OPINION: Do the FedExCup Playoffs have an identity problem?
(Note: the following is the opinion of the author and does not reflect the stance of Golf Unfiltered as a whole.)
Ahead of this week’s opening round of the 2024 FedExCup Playoffs at the FedEx St. Jude Championship, world no. 1 Scottie Scheffler had some things to get off his chest regarding the playoff format.
“I’ve talked about [the playoff format] the last few years. I think it’s silly. I mean you can’t call it a season-long race and have it come down to one tournament,” Scheffler told reporters via press conference. “I mean, hypothetically we get to East Lake [annual site of the Tour Championship] and my neck flares up and it doesn’t heal the way it did at The Players, [and] I finish 30th in the FedExCup because I had to withdraw from the last tournament? Is that really the season-long race? No.”
Scottie has a point, of course, as this has long been a standing criticism of the PGA TOUR’s playoff format since its inception in 2007. Crowning the “champion” of a nearly 10-month long season of individual athletes is no small feat, especially when every player’s schedule differs from the next. This latter point has somewhat been addressed by the inclusion of Signature Events on the playing schedule — where the game’s best players are mandated to participate — but imperfections persist.
On one hand, Scheffler’s stance that the format is “silly” hinges on the example he provides of everything coming down to one tournament to determine the best player of the season. In many ways this is no different from any other championship format in sports. As a longtime fan of the New England Patriots, I vividly remember a one-loss season that ruined a perfect record at the hands of those dastardly New York Giants. The Patriots were clearly the best team in football at the time by any measure other than what mattered most: who won the final game of the year.
On the other hand, the entire format is build upon the idea that it is the culmination of one’s individual performance in totality throughout the season. In doing so, it perceivably dampens the importance of any single tournament while elevating the importance of made cuts and high leaderboard finishes as opposed to outright wins. Pro golfers do not have a “win/loss record” nor are there any wild card play-in games.
This contrast — and many similar arguments highlighting it — remains the biggest problem with the FedExCup Playoff format. It is an identity problem nobody seems to have solved in 17+ years.
The arguments for or against the format are as circular as they are redundant. Many suggest that a match-play single-elimination tournament is the best way to determine the champion, similar to the NCAA’s March Madness. Since there are no golfer win/loss records, how would seeding be determined to construct a bracket? Inevitably a golfer will be left out, causing an entirely different problem.
Others have suggested that an equal amount of points be awarded to the Top XX amount of players from each tournament, allowing one’s final point accumulation to determine the champ. This is kinda sorta how the format worked in its early days, but then this guy Tiger Woods broke it by establishing an insurmountable point total prior to the Tour Championship.
Dozens of other scenarios and ideas have been proposed by any golf fan with a keyboard, but the point remains clear: nobody is completely pleased with this playoff format, perhaps least of which being the players themselves.
One solution: perhaps do away with the need for a season champion altogether. It is difficult for casual golf fans to recite back to you the number of FedExCup titles their favorite players have captured. Don’t believe me?
Without looking it up, how many FedExCup titles AND Tour Championships has Tiger Woods won in his career? Who has the second most of each? A good number of you reading this might know the correct answer, but I’m willing to bet the majority has no idea.
The PGA TOUR is trying to hard to be as memorable as the NBA, NFL, NHL or MLB without having any need to do so. Golf fans care more about the number of Green Jackets or Claret Jugs a golfer has won in his career. Up until 2007, this was the only way golf fans and historians alike (and players, to boot) could uniformly agree on which players were the greatest ever. It was simple, the majors were memorable, and the need for a playoffs system was unneccesary.
While Scheffler’s comments are just the latest example of kicking a horse that isn’t quite dead, you have to think that at some point it’s time to put the poor thing out of its misery.
