Why Rory and Wyndham are Wrong
Earlier this year, a great story emerged on the PGA Tour. Nick Dunlap, a 20-year-old amateur from The University of Alabama, won The American Express Tournament. He was the first amateur to win a PGA Tour event since Phil Mickelson won the Northern Telecom Open in 1991. A few tournaments later, Jake Knapp won his first tour event in Mexico. Then came Austin Eckroat at the Cognizant followed by Brice Garnett at the Puerto Rico Open. These stories paint a picture of professional golf which differentiates it from other sports. Amateurs and unknowns show up, compete and win. No other sport gives the underdog as many opportunities to win as professional golf.
Which is why I completely disagree with comments made by Rory McIlroy and Wyndham Clark this past week. Both players commented on reducing the number of tour cards and creating more smaller field events with only the top players competing. If they have their way, there are no Nick Dunlaps, Jake Knapps, Austin Eckroats or Brice Garnetts or very few of them.
Let’s start with Wyndham Clark. He suggested cutting the Tour to 100 players with the bottom 20 getting cut every year. The Tour currently has 132, 144 or 156 players in a normal Tour event depending on the time of year. There are somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 players with Tour eligibility in any given year. Obviously, many of these players are not playing every week. Cutting the number of players on the Tour would lead to smaller fields with even fewer events available to the lower echelon of players. It’s already difficult enough to earn a Tour card and keep it. Clark’s idea would make it even harder.
But Clark’s statement is even more puzzling because he was outside the top 100 players just a few years ago. What he’s suggesting would have likely prevented him from rising to the upper echelon where he now finds himself. Even for the best players, it takes time to acclimate playing the PGA Tour. Between developing a schedule, travel, learning courses and competing against some of the best players in the world there’s a big learning curve. It’s already difficult enough to succeed. There’s no need to make it almost impossible
.
Rory McIlroy stated he wants more limited field events with only the top players competing. He admitted this was probably an unpopular opinion with a lot of his peers. It is similar to Clark’s comment in that there would be fewer opportunities for the lower tier PGA Tour pros who already have limited opportunities. Some fans do agree with this statement as they clamor on social media wanting to see all the top players compete against each other more often. Most of this stems from players having gone to LIV. On the surface, it seems reasonable to want the best of the best competing against each other more often.
But it’s a bad idea, and here’s why.
Prior to LIV, The Majors, The Players Championship and a few other tournaments brought the best players from around the world together. Three of the four Majors have 156 players in their fields. The Masters traditionally has the smallest field of the Majors with around 80 players depending on the year (having one Major with a limited field is ok, but I would personally like to see it expanded). The Players Championship has a field of 144 players. To many golf fans, these five tournaments are the best each year, and, other than The Masters, they have full fields. Why? Because full fields create true competition, allow underdogs to emerge and create great storylines
.
For instance, The PGA Championship is considered by most to be the weakest field of the four Majors because they reserve 20 spots for PGA Club Professionals. Some Tour players have complained about this for years, but it is a nod to the club professionals who work hard to preserve, promote and teach the game of golf. While it is a reward for their hard work, it is also an acknowledgement of the history of the game as tour professionals used to serve a dual role as club professionals. Last year, one of those club professionals became arguably the biggest story of the tournament. Michael Block, a 47-year-old PGA professional from California, had a week that changed his life as he finished T-15 and became the feel-good story of the year. Ironically, Rory was paired with Michael Block for the final round. In the world McIlroy and Clark wish for, there would be no Michael Block story to tell.
.
One final thought as to why I believe having more limited field is a bad idea. When the best of the best in any sport get together to compete, it is special. It’s special because it doesn’t happen very often. Adding more events with only the best cheapens the importance and impact of the tournaments where they do come together to compete. Specifically, it impacts negatively the importance of the Majors and the few other tournaments like The Players Championship. There are enough events already where the best players compete head-to-head.
For those of you saying the best players in the world are no longer competing against each other because LIV players are being excluded, that is a separate debate for another time.
In conclusion, the best stories, the best opportunities, the best true competition come from full field events not from limited tour sizes and limited field tournaments. With smaller tours and fields, we might never have heard of Wyndham Clark or had great stories like Michael Block. Making a living as professional golfer is already hard enough. There is no reason to make it harder.
As always, be thankful when you get to play this amazing game. Be grateful for every shot. Appreciate every moment on the course. Now, go golf!
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Go Golf to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.