work and have 3 kids at home!!) But what in the world is wrong with the guy who finishes 125th on the best professional golfing tour on the planet making $600k??? I would be willing to bet the 125th best lawyer, doctor, football player, actor, and ceo made that much cash last year...who are we to sit and say what they should make?
As far as the proposed revamping...no thanks. The American Tour is the best already and adding guys who were 30th best on Nationwide Tour won't strengthen it. As someone pointed out, most q-schoolers and Nationwide grads go right back to the Nationwide Tour the following year.
Also, I totally disagree with Augusta changing the qualifying for the Masters...sure it now ensures a stronger field, however.......the tournament being what it is....THE BEST, most dramatic (well, before they took away the drama of the Sunday back 9 by eliminating the risk/reward Par 5 scoring possibilities) Major of them all....when a player won a regular event, I remember more guys saying how great it would be to play in the Masters next year than talking about their win that week...it means THAT much. It was great to see a guy who otherwise wouldn't get in, pull lightning from a bottle one week and see the sheer joy in knowing he was going to Augusta...I miss that. (and please don't say, "well, if he worked harder and made the top 40...etc." There is no drama in that..that's just stating the obvious.) If I remember correctly, a poll showed the old 'win and get in' policy was favored