We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Should the PGA Tour eliminate the cut?

PhillyV

PhillyV

Original Ass-Cap : G15' & G18'
Albatross 2024 Club
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
34,338
Reaction score
5,305
Location
CLE
Handicap
Snow
So this week is the WGC Match Play event and one of my favorites (mostly because i love watching the pros play matches). But the first round is a head scratcher. It is round robin style which gives guys a chance to win the event even if they lose their first match. And its being said that its set up that way for the fans and to keep matches interesting early in the week. So that raises the question i have. If they are doing something like this rather than single elimination due to fan interest, can you see the PGA Tour eliminating the friday cut? In your eyes, should there be a cut line?
 
I hope they never get rid of the cut line. IF they were to get rid of it, I could see them hosting smaller fields during that week. For the fan interest it could help right? I mean seeing TW(just an example) play 4 rounds instead of 2 bad rounds would be more fun to some.
 
No way, keep the cut. Not a fan of the no cut events anyways, unless it's for fantasy golf purposes.
 
I hate round robin. Single Elimination.
Give the tour a chance to create new stars, which they suck at.
 
I could maybe see them doing 2 cuts before getting rid of the cut.
 
They absolutely should not eliminate the cut line. Nothing wrong with not having it for a few events, but IMO the cut line provides an incentive to play well.
 
I like the cut line it gets less players for the weekend, the day is not as long, and the course does not get beat up as much. With no cut line I think it would just mean more the course has to hold up to.
 
It's a competition. You compete to win it all. I think the cut line is needed to make the competition field competitive. If a guy is +10 and the leader at -10, does the guy who is at +10 really compete to make up 20+ strokes in two rounds?
 
Yes, always a cut line. Would not be a fan of no cut.
 
VegasMav said:
It's a competition. You compete to win it all. I think the cut line is needed to make the competition field competitive. If a guy is +10 and the leader at -10, does the guy who is at +10 really compete to make up 20+ strokes in two rounds?
Click to expand...

But that is neither here nor there really. They move to a round robin so that the fans get to see their favorites in multiple matches. They could do the same for the cut line and as you said, it has little impact in the end result.

The problem I have with the round robin, is that it eliminates the upset side of things.
 
Always need a cut. Keeps everyone honest and I think it makes tournaments better.

I would say it will save time so guys aren't finishing so late in the day but we all know that will never change.
 
I'm a fan of the cut line. To not have the cut line would be very "PC America" of us though. So, instead of no cut, the lower half of the field gets a "We're All Winners" medal?
 
Agent Jay said:
I'm a fan of the cut line. To not have the cut line would be very "PC America" of us though. So, instead of no cut, the lower half of the field gets a "We're All Winners" medal?
Click to expand...

Say that to Steven Bowditch and his +37
 
Yes to a cut line.. I don't mind not having it for one event and further into the playoffs, but I like the added incentive for the first 2 days.
 
I am A big fan of the cut and the one and done during a tournament like this. If they want the big names hanging around despite losing, make it a stroke play tournament.
 
With reduced field size at some of the WGC events, I like the no cut...particularly if you are attending the event. While TV is going to follow the 10-15 players regardless, as a spectator, I can't imagine the crowd density when the field is really small like at the Tour Championship. I know that as a spectator at the Masters, the crowd density was worse and the enjoyment somewhat lessened on a Saturday with only 40-50 players compared to Thurs/Fri with 90+.

With the normal full field size of 140-150, I think the cut is almost mandatory for logistical purposes in an outdoor sport. I also prefer the leaders be playing in twosomes rather than threesomes, which couldn't be done without a cut.
 
Always need a cut, the last thing I want to see on Sunday is watching big names like Phil and SPieth etc when they are 25 shots behind
 
adwillingham said:
With reduced field size at some of the WGC events, I like the no cut...particularly if you are attending the event. While TV is going to follow the 10-15 players regardless, as a spectator, I can't imagine the crowd density when the field is really small like at the Tour Championship. I know that as a spectator at the Masters, the crowd density was worse and the enjoyment somewhat lessened on a Saturday with only 40-50 players compared to Thurs/Fri with 90+.

With the normal full field size of 140-150, I think the cut is almost mandatory for logistical purposes in an outdoor sport. I also prefer the leaders be playing in twosomes rather than threesomes, which couldn't be done without a cut.
Click to expand...

What he said. Having a cut also adds a competitive aspect to the Friday rounds.

This is probably another discussion, but why does the Tour have to "create stars?" Stars are created by wins and good play. People moan all the time about guys getting marketed as stars when they haven't really done anything notable on Tour (example: Rickie Fowler in his first 3-4 years on Tour) but yet the Tour needs to create stars? I don't get it.
 
arydolphin said:
What he said. Having a cut also adds a competitive aspect to the Friday rounds.

This is probably another discussion, but why does the Tour have to "create stars?" Stars are created by wins and good play. People moan all the time about guys getting marketed as stars when they haven't really done anything notable on Tour (example: Rickie Fowler in his first 3-4 years on Tour) but yet the Tour needs to create stars? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

Stars are created by marketing.
As you said exactly in the next sentence.
Jimmy Walker is not a star
Johnny Football is a star

Its up to the tour to create ratings, to create revenue, to create and keep sponsors, which all happens by creating star power and not relying on the same 3 players to move the needle.
 
I think the cut keeps everyone competitive on Thursday and Friday! Really not interested in watching the guys that are 10-25 shots behind on a weekend!
 
I couldn't imagine how long they'd be on the course with as slow as they play if there wasn't a cut.
 
No they should not eliminate the cut. I agree this Round Robin format is silliness though. I think it was intended to prevent a lesser known player from pulling the upset, its all about the big names.
 
Im pro cut
 
Looking thru their eyes (the pros). As a pro would you want to be forced into playing Saturday and Sunday when you are 20 strokes out or worse? I mean yes it would suck to not be in contention because this is how they make their living. But I'm sure these guys have other things on their agenda that would be freed up by having Saturday and Sunday off, like family....

Of course you could drop out but then you add negative attention .

The cut helps in more ways than one. To remove it would be ridiculous.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 
JB said:
But that is neither here nor there really. They move to a round robin so that the fans get to see their favorites in multiple matches. They could do the same for the cut line and as you said, it has little impact in the end result.

The problem I have with the round robin, is that it eliminates the upset side of things.
Click to expand...

I agree with you in regards to round robin elimination. My comment was in reply to, if the PGA moved to eliminate the cut line all together, not just for the WGC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top