On the one hand, PGA Tour CEO Brian Rolapp argues that the middle class matters. “You can’t build a lifelong sport that outlives your stars if you don’t build a system that outlasts your stars,” Rolapp said last month during a CNBC leadership forum.
On the other hand, Rolapp and Tiger Woods, head of the PGA Tour’s new Future Competition Committee, preach the need for scarcity in the league’s competitive model, along with simplicity and equality, the latter of which, Rolapp says, the PGA Tour already has in abundance.
But for how long? How does parity relate to scarcity? How can the PGA Tour, which just reduced the number of fully exempt members, scale back and simplify the season without also further reducing the number of opportunities to play?
The answers could be found on the tennis court.
This is in no way an endorsement by the Association of Tennis Professionals. I watch four tournaments a year, the Grand Slam events and maybe the ATP Finals – and I’m certainly not the only one. Still, I can’t help but find the ATP’s competitive model intriguing when applied to the PGA Tour.
This is the idea I serve:
One tour, six tournament levels
The ATP has four tournament levels, six if you include the Challenger and Futures events. The Grand Slam events award 2,000 ranking points to the winner, followed by the Masters 1,000 events, 500 events and 250 events. The Challenger and Futures events vary in points, between 50 and 175 for Challenger and 15 to 25 for Futures.
The PGA Tour example would shake out something like this:
- Majors and The Players (5 events) – 2,000 points for the winner
- PGA Tour signature events (10) and playoff events (3) – 1,000
- PGA Tour open events (~15) – 500
- Alternate Events for the PGA Tour (~10) – 250
- Korn Ferry Events (~25) – 125-175
- US events (~15) – 50-100
In tennis there are usually several events per week at all levels, even several of the same level, although the emphasis is on presenting the Grand Slam and Masters 1,000 events. Grand Slam and eight of the nine Masters 1,000 events are mandatory for top players who qualify. For the PGA Tour, the signature events would be spread out over about two per month, for a total of ten, and there would be a requirement for top players to participate in at least nine of them. This creates a model of scarcity in which there are 18 tournaments that matter most: four majors, The Players, 10 signature events, and then three playoff events.
All other events are considered routes to the above levels.
Seven month calendar
All tournaments would be played between early February, after the Super Bowl, and early September, before the start of the NFL season. Theoretically, some lower level tournaments could start earlier, and a lower level play-off series would take place in the fall together with Q-School.
There may also be scenarios where there are multiple tournaments of the same level in the same week, even as high as the 500 point events. In that scenario, the fields would likely split the exempt membership, but if the PGA Tour truly believes that the gap between the 100th best player in the world and the 300th best player in the world is razor thin, then these fields shouldn’t be too different from what we would normally see at events like the Cognizant Classic and CJ Cup Byron Nelson.
More about fall and Q-School later.
Varied field sizes
As with tennis, court sizes for most of these tournaments can vary. However, for the signature events, there are 90 players with a cut. The playoff fields would retain the existing 70-50-30 structure.
Rolling ranking where only top performances are taken into account
A new PGA Tour rankings would determine status and would resemble the ATP’s 52-week rolling rankings, which rank players based on a cumulative points total that counts only a certain number of top performances. On the ATP, a player’s ranking includes his 19 best performances, 20 if that player qualified for the ATP Finals, the ATP play-offs. All mandatory events must be included in the rankings. The PGA Tour’s number could be slightly higher; I’m going for the best 18 appearances plus three play-off starts for a potential total of 21.
Here’s what could affect a PGA Tour player’s ranking, assuming that player is qualified for all events:
- Four majors and the players (5)
- Nine mandatory signature events (9)
- Playoff events (3)
- Best Four Other Performances (4)
Players who do not qualify for all mandatory events will count additional achievements from other events to reach their 18-event threshold. But if a player skips a mandatory event without reason, such as at the ATP, zero points will be applied to his ranking; for someone like Rory McIlroy it might make very little difference.
As with the ATP, players who miss a cut will still receive points towards qualifying for that tournament. For example, any player who qualifies for the main draw of a Grand Slam event automatically receives 30 points. These qualification points are reduced per level.
The reason this ranking works is because you can’t play it based on overplaying or underplaying, like a true cumulative ranking or an average points ranking.
Constant promotion and relegation
One way to think of these new PGA Tour rankings is as a form of universal points that can effectively rank players at all PGA Tour levels. Players would earn exempt status at each level based on their rankings at the end of the postseason (after the Tour Championship), although unlike current points races, the rankings are not reset between seasons.
This is a quick thought on who would be exempt via the rankings for each level for next season, although this could be adjusted upon further investigation:
- Majors – existing criteria, although new PGA Tour rankings could potentially be included
- The Players – Playoff Qualifiers (Top 70)
- Signature events – top 50
- Open events – top 100
- Alternative events – top 135
- Korn Ferry Events – Top 200
- US events – top 300
The rest of the fields will be filled through the current rankings, qualifiers and sponsor exemptions, creating a system of constant promotion and relegation that will reward players who play well, regardless of the level they are at. With this model, Johnny Keefer would not continue to play the Korn Ferry Tour all year; he would likely have earned his way into the signature tournaments by the end of the season and the playoffs. This creates a parity unlike anything the PGA Tour has ever seen.
This is how a signature event field can be constructed:
- Exempt players (50)
- Sponsor exemptions (2)
- Top available players in rankings (38)
- Rankings determine the alternate list
Players can play down to a lower level at any time if they need the points. I saw that the open events had a handful of top players competing, just like the non-significant events now. But because the rankings only include your best 18-21 results, there won’t be many top 100 players playing a lot of KFT and lower events.
For Year 1, previous season performance determines exempt status and initial ranking.
One more thing: using a universal leaderboard to populate fields can be complicated as players are constantly moving up and down, but there is technology to handle the logistics of it. Players can be locked into fields a week in advance if they lose eligibility just before the start, while players working their way into a higher-level event on Sunday have the option to change their plans and continue playing straight away. For most of these events in the US, travel should not be a barrier. Players will adapt for the chance to rise in the rankings.
Filling in fields is confusing, but it’s not the fans’ job to do that – and this may still be easier to understand than the current priority lists. However, simplicity lies in the arrangement. The better the game, the better the ranking.
Fall Schedule and Q-School retain their identity, with a twist
Even if football is played, there will still be a demand for golf tournaments in the fall. The PGA Tour season technically ends in late August or early September with the Tour Championship, but there will be a fall schedule that will include a lower-level playoff and Q-School.
The lower level play-offs would be a series of events that provide players with opportunities to improve their rankings for the following season. The point value for these events is 250 winners points each. Please note that fields at all levels are filled based on rankings, and with signature events including a handful of non-exempt players through rankings, the top performers in these events can play themselves into signature areas on rankings. Unlike the current fall, this series would be closed to players already exempt from the following year’s signature events, so Nos. 51 and above in the rankings after the main playoffs are eligible to compete.
Q-School would not be ranked and would function as is, offering exempt places in the 250 events and below for those who make it to the final stage. Once cleared, these players would build their rankings during their rookie season.
Involvement in DP Word Tour? Potential
There could still be a route from the DP World Tour to status exemption in the 500 events or below, while co-sanctioned tournaments could still award ranking points.
Still confused? Hopefully not.
The switch to this model may not be as easy as Rolapp and Co. would like, but it would likely not only meet the goals and desires of a large portion of the membership, but it would also allow for an easy transition for existing sponsors and partners. Shortening the schedule within the existing structures would mean that some tournaments would be excluded. Having essentially one tour with different levels of tournaments would allow flexibility in scheduling. And the cumulative rankings will not only accommodate more events, but will also help alleviate the extreme advantages created by the current signature model.
There’s so much more to think about with this idea, but given the current outlook, it’s an idea that is at least useful.
#idea #competitive #future #PGA #Tour #love