Weekend Wrap - Empire Strikes Back Edition

Hey, kids, sorry for the one-day lag....  I had a busy Monday morning with something requiring actual thought and preparation, so better to defer to Tuesday when there's sufficient time.

My first comment is to complement the schedulers for picking Nor'easter season for the event.  If nothing else, I certainly saw a lot of the event....  Like, all of it.

I'm going to use Eamon Lynch's preview piece as my framing device, see what you think:

The worst-case scenario for the Presidents Cup is an International team upset

Well, that's certainly a hot take.....  though let's let him have his say:

The Presidents Cup isn’t among the most important projects in Brian Rolapp’s gut renovation of the PGA Tour, ranking somewhere after designing a split-level schedule, building media rights

revenue and installing a shredder for the perfumed letters sent by agents representing LIV Golf’s groveling refugees. But the matches at Medinah Country Club should remind him that the remodeling needs to go beyond the weekly stroke play product.

It’s been 32 years since the Presidents Cup was created to draft off the drama (and revenue) of the Ryder Cup, and more than 20 years since it became as stale as the offerings in a Pyongyang deli. When the U.S. was last defeated, Bill Clinton wasn’t yet halfway through his second term, the second-ranked golfer in the world was Mark O’Meara — now retired even from senior events — and Donald Trump was desecrating skylines to build monstrosities to honor his fragile little ego. Which is to say that a lot of things have changed since 1998, but not everything.

Debating the shortcomings of the Presidents Cup risks having the International team’s players and captains interpret it as an indictment of their effort. It isn’t, and it’s necessary. The Cup was intended to capitalize on a generational talent pool — Greg Norman, Nick Price, Vijay Singh, Ernie Els — but today finds itself swimming in the shallows of Si Woo Kim, Nico Echavarria, Ryo Hisatsune and Christiaan Bezuidenhout. Fine players all, but not legends around whom one can market a compelling event. Many an accusing finger points at LIV for the Internationals’ lopsided losses in the last two Cups, but the exiling of Cameron Smith or Louis Oosthuizen doesn’t account for the eight successive American wins prior to the league’s launch. LIV is more excuse than explanation.

Eamon is correct that the 2026 International team seemed historically weak, certainly without anyone that might be considered a generational talent.  And yet, unlike Eamon, we have the benefit of hindsight, and we know that this band of misfits gave the Americans all they wanted...

How does this hold up?

As a competitive spectacle, the Presidents Cup is fundamentally broken, and the worst thing that could happen at Medinah is for Geoff Ogilvy’s International squad to pull off a shock victory. Sure, even some U.S. fans might enjoy a romantic underdog upset and a reversal of three decades of drubbings, but it would also embolden optimists and opportunists to hail the dawn of a new era of parity and it would set back an effort to fix things by a decade or more.

What that fix could look like is another matter.

But even Eamon knows the obvious fix isn't so....well, obvious:

There’s a good chance that by Sunday night we’ll hear the biennial cry for the Presidents Cup to become a co-ed affair, with six men and six women comprising each team. There are several arguments in favor of such. It would make it more competitive and perhaps even render the Internationals as favorites, since there are six eligible women ranked in the world’s top 10, five of them in the top six. It would clearly distinguish this event from the Ryder Cup, a lingering comparison that will always cheapen the pale imitation. And it would embrace a format that departs from the weekly fare, which the Tour has shown a willingness to do in rethinking the FedEx Cup playoffs.

But there are factors mitigating against such a seismic shift. The Presidents Cup is profitable and Rolapp likely isn’t incentivized to roll the dice with revenue when investors are watching closely. He also knows that his job is to create playing opportunities and money for his members, not for Craig Kessler’s constituents on the LPGA Tour, and that going co-ed would be dilutive to the core mission. And while it might generate social media brownie points from the woke folk, Rolapp can’t be eager to assume responsibility for marketing LPGA assets, a task that seems ever more onerous given the poor viewing ratings for the recent Solheim Cup.

It's a very funny state of affairs, but the real problem is on the ladies side.  The Solheim Cup is perfectly fine nad has the benefit of on asset the Prez Cup would die for, actual bad blood between the teams.  The structural problem is that the ladies can't mimic the men and create their own Faux-Prez Cup, because the U.S. vs. the rest of the world wouldn't be remotely competitive.  Heck, the U.S. vs. South Korea or Japan alone wouldn't be a fair fight.

But Eamon's points against are spot on, I'd only reinforce that, while the opportunity sounds great and I would definitely watch, you're limiting it to maybe six players of each gender, so it's not really viable.

While Eamon makes a perfectly valid point here, I don't think he actually has put much thought into his solution:

The other potential change is more incremental and focused on an area seldom scrutinized: ownership.

The Presidents Cup is wholly a PGA Tour product and the PGA Tour decides everything. Who captains both teams. Who’s eligible to play (or not) on both teams. Qualification criteria for both teams. How both teams are resourced and managed. And where the matches are held for both domestic and international venues. The latter might explain why two of the last five “foreign” Presidents Cups were staged within walking distance of the U.S. border, betraying a desire to keep this “global” event within North American time zones to maximize media rights value.

For an event that wants to emulate the Ryder Cup, the Presidents Cup does the exact opposite at every turn. Instead of cultivating a real rivalry, it feels like divisions of the same parent company meeting for a friendly off-site.

Rolapp should sell the International team, whether to a conglomeration of overseas tours, a wealthy individual who fancies being a player in the sport alongside a solvent partner, or to private equity. This is a platform with value but no direction. Let a new owner decide captaincies, eligibility, resources and foreign venues. Hanging a new shingle won’t necessarily make it more competitive, but it would at least mirror one crucial aspect of the Ryder Cup by granting the International team the self-determination necessary to give itself the best opportunity to succeed. But that would require Rolapp overcoming the control freak vapors that filter through the ducts in the building formerly known as the GloHo.

Except for the fact that there is no controlling legal authority on the other side.  There are tours in that part of the world, but this is where things are different from the Ryder Cup.  The Euros grew up through the Euro Tour and, most importantly, remain members of it.  But I'm pretty sure that Si Woo Kim isn't a member of the Korean Tour any longer, and it's hard to see how they play a role in this, even more so because you'd need to include 4-5 tours in a consortium.  Good luck with that.

I'm among the persuadable.  I'd love to see the Internationals more in control of their fate, captain, qualification and site selections most importantly.  The LIV thing certainly exposed some fault lines, and I think Trevor Immelman absorbed the worst of it, but I don't see the need to tear down the house.

In fact, I see the Prez Cup as being what the Ryder Cup has been for much of its existence, an entertaining exhibition.  Not only is the overall competitive balance out of whack, but we see the same patterns within each event, where the International rely on a handful of show ponies in order to build up enough of a lead before being worn down by the Yanks' superior depth.

So, shall we talk about the week?  We'll lede with the TC panel:

The U.S. was trailing by three points heading into Sunday at the Presidents Cup but

stormed back to win nine singles matches and tie another to claim the Cup, 17-13, for its 11 consecutive win in this event. What was more impressive: the Internationals’ play in the first two days, or the Americans’ play on the third and final day?

James Colgan: The International performance to start the Cup will stick with me far longer than the American performance to save it. Every conceivable indicator told us this iteration of the event was more lopsided than any of the (pretty lopsided!) versions we’ve seen over the last half-decade. Instead, the INTs gave the Americans everything they could handle.

Josh Sens: Agreed. Team play has a way of somehow disguising weaknesses — or, maybe, in the case of the Americans — exposing them. But when it reverts singles, and those dynamics of partner are stripped away, you’re left with talent and experience going head to head. There was nothing shocking about the U.S. comeback. It was just a bit surprising that they were down as far as they were heading into the final day.

Dylan Dethier: The U.S. comeback will stick with me because of its sheer force. When the red wave finally hit it obliterated everything in its way, crashing over each of those last seven matches, which each made it to 17 but yielded just one tie and six losses for the International side. Honestly, it was incredibly impressive but also a bit deflating — there was so much heart to the International side’s team-play performance that it was somewhat painful to see them go out in such tragic fashion.

For once, I think the writers did a pretty good job with a silly question, though my sympathies lie more with James Colgan than Dylan.  Team play is inherently more interesting, especially since we see it so seldom, so watching the scrappy underdogs school the favored Americans was a great pleasure for this viewer.

Who is your MVP for each side?

Colgan: Cam Young is quickly developing into a serial killer in these team settings. With Bethpage last year, that’s two straight events where he’s been the best player by a few miles on the U.S. side. Sungjae Im was equally brilliant for the INTs, delivering a rare Black Flag on Sunday when they needed it most.

Sens: Young was the pacesetter, to be sure. But I’d argue that Jackson Koivun came up even bigger in the rare match (against Si Woo Kim) in which the Internationals had the advantage on paper.. His comeback from two down was especially pivotal in flipping the momentum late in the day. If Kim had gone on to win that point, a couple of the other closing matches — I’m thinking, in particular, of Russell Henley against Nick Taylor, and Jacob Bridgeman against Min Woo Lee — would have taken on a different atmospheric pressure, with potentially different results.

Dethier: Tom Kim was the only man to pick up four points on the week and is my International MVP, especially after a gritty Sunday showing against Wyndham Clark. Cameron Young and Chris Gotterup are co-MVPs on the American side; when they finally teamed up on Saturday they kept the U.S. team in it.

There's a million articles grading players and separating into winners and losers, which allow for a bit more nuance.  For instance, this is one such winner offered up:

U.S. Presidents Cup rookies

The Americans' first-timers delivered when it mattered most at the Presidents Cup. Rookies Chris Gotterup, Jacob Bridgeman and Jackson Koivun all won their singles matches on Sunday, with Bridgeman providing the clinching point when he beat Min Woo Lee on the 18th green to secure his first win of the competition.

Gotterup and Koivun, meanwhile, finished the event a combined 5-1-1. Gotterup teamed with Cameron Young to get two dominating victories on Saturday and may have provided the U.S. a new formidable combination for next year's Ryder Cup in Ireland. Gotterup then outlasted Christiaan Bezuidenhout in singles to give the U.S. wins in four of the first six matches as part of Sunday's comeback.

Koivun, the 21-year-old rookie, produced perhaps the most unexpected result on Sunday when he rallied on the back nine to beat Si Woo Kim in singles. Kim entered the Presidents Cup as the International team's top player, according to the world golf rankings. Koivun didn't lose a match at Medinah, burnishing his reputation as a looming force in match play events and reinforcing the belief that he could be the PGA Tour's next star.

I think that's completely and will be way over-interpreted.  Those three rookies did great, but we've seen this movie before and results tend to be stubbornly non-linear.  Let's remember that one such rookie given an early cameo was Scottie Scheffler, whose career is compared to Tiger but who also sports a 1-9 record in foursomes.  

From that same piece, we won't be arguing against either of these "losers":

Adam Scott

Scott acknowledged before the Presidents Cup began that, at 46 years old, he wasn't sure how much longer he'd be able to qualify for this event. That reality made the International team's squandered lead on Sunday particularly painful, especially since he lost a singles match to American Patrick Cantlay. This was Scott's 12th consecutive Presidents Cup appearance, tying the record set by Phil Mickelson, yet he's never been part of the winning team.

Corey Conners

Conners lost five of the first six holes to American Justin Thomas in their singles match on Sunday and never was competitive in the third pairing to tee off. Thomas closed him out for a 5-and-3 win and the most lopsided result of the round and put American red on the scoreboard early to help get the U.S. comeback going. Conners was the worst putter on the course by a lot based on strokes gained, and lost more than 4.6 shots compared to everyone else on the Medinah green.

Adam's performance Sunday I found extremely hard to watch, because we wanted so much better for him (and, admittedly, he was up against my least favorite American).  I also think that, as thin as the roster was, five sessions for Adam was a big ask.

Back to the TC:

U.S. captain Brandt Snedeker weathered far more second-guessing (including from himself!) than International captain Geoff Ogilvy — and yet still came out on top. What was your assessment of how the American skipper handled his duties?

Colgan: Uhhh, poorly. He had a massive talent advantage on home soil and eked out a pretty narrow victory that appeared to be operating with little plan or bigger strategy. Just because he won doesn’t make him a “winning” captain.

Sens: I think it’s easy to second guess, but aside from sitting the best player in the world on Saturday afternoon, I’m not sure anything he did would have yielded different results. We’ve seen this over and over out of the Americans – they’re weaker in team play than they are in singles. On top of that, the Internationals got some exceptional play in those partnerships up and down the roster.

Dethier: The losing captain always takes too much flak in these things, and so I felt for Snedeker on Saturday night even though I disagreed with a couple of his decisions. But ultimately it’s a results-oriented position, and the U.S. team won by four, so whatever Snedeker did ahead of Sunday singles certainly worked.

I guess let me throw this Q&A into the mix as well:

The U.S.’s play in singles was dominant, but the team continues to struggle in foursomes, a format in which they went 2-7 this week, dropping their combined foursomes record in Presidents Cups and Ryder Cups since 2023 to 8-26. What is going on here?

Colgan: I spent a while looking into the numbers behind this yesterday, and the answer is that the Americans don’t show up ready to play in the format. Of 18 opening foursome session matches since 2023, the Americans are 1-17. Of those 18 matches, they’ve trailed after 6 holes 15 times. To me, that reflects a total lack of preparation. You can’t wait for the event to start to “turn it on.” You can’t wait for players to “get a feel for their partner.” By the time you’ve done that, you’re already in a hole.

Sens: I think James’ answer points in part to the deeper reason. If it is in fact a lack of preparation for early partner play, doesn’t that suggest that the stereotype is true: that Americans are more individualistic, more comfortable on their own, less inspired by collective action. I know it seems cliche to the point of being lazy to repeat that old saw. But I also don’t see much evidence that it isn’t true.

Dethier: You’d assume that some of those stereotypes — about Americans playing well on their own ball, but notably worse when they have to take turns — would be statistical noise. But this week seemed exaggerated on both fronts; foursomes went miserably and singles went beyond their wildest dreams. There’s obviously some randomness involved, but there’s also enough of a trend line that I’d offer next year’s Ryder Cup captain Jim Furyk this special advice: make sure your guys practice alternate shot!

It's really hard to find the signal amid the noise on this issue, because it's not like the other guys play foursomes growing up.

The whole captain thing is interesting, as I found this dead wrong:

LOSERS

Geoff Ogilvy

The International team captain deserves credit for putting his golfers in position to have a lead going into the final day of the Presidents Cup, despite entering the competition as heavy underdogs to the Americans. But Ogilvy's strategy for singles ultimately didn't work. The decision to send out most of his inexperienced golfers helped the American comeback.

OK, but is the writer aware that Ogilvy had to use those players?  The criticism I assume is the order in which he sent them out, but that weakness was going to make an appearance.

It's funny to me that taking a squad of low-ranked players, absorbing a loss in the first session, he got them to go take a three-point lead into singles.  Was anyone watching Saturday when both sessions featured Americans ahead in all four matches?   I saw those teams patiently fighting back, which smells to me like a first class piece of captaining.  And don't we think he's the perfect guy for Kingston Heath?

On the other hand, can I just say that I found Brandt Snedeker to be a quivering idiot this week?  I'm sorry to be harsh, but I just felt like he couldn't get a sentence out even before the apology.  I understand he was trying to take his guys off the hook by taking blame, but it came across to me as useless blather, since we could all see their indifferent play.  If this was an audition for Ryder Cup captaincy, Hell No!

Before moving on from captains, Geoff has a post up that's mostly cautionary, but I was amused by his callout of a certain former captain:

Keegan Bradley. A year removed from an embarrassing loss where he failed the number one task of a Captain in an exhibition match—ensuring that sportsmanship prevailed—it really was something to see him at the table dictating ideas to Snedeker while covering his mouth as if anything he has to say is profound enough to steal.

Geoff, given that Furyk is getting a mulligan, how cnfident are we that Keegan won't?  Or Sneds... 

Match play, especially on such a high-pressure stage, reveals players’ character in a way that stroke play does not. What’s one thing you learned or saw in one of the 24 players this week that you didn’t know before the event?

Colgan: I learned that Jackson Koivun has the “it” factor in big moments. He was arguably the most important point all day for the Americans, and unquestionably the least experienced player in the field. Kudos to him for closing it out when it counted.

Sens: Koivun is a good call. Another telling sequence was seeing Scottie Scheffler concede what would have been a pretty much impossible par to his opponent, Nico Echavarria, after Echavarria had been heckled during his downswing on the tee. And then, moments later, seeing Wyndham Clark fail to concede a slam-dunk two-putt to his opponent, Tom Kim, that ended the match. Granted, they were different scenarios. But in terms of image-making, that underscored the public perception of Scheffler as a sporting gentleman, and Clark as, well, somewhat harder to like. Even the NBC announcers, who seemed allergic to saying anything even remotely critical all week, called out Clark’s decision as strange.

Dethier: This is about his golf game rather than his moral fiber, but still: If we’re drafting golfers for a team, I think I’m taking Cameron Young first. He was an absolute force this weekend and his tone-setting beatdown in the first singles match proved a sign of things to come.

Yeah, I'm gonna say that I learned that match play is fun, but it's really team match play that's da' bomb.

Shall we get to that elephant in the corner?

U.S. needs to follow up Presidents Cup with a Ryder Cup win

And typically they use Prez Cup and home Ryder Cup wins to assure themselves they've fixed their problems.  They beat an undermanned team, which should have alarm bells sounding about Adare Manor, but Jackson Koivun will save us.

Brandt Snedeker fires warning shot at Europeans that U.S. will 'be a problem' at 2027 Ryder Cup

 And this:

The 2027 Ryder Cup is less than a year away. Did this week make you feel better or worse about the U.S.’s chances against Europe at Adare Manor in Ireland next September?

Colgan: Worse. It showed me the Americans do a lot of talking about “changing things,” but have little to show for it in the setting where they’re worst: foursomes. Until we see some actual evidence of a shift in leadership, I predict the American alternate-shot woes will continue.

Sens: I wouldn’t say I feel better about the American chances, but that doesn’t mean I feel worse in general. I think it’s generally better for the Ryder Cup when the U.S. struggles and slips into an existential crisis. It adds more fuel to the rivalry and makes for a more exciting buildup and competition, all the while throwing water on the irritating assumption — which still lingers despite what has happened over the past decade plus — that the U.S. is somehow exceptional and entitled to win.

Dethier: Better, I’d say. These last two years have shown that, whatever their team-play deficiencies, these Americans work well enough on their own that no lead is insurmountable. I wouldn’t recommend they dig such a deep hole again, but they’ll never feel out of the competition regardless of score.

Wow, James, it's almost like you think Phil's Task Force was all BS.  

Or, yanno, maybe the guys just need to play better.

Just a couple f other hits from Geoff, items to muse upon:

The Snake Draft. The means of making matches differentiates the Presidents Cup and, because of possible strategies involved, led to some spectacular griping over the Captain’s decisions. The system of making match selections before or after the other team’s selection gives the Captain’s power to have a say in the outcome. (Assuming things go as planned…which they never do in golf). So in figuring the outcome would be close no matter what they did, International Captain Ogilvy and his fellow cart drivers chose to throw their weakest sticks to USA’s wolves and hope the stars would win it late. Ogilvy tried to take advantage of Snedeker’s curious choice to place Scottie Scheffler on the board instead of waiting to put the world No. 1 against one of Ogilvy’s best. The chess match proved so compelling that Golf Channel’s Live From crew questioned the strategy, then changed their minds after a few minutes when they practically declared Ogilvy the Einstein of team golf. And of course it didn’t work out even with Ogilvy’s left-to-slaughter guys acquitting themselves well—losing 3&2, 2&1, 1 Down—while his stars appeared to hit a wall in the same way that almost felled the Europeans at Bethpage.

It's a very different system, and in the past has been used to create marque matchups, think Tiger v. Ernie (they played each other that Sunday even before the OT holes, which one does in made-for-Tv events).

Here it was pretty interesting.  I did think the Scottie move felt odd, but at the same time I think each captain got what they wanted.  And we might want to remember that two hours in, it looked like Ogilvy had a chance of it working out.  It was an interesting way to play a bad hand, but we should remember how few face cards he had.

Dod begs to differ:

Data worship. Pundits working off of the numbers said this might be the greatest American team…on paper. “Miles better” than the opposition…on paper. The match that was the most lopsided…on paper. This, even though the International side is required to play the same Tour to be eligible where we’re regularly told anyone can win any given week. So it’s surprising how many smart people who play the game believe “win probabilities” based on stats hold deep meaning. You’d think after all these team events and data-driven declarations that the numbers would be seen as just one tool carrying a bit more weight than, say, the player’s astrological sign. So until we get daily stats that incorporate how a player is feeling after a 3 am wake-up call for a Saturday morning match, or quantification of their marriage health, or their Strokes Gained After Taking A Month Off Prior To A Team Matches, there are still only two stats that matter in pairings construction: steady ball strikers in Foursomes, and birdie-makers for Four-balls.

 And even on formats:

Four-ball needs to speed up. Modern professionals have been allowed to sully what can be a the most strategic team format. Thursday’s opening four-ball match featuring Scottie Scheffler/Sam Burns vs. Sungjae Im/Min Woo Lee took five hours and 23 minutes to complete 18 holes. While there are the usual caveats created by the time it takes to get around a 7500-yard-plus course with greens Stimping over 13, the opening four-ball had no lost ball searches, no waits on tees, and no complicated rulings. They are just slow. But four-ball in all team Cup events has become a five-hour-plus affair. This is sad since the format gives us intriguing moments not seen in any other part of the sport: players hitting shots they normally would not play in the name of helping their partner. Or forced decisions in key moments based on what the opposition is up to. That’s what makes the format so much fun on a remotely interesting course. But who can enjoy it when the average hole takes 18 minutes to play? If we’re lucky.

Foursomes needs a policy tweak. I get that spread-out routings often don’t allow for this suggestion, but it’d be nice to see Captain’s Agreements in future matches to encourage the players not teeing off at the non-par-3 tees to walk ahead with their caddie as happens in proper Foursomes. And no, in walking ahead don’t have to socialize with the enemy, as golfers do in a traditional foursomes play. But when the pace tips a few minutes over four hours as it did in Saturday’s idyllic weather alternate shot play featuring great golfers hitting good shots, it’s gotten too slow.

Fact is that Four-balls have become borderline unwatchable.  The guys don't make any bogeys, so they tend toward putting contests....

I shall leave you here.  Nothing set in stone, but for the next few weeks you might see me more on Tuesday than on Monday, not that much of importance will happen in our little golf world.  Have a great week.