They are projecting the cut for matchplay at +7 - that is to say, +7 makes the playoff, +8 does not.
I can't remember what it was at Oakmont, but I think it was similar. The second course then was Pgh Field Club.
And, Mike C, I continue to resent your misrepresentation of the '03 Am. I was there every day. I have seen tougher rough. I have seen narrower fairways. I have never seen a course presently as tough but as fair as Oakmont that year. 
Seriously, the rough was not hay, as you describe it. It was penal, but it was possible to hit out of it. I personally stood next to more than a couple players as they hit out of the rough, and very few that I personally witnessed just hacked it out. They usually made a go at the green. Some got it there, some didn't, but few just hacked it out, which is what hay-like rough implies to me. Oakmont defended itself with the best set of greens imaginable, not hay life rough bordering overly narrow fairways. I'd imagine Merion's defenses are much the same.
George,
My apologies. Knowing you personally, if I have you "resent"ing something I've said, then I have clearly misrepresented my case.
I certainly didn't mean to cast any aspersions on Oakmont but perhaps I've been over-using the example as a foil to match the contention of some on here who infer that a tough (re: "unfair") setup is needed because of architectural deficiencies, whether in the case of Baltusrol a few weeks back, or Merion this week.
I'm certain that having been there, you're correct in your assessment of the rough at Oakmont not being "hay", but instead, tough but playable. I think rough should be an "iffy" and not purely penal proposition and it sounds as though it was in 03, and from first hand accounts, that's what it sounds like it is this week at Merion, as well.
Clearly some of us purists would love to see wider fairways and less of an emphasis on rough at the courses we love, but at Championship level golf, an emphasis on accuracy over options seems to be unavoidable, particularly given the distance most top modern players can achieve.
By the way, you should know that I love Oakmont. I've never played it but had the pleasure of attending the Saturday and Sunday rounds of the US Open back in 1983 and you're right...there is way more there from an architectural standpoint than just the "penal" reputation of scads of bunkers, high rough, and blazing greens. The use of topography on that course in the routing is sensational, as is the variety of hole presentations. I'm sure the recent tree removals have only enhanced the property and golf course.
Personally, I think we're extremely fortunate to have two courses in Pennsylvania, each about 100 years old, both under 7000 yards (although I believe recent tee additions might have stretched Oakmont beyond that), that can still challenge top players in exciting and original ways. Frankly, I'm amazed at how well Merion held up this week and to know that the scoring average was as high as a fearsome test as Oakmont says something about the degree of challenge at both courses.