[Matthew Lloyd]

This is the text that Simpson sent Watson asking to be picked.  Even he mentioned better options.  The extra "really's" should have been a red flag.

“I thought, I've got nothing to lose,” Simpson recounted on Thursday, “So I texted him, something like: ‘I know it's a really tough decision for you, I know Chris [Kirk] just won and I know Bill [Haas] is playing good, and you even have other options than that. But I really, really, really want to be on the team and I really want to represent the United States. I love this format, and I'll do anything to be on the team.’”

I think he received the same text from Michael Jordan but had the good sense to hit the "trash" button.

this is my favorite post of 2014.

[Sean Leary]

But what are you going to do to address your 2nd paragraph: give the Captain 12 picks? The 9 guys that make the team earned their way onto the team.....

I agree, it's a problem. They made the team fair and square. I'm just saying that there isn't a whole lot Watson could have done (even though I think he made a few mistakes). He was saddled with a core group of guys who have loads of experience losing the Ryder Cup. He also has guys like Mickelson, Mahan and Furyk who, in recent years, have hit an inordinate amount of awful shots under extreme pressure. And this is going up against a group of guys like Sergio and Poulter who seem to save their most clutch performances for the Ryder Cup.

Dan, why do you think the same guys that lose at the Ryder cup win at the Presidents Cup with the same format?

[Scott McWethy]

Note:  I didn't watch the Ryder Cup since I was on a golf trip myself of unspeakably epic origins.

This time around, you really didn't miss much, if suspense about the outcome is something to appeals to you.

Curious about something: Did Watson need to make his captain's picks as early as he did? Surely, had he waited, Horschel and Kirk would have been on the team instead of Simpson and (choose one of the others).

Very good point, Dan.  Why not wait until 5-10 days before kickoff to see who is really hot and wants to be there.  Does a football (or baseball or basketball or hockey or soccer or rugby or cricket or boules) coach choose his starting lineup (with no substitutes allowed) 1-3 months before the game begins?

The more I think about this, the more bizarre it seems.....

I agree that I wish they could finish out the Tour Championship and then pick the last three players, but I guess the clothing manufacturer needs enough time to fit all the guys on the team and have the clothes ready for the matches.  Priorities!!

[Mark Bourgeois]

But what are you going to do to address your 2nd paragraph: give the Captain 12 picks? The 9 guys that make the team earned their way onto the team.....

I agree, it's a problem. They made the team fair and square. I'm just saying that there isn't a whole lot Watson could have done (even though I think he made a few mistakes). He was saddled with a core group of guys who have loads of experience losing the Ryder Cup. He also has guys like Mickelson, Mahan and Furyk who, in recent years, have hit an inordinate amount of awful shots under extreme pressure. And this is going up against a group of guys like Sergio and Poulter who seem to save their most clutch performances for the Ryder Cup.

Dan, why do you think the same guys that lose at the Ryder cup win at the Presidents Cup with the same format?

Interesting thought experiment. The two most obvious answers are:
1) President's Cup ROW teams are weaker than US teams;
2) Ryder Cup is pressure, the President's Cup is fun, ergo US chokes under pressure.

[Scott McWethy]

I think there is also the F**k You factor that the GB&I team has that we don't.  Paul Casey said it several years ago when he stated that they bloody hate the U.S. team when it comes to the Ryder Cup (I'm paraphrasing here).  He took a lot of grief for that comment, but I think it's very true.  They have the attitude towards the guys on the U.S. team that they are prima donnas, we're arrogant about our world rankings and that we play on the best tour in the world, so how can we lose.  The U.S. doesn't have that attitude toward GB&I.  I don't see any dislike for them when it comes to playing the Ryder Cup matches, until Patrick Reed came along this year.  They might not admit it, but I think they still have some of that dislike (F.U. factor) towards us and it fuels their fire.

I think that's why the U.S. performs so much better in the President's Cup.  The International team doesn't seem that have that dislike for us the way the GB&I team does.  When I watch those matches, it appears to be a much more cordial event and the U.S. team seems to play their best.  

I know captains play a big role, but there are so many other factors at play.  JMO.

[Jonathan Mallard]

Here's the best article I've seen so far:

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/ryder-cup/2014/paul-mcginley-tom-watson-shane-ryan

[Tim Pitner]

But what are you going to do to address your 2nd paragraph: give the Captain 12 picks? The 9 guys that make the team earned their way onto the team.....

I agree, it's a problem. They made the team fair and square. I'm just saying that there isn't a whole lot Watson could have done (even though I think he made a few mistakes). He was saddled with a core group of guys who have loads of experience losing the Ryder Cup. He also has guys like Mickelson, Mahan and Furyk who, in recent years, have hit an inordinate amount of awful shots under extreme pressure. And this is going up against a group of guys like Sergio and Poulter who seem to save their most clutch performances for the Ryder Cup.

Dan, why do you think the same guys that lose at the Ryder cup win at the Presidents Cup with the same format?

Interesting thought experiment. The two most obvious answers are:
1) President's Cup ROW teams are weaker than US teams;
2) Ryder Cup is pressure, the President's Cup is fun, ergo US chokes under pressure.

I'd add that the Europeans care far more about the Ryder Cup than the ROW players care about the President's Cup.  Their passion is quite visible--tears of joy from Sergio, partying like it's 1999 when they win.  Maybe it's overhyped, but I think it's pretty cool to see that sort of emotion in golf.

The ROW team used to be very strong with Els, Singh, Goosen and Norman and Price going further back.  Now, it's Scott, Day, Schwartzel, Oosthuizen and not much after that.  They've fallen off quite a bit.

[Scott Coan]

I thought Watson came across like a doddering old fool, especially when held in comparison to the masterful McGinley.  I found it particularly interesting that McGinley had his foursomes pairings sorted out for more than a year and that he had these teams paired together (with the help of the Euro PGA Tour) for the first two rounds of many tour events in the leadup to the Ryder Cup.  The 7 to 1 whitewashing is no surprise to me in light of this kind of detail.

[Will Peterson]

I don't mean to change the direction of the tread, but I had an observation.

In all of the Ryder Cups that I have watched, it seems that the team that wins makes putts (pretty obvious), especially 10-15 footers.  I do not know if the stats are kept, but I would like to see the difference between the teams.  Watching this week, the Euros just made more putts.  We are talking about 24 of the best players in the world, and the margin of difference is razor thin.  Yes, certain players or teams may have bad days or someone may get very hot (Rory on Sunday), and those points aren't going to be close.  All the matches that ended halved, 1up, or even 2&1, could easily be explained by one or two mid range putts.  It just seems the Americans don't make as many putts as the Euros.  It really isn't fun to argue about like benched players or team room intrigue, but seems like it might be the best explanation for much of the difference.

[Garland Bayley]

It seems the criticism of Watson amounts to "he let them have foursomes in the Ryder Cup". If he has just stuck to insisting that all team matches be four-ball, then everything would have been OK.

What I mean by this is that he is criticized for not siting Phil and Keegan in the afternoons and playing them in the mornings. Well guess what, the team would have done better if he had played everyone in the mornings, and sat them all in the afternoon. The USA players played four-ball better than they played foursomes, so optimally you gotta play everyone in the morning in addition to Phil and Keegan, and sit everyone in the afternoon, in addition to Phil and Keegan.

In essence the criticism is that he did a bad job, because playing someone else would have been better. What a bunch of drivel. No one knows what other pairings would have done, so those suggesting we would be better with them are bloviating egotists.

[Kenny Baer]

Im of the opinion that the captain doesn't make much difference.  He sets the lineup best he can but these guys are pros.  You could let the Euro capt pick the American lineup and they could actually get beat, same as the flip side.  There is noone on either team that can't shoot 65 and also can't play like shit and shoot 75, even the best player in the world, Rory is barely over 55% likelyhood to beat the worst player on the American team.  Tiger in his prime lost to Nick O'Hern 2x in match play.  

You can't say that in any other sport.  If a football coach got to call the plays of the other team or a baseball manager picked who was going to pitch and the lineup of his opponent, then they would never lose.  

Being that the captain is not that important when compared to other professional sports, (see my point above)  Having basic common sense would help.  Benching Reed and Speith on Friday afternoon made no sense.  They were the only team that played decent in the morning, Phil and Keegan won but shot like 1 or 2 under on a best ball which probably wouldn't have beat any other team that morning.  The Euro's have come up clutch and made more putts at the right time, any talk of why is just pure BS, the reality is that they are both equally talented and it will ebb and flow.  Winning 5 of 6 is not close to enough of a sample size to prove anything, the Americans will go on a run soon simply because of a reversion of the mean.

[JLahrman]

But what are you going to do to address your 2nd paragraph: give the Captain 12 picks? The 9 guys that make the team earned their way onto the team.....

I agree, it's a problem. They made the team fair and square. I'm just saying that there isn't a whole lot Watson could have done (even though I think he made a few mistakes). He was saddled with a core group of guys who have loads of experience losing the Ryder Cup. He also has guys like Mickelson, Mahan and Furyk who, in recent years, have hit an inordinate amount of awful shots under extreme pressure. And this is going up against a group of guys like Sergio and Poulter who seem to save their most clutch performances for the Ryder Cup.

Regarding the 9 qualifiers and 3 picks, let's remember that it was 4 picks until Watson only wanted to have to pick 3.

[John Kavanaugh]

Here's the best article I've seen so far:

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/ryder-cup/2014/paul-mcginley-tom-watson-shane-ryan

Wait for it.....This guy said it better than I could.

[Bill Brightly]

1. Playing a 40+ year old guy with an arthritic condition twice on Friday. (Did you notice the ski gloves on his hands?) Pat him on the back after the fourball win, say "nice job, Phil. Rest up, and do it again tomorrow." Phil's game is completely ill-suited for alternate shot. He is a master of recovering from his own errant shots, NO ONE else can do that, especially in this format.

2. He should have stuck with Speith and Reed, two young players who did not know they could not win. The odds were stacked against the US, the Euros were clearly the stronger team. Hoping to catch lightning in a bottle was the only hope.

3. Panicking after Phil's loss Friday afternoon and benching him Saturday morning.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Im of the opinion that the captain doesn't make much difference.  He sets the lineup best he can but these guys are pros.  You could let the Euro capt pick the American lineup and they could actually get beat, same as the flip side.  There is noone on either team that can't shoot 65 and also can't play like shit and shoot 75, even the best player in the world, Rory is barely over 55% likelyhood to beat the worst player on the American team.  Tiger in his prime lost to Nick O'Hern 2x in match play.  

You can't say that in any other sport.  If a football coach got to call the plays of the other team or a baseball manager picked who was going to pitch and the lineup of his opponent, then they would never lose.  

Being that the captain is not that important when compared to other professional sports, (see my point above)  Having basic common sense would help.  Benching Reed and Speith on Friday afternoon made no sense.  They were the only team that played decent in the morning, Phil and Keegan won but shot like 1 or 2 under on a best ball which probably wouldn't have beat any other team that morning.  The Euro's have come up clutch and made more putts at the right time, any talk of why is just pure BS, the reality is that they are both equally talented and it will ebb and flow.  Winning 5 of 6 is not close to enough of a sample size to prove anything, the Americans will go on a run soon simply because of a reversion of the mean.

So despite the fact the Americans consistently have the better team based on world rankings at the time the match is played, you think the run of success for Europe is entirly down to luck?   After all you say the Captian doesn't really make a difference.

As a Euro I kinda hope your view prevails at the PGA. Don't need to change a thing and our time will come again.  Please tell me how often you are preparared to lose before you reconsider this position?

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Golf is an individual game, not a team sport. The Euros have mastered the concept of "team golf" in the Ryder Cup and except for Azinger  at Valhalla, the US has not in recent years. It seems that a Captain can not or no longer tell his guys to go out and play. Watson was remote with his players personally and on the course. Of course, Watson was hampered by injuries of possible key members of the team- Woods & Duffner- and the Dustin Johnson "leave of absence" situation. Also, the PGA;s policy of not delaying Captain's pics, leaving Horschel & Kirk out of the mix. BUT, Watson's "old school" approach didn't work and won't work in the future. The PGA did reach out to Azinger before selecting Watson and there was no return call. Changes will be made.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Here's the best article I've seen so far:

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/ryder-cup/2014/paul-mcginley-tom-watson-shane-ryan

Wait for it.....This guy said it better than I could.

Worth reading.


"On Wednesday and Thursday, I joked about the template with colleagues, likening it to metaphysical hokum like "The Secret." By Saturday evening, as the contours became clear, I thought it was genius. (Even his main guest speaker last week, Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson, was chosen because he made a career of winning at home as a favorite -- two qualities shared by this year's European team.) Later, I came to a more measured conclusion -- the template is a fine way to structure a team, but it takes a man with the energy, intelligence, and personal insight to execute it. McGinley was that man and more, a charismatic CEO who has set a standard that future captains may find very difficult to match."

Sadly for Europe Darrren Clarke is not the man to work through a plan. Jiminez is much more disciplined than his reputation might suggest.


I've come to think that the singularity of mind that leads a Golfer to Major success, probably makes him unsuitable for such a role. Watson trusted his gut, but it's more important to worry about his player's guts.

[Adam Lawrence]

I think there is also the F**k You factor that the GB&I team has that we don't.  Paul Casey said it several years ago when he stated that they bloody hate the U.S. team when it comes to the Ryder Cup (I'm paraphrasing here).  He took a lot of grief for that comment, but I think it's very true.  They have the attitude towards the guys on the U.S. team that they are prima donnas, we're arrogant about our world rankings and that we play on the best tour in the world, so how can we lose.  The U.S. doesn't have that attitude toward GB&I.  I don't see any dislike for them when it comes to playing the Ryder Cup matches, until Patrick Reed came along this year.  They might not admit it, but I think they still have some of that dislike (F.U. factor) towards us and it fuels their fire.

I think that's why the U.S. performs so much better in the President's Cup.  The International team doesn't seem that have that dislike for us the way the GB&I team does.  When I watch those matches, it appears to be a much more cordial event and the U.S. team seems to play their best.  

I know captains play a big role, but there are so many other factors at play.  JMO.

I don't think it is 'dislike' exactly, but you have hit on the key issue IMO. Back in the 1980s when Europe started to make the RC competitive and it became a big priority over here, there was a definite 'us and them' feel. I forget which US captain introduced his team as the twelve best golfers in the world, when we had Seve, Bernhard, Faldo, Woosie etc, but that didn't go down too well. If you look at how team spirit is created in any area - business, sport, military - it comes from wanting to do well for your mates who are around you, and a bit of an 'it's us against the world' mindset is pretty potent. Alex Ferguson was a master of that during his time with Manchester United; even after they had become the biggest and most successful club for years, he was still able to engender a sense among his players that no-one liked them and the world wanted them to fail.

What has happened in recent years is that the strength in depth of the European team has increased, while the 'us against the world' culture has been maintained from captain to captain. Even though the players mostly spend most of their time in the US, even though our team is now objectively stronger than the American, they still maintain that 'we're little old Europe and we're fighting together against the odds' spirit. That mindset is very powerful. It's even more remarkable when you consider that 'Europe' as an entity is pretty amorphous and attracts precious little loyalty. The team plays under the EU flag while polls indicate that a fairly substantial proportion of British people want to pull out of the EU. Yet in Ryder Cup week all that is forgotten and we come together as one unit. All that, imo, is the legacy that Jacklin created. They are playing for themselves and their mates.

Somehow the Americans have to find a way of inculcating the same kind of spirit, but it is difficult. I guess most people on here will be aware that the kind of overt 'We're the greatest' patriotism that is deeply enmeshed in American culture doesn't always go down well elsewhere in the world - there is a fine line between pride and the stereotype of the 'ugly American' and I am sure the US golfing authorities are aware of that and seek to avoid going over the top. Plus, if you're always asserting that you are the best it's hard to conjure up an underdog spirit!

[Tony_Muldoon]

I think there is also the F**k You factor that the GB&I team has that we don't.  Paul Casey said it several years ago when he stated that they bloody hate the U.S. team when it comes to the Ryder Cup (I'm paraphrasing here).  He took a lot of grief for that comment, but I think it's very true.  They have the attitude towards the guys on the U.S. team that they are prima donnas, we're arrogant about our world rankings and that we play on the best tour in the world, so how can we lose.  The U.S. doesn't have that attitude toward GB&I.  I don't see any dislike for them when it comes to playing the Ryder Cup matches, until Patrick Reed came along this year.  They might not admit it, but I think they still have some of that dislike (F.U. factor) towards us and it fuels their fire.

I think that's why the U.S. performs so much better in the President's Cup.  The International team doesn't seem that have that dislike for us the way the GB&I team does.  When I watch those matches, it appears to be a much more cordial event and the U.S. team seems to play their best.  

I know captains play a big role, but there are so many other factors at play.  JMO.

I don't think it is 'dislike' exactly, but you have hit on the key issue IMO. Back in the 1980s when Europe started to make the RC competitive and it became a big priority over here, there was a definite 'us and them' feel. I forget which US captain introduced his team as the twelve best golfers in the world, when we had Seve, Bernhard, Faldo, Woosie etc, but that didn't go down too well. If you look at how team spirit is created in any area - business, sport, military - it comes from wanting to do well for your mates who are around you, and a bit of an 'it's us against the world' mindset is pretty potent. Alex Ferguson was a master of that during his time with Manchester United; even after they had become the biggest and most successful club for years, he was still able to engender a sense among his players that no-one liked them and the world wanted them to fail.

What has happened in recent years is that the strength in depth of the European team has increased, while the 'us against the world' culture has been maintained from captain to captain. Even though the players mostly spend most of their time in the US, even though our team is now objectively stronger than the American, they still maintain that 'we're little old Europe and we're fighting together against the odds' spirit. That mindset is very powerful. It's even more remarkable when you consider that 'Europe' as an entity is pretty amorphous and attracts precious little loyalty. The team plays under the EU flag while polls indicate that a fairly substantial proportion of British people want to pull out of the EU. Yet in Ryder Cup week all that is forgotten and we come together as one unit. All that, imo, is the legacy that Jacklin created. They are playing for themselves and their mates.

Somehow the Americans have to find a way of inculcating the same kind of spirit, but it is difficult. I guess most people on here will be aware that the kind of overt 'We're the greatest' patriotism that is deeply enmeshed in American culture doesn't always go down well elsewhere in the world - there is a fine line between pride and the stereotype of the 'ugly American' and I am sure the US golfing authorities are aware of that and seek to avoid going over the top. Plus, if you're always asserting that you are the best it's hard to conjure up an underdog spirit!

Scott said it is a GB&I thing and Adam you parlayed that into a key European thought.

No I can’t see it. I think this attitude is much more a GB thing. Loss of empire and all that?  I doubt it was much motivation to McGinley, Gmac or Rory, Dubuisson, Stenson etc..  I accept it mattered to Seve!  Casey is not exactly the Brain of Britain and I discount this theory as a significant factor in Europe’s success.  Any team needs an opponent to focus on beating.

[Tim Pitner]

Here's the best article I've seen so far:

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/ryder-cup/2014/paul-mcginley-tom-watson-shane-ryan

Wait for it.....This guy said it better than I could.

Worth reading.


"On Wednesday and Thursday, I joked about the template with colleagues, likening it to metaphysical hokum like "The Secret." By Saturday evening, as the contours became clear, I thought it was genius. (Even his main guest speaker last week, Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson, was chosen because he made a career of winning at home as a favorite -- two qualities shared by this year's European team.) Later, I came to a more measured conclusion -- the template is a fine way to structure a team, but it takes a man with the energy, intelligence, and personal insight to execute it. McGinley was that man and more, a charismatic CEO who has set a standard that future captains may find very difficult to match."

Sadly for Europe Darrren Clarke is not the man to work through a plan. Jiminez is much more disciplined than his reputation might suggest.


I've come to think that the singularity of mind that leads a Golfer to Major success, probably makes him unsuitable for such a role. Watson trusted his gut, but it's more important to worry about his player's guts.

Judging by the results, his players' support and his public statements, McGinley was an exceptional captain.  But, that's not necessarily required for the Euros to win.  Consider Woosnam, Seve, Gallacher.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Adam, that was Hogan.

Interesting Golf Digest article. Really amazing how McGinley took a golf cripple like Dubuisson and got this nobody from nowhere to play top-tier golf. Henry Higgins ain't got nothing on this here McGinley bloke!  How did he even find this guy in the first place??

[Adam Lawrence]

Adam, that was Hogan.

Ray Floyd also said this at the 89 Ryder Cup at the Belfry.

That was the one I meant. I'm not old enough to remember Hogan being captain!

[Mark Bourgeois]

It's a famous line from Hogan. Floyd was quoting him.

[A.G._Crockett]

Watson could have picked four players, elected only to pick three.

He could have picked Chris Kirk, who had won twice, led the FedEx standings, and had just beaten McIlroy head-to-head over 36 holes, and didn't.  Horschel's win in Atlanta was after the deadline for the picks, but he had played better than Simpson all summer, as had Haas and several others.

The logical assumption is that he picked Bradley, who hasn't won in two years in hopes of getting something out of Mickelson, which is a suspect strategy at best.  He picked Simpson, then sat him from Friday morning until Sunday when he (predictably, I think) didn't play especially well.

He sat his most successful Friday morning team made up of two young guys on Friday afternoon.  That he instead played an older, arthritic guy in poor form (one top ten ALL YEAR) for 36 holes on Friday speaks for itself.  Would ANY coach or manager in ANY other sport make such a decision?

So what did Watson do wrong?  He thought he was the smartest guy in the room.

[Jim Franklin]

1. Playing a 40+ year old guy with an arthritic condition twice on Friday. (Did you notice the ski gloves on his hands?) Pat him on the back after the fourball win, say "nice job, Phil. Rest up, and do it again tomorrow." Phil's game is completely ill-suited for alternate shot. He is a master of recovering from his own errant shots, NO ONE else can do that, especially in this format.

2. He should have stuck with Speith and Reed, two young players who did not know they could not win. The odds were stacked against the US, the Euros were clearly the stronger team. Hoping to catch lightning in a bottle was the only hope.

3. Panicking after Phil's loss Friday afternoon and benching him Saturday morning.

Sums it up fairly nicely.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()