Will it work? Success of PGA Tour's bold change to be determined further down the line

MUCH DIFFERENCE? Rory McIlroy hits a shot in a practice round prior to The Players Championship at TPC Sawgrass on Tuesday in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida. Pic: Richard Heathcote/Getty Images

When you’ve spent nearly every waking hour for the last year belittling the phrases “limited field” and “no cut,” it requires a level of dexterity and verbal gymnastics to start selling the concept of limited-field, no-cut events as the best way forward out of an existential crisis about the future of golf.

But here we are. 

At the PGA Tour’s flagship $25 million Players Championship – whose annual boast of the greatest field in golf is wounded by the absence of its reigning champion and the reality of needing to dip below the top-400 in the world to fill out the tee sheet – the tournament host invited a heavyweight lineup of stars Tuesday to support the PGA Tour commissioner and tout the merits of its announced changes to a 2024 schedule as something completely different than the rival LIV Golf league that compelled them to blow up the long-standing model.

While the LIVsters have enjoyed mocking the pending designated-event model of eight big-money events with fields capped at 70 to 80 players and no cut as “familiar,” commissioner Jay Monahan and stars like Rory McIlroy and Jon Rahm are very quick to promote the major differences between the two.

Only one of them requires qualifying for your place in each field, more than accepting a fat check of Saudi money to book a guaranteed spot.

“Do you think we really look the same?” Monahan said when LIV CEO Greg Norman’s imitation-is-the-highest-form-of-flattery jab was broached. 

“You know, the players that are competing in our events in this new format next year will have earned the right to compete in them and they will have earned it through top-50 position in the FedExCup this year as well as their performance in the fall and ultimately in these swings.” 

In January, Monahan said, “I’ve always felt a cut is important to the sport.” 

What changed?

“There was and there still is a lot of discussion and debate on whether or not there should be no cuts,” Monahan said. 

“But for us to be able to have our stars assured to play for four days is a really important element to this model going forward. We think that's what fans want, particularly given the players have earned their right and their ability to play in those events.” 

McIlroy, who helped shepherd this new system to fruition as a member of the PGA Tour Players Advisory Board, said that there is “enough jeopardy built into the system” despite the no-cut formats, differentiating itself from the guaranteed invitation LIV Golf model.

“Obviously there's going to be eight events with no cuts, but with everything that you have to do to get into those events … like cuts that you have to make to get into those events; making the playoffs (and) getting into the top 50,” McIlroy explained. 

“So there's certain things that you have to do to qualify for those events. I think that's more than fair to warrant eight events a year that are guaranteeing the players four days.” 

Monahan and McIlroy were also armed with legacy numbers to stem any critics.

“You know the PGA Tour has always had limited-field, no-cut 72-hole stroke play events,” Monahan said. 

“In fact, Jack Nicklaus won 17 times in that format. Arnold Palmer won 23. Tiger Woods won 26. To me … the format did not diminish those accomplishments as we sit here today.” 

It still rings disingenuous after the last year has been spent criticizing LIV Golf for its 54-hole, no-cut model with the same players week after week competing in a relative closed shop. The Masters tournament often has a field with fewer than 90 players, many of them older past champions, but it’s long had a cut that fit in with golf’s long-established merit-based system. It wouldn’t be a major championship without a cut.

But the commissioner and players filing through interviews Tuesday all kept touting those “cuts along the way” to qualify that distinguishes it from its rival. The limited fields will include the top 50 finishers in this year’s FedEx Cup race, the next 10 leaders from the fall or the current year’s points standings, the top five leaders from the intervals in between designated events and sponsor exemptions to make room for players like Tiger Woods or other desirable inclusions.

“We've looked at all possible competitive models, and it was evident and perhaps obvious that whatever we do differently, we must showcase our top performers competing against one another more often,” Monahan said. 

“Every single member aspiring to qualify for the designated events has the opportunity to do so throughout the season.” 

It's a far cry from the original proposal by elite players last summer for 50-man selected elite fields that quite frankly would have been blatant plagiarism of the LIV model and created a two-tier tour of haves and have-nots with roughly an 80-percent retention rate of participants year over year.

“We've run a dizzying number of models,” Monahan said, “the model right now would suggest that roughly a little north of 60 percent of the players in the top 50 will retain their position. So more than a third will not.

NEED FOR CHANGE: PGA Commissioner Jay Monahan. Pic: AP Photo/Ryan Kang

“That was an important element to the changes that we're making. We wanted to make certain that there was real consequence and there's real promotion, there's real relegation. I think that accomplishes that. … You're matching up the hottest players at the time with the top performers from the prior year, that's what creates that variability and the retention rates.” 

Monahan also made the case that not having a cut will allow for critical movement by players over the weekend to try to maintain their place in future designated events.

“If you think about a field size of 70 to 80 players, and if you think about a higher reward for a top-10 finish … any player that is near the bottom of the cut line in what is already a reduced field has the chance to come back and finish inside the top 10. In fact, I think you'll probably see over the next couple years a player in that spot come back with a chance to win. For us I think that that's very compelling for our fans, and I also think it's very compelling competitively for our players.” 

The full framework of the 2024 schedule will not be finalized until later in 2023, but they’ve stressed that there will be a set “cadence” to the schedule from January through June with three full-field regular events in between pairs of designated events, the majors and Players to create windows of opportunities for players to play their way in and give ample opportunity for top players to still play non-designated events that they choose. 

There will be no mandatory participation, but the most lucrative events sell themselves.

The limited field sizes help strengthen the regular events, Monahan said, citing a measurable reduction in top players competing in those events this year due to the larger fields in the designated events.

“Our 2024 schedule will look significantly different, with a consistent cadence of designated and full-field events,” Monahan said. “Within this framework, those players who qualify for these designated events will be able to better complement their schedules through full-field events, as they return to favorite venues, support their home markets, and solidify positions at the start of the season as well as in advance of the FedExCup Playoffs.

“By keeping these field sizes at 70 to 80 players, that allows us to make the field sizes at all of our full-field events as strong if not stronger going forward. All of our modelling suggests that. Candidly, we have seen some challenges with player fields early in the season. We've had a 20 percent decline in exempt members that are participating in some events.

“The fact that we will not have designated events between late June and the end of the year so players are playing their way into the playoffs and competing for positioning, not only in the playoffs but for the following year.” 

Will it work? 

It will certainly bring together the best players more often, which is the primary goal. But how it develops and strengthens the overall tour model remains to be seen.

“Will this model be perfect right out of the gate? Perhaps not,” Monahan conceded. 

“But as we've done throughout our history and using the FedEx Cup as a prime example, we will listen, we will learn and we will adapt each year with the changing needs of our players, partners and fans.” 

There’s no denying it’s a bold change, especially in light of all the rancor between the PGA Tour and LIV Golf. The larger-field designated events have certainly delivered on the drama that was promised so far this season. Now they’re selling less is more.

Ready or not, we’ll find out next year if the new model is worth buying into.