What did Watson do wrong ?

[Niall C]

Hands up, I'm in the camp that says Captains don't really matter very much as long as they don't get in the way (ie. Faldo). I'm also a huge fan of Watson. With that in mind it seems to me that the reaction to the US loss and the blaming of Watson is totally misplaced. Europe won because they played better over the three days.

Much has been made of Watson dropping Mickelson when he wasn't playing too well. Surely that would have been seen as an inspired decision had Mickelsons team mates come up with a win. The guy is in his mid-40's and frankly looked jaded. In that respect reputation has nothing to do with it. Instead should Watson not take huge credit for backing the rookies who were possibly the stars of the competition ? It all seems very strange to me.

Contrast that with McGinley who is getting all manner of praise heaped on him. Imagine if Europe had lost, what would the press have said about continuing to play Poulter when he was clearly in no form. What about the comment from McDowell when he finished playing Speith and said he had felt at the start of the game that he was less than match sharp as he had only played foursomes to that point where he had hit very few putts and very few iron shots. Of course by the end, all the European players were asked by the media what they thought of McGinley and to a man they said he was great (even Gallagher) which just shows what a win does for you 

Niall

[John Kavanaugh]

He picked Webb Simpson with his last pick, after a late night text begging from Webb, and then plays him all of two matches. Captains picks should be an opportunity to improve your team, not filler asked to play the first morning round and then sit a day and a half until singles.  Really, why pick guys who use long putters when they obviously are short on character.

This is a strange article:  http://www.golfchannel.com/news/jason-sobel/simpson-talked-texted-way-ryder-cup-team/

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

[Dan Kelly]

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).

[Brad Isaacs]

When the relative talent is equivalent, such as in the NFL, who wins? Most of the time it is the better organization. Possible for bad organizations to win but that is the exception.  Take it one higher than Watson, perhaps Ted Bishop?

Who would you rather hang out with?  The most interesting man in the world, Harrington, McGinnely etc or

Tom Watson, Andy North, Ray Floyd, Steve Stricker..... All interesting people, but hang out with.....

Give me the euros please........

Phil has a point,  not that we need Azinger back.

A little modern business management please........ Or modern military leadership, they are the same thing.

[John Kavanaugh]

This article lets you look into the mind of Watson the coach.  Simpson hits a poor drive on the first hole after being introduced wrongly.  Even at that it found the fairway.  Instead of instilling confidence in an obviously talented Major winner, Watson benches him until singles.  The entire team sees and feels this vibe.  It's must have felt like being back in high school.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/09/29/5209084/webb-simpson-reflects-on-disappointing.html#.VCr6SyjH0qY

This excerpt says it all:

“I noticed he said Bubba Watson,” Simpson said with a laugh, “And I glanced over at Bubba like, ‘Well, maybe you’re supposed to hit first then.’ ”

Using a fairway wood, Simpson sent his tee shot, the first of the Ryder Cup, sky high. When it landed, less than 200 yards away, it barely had reached the 429-yard, par-4 hole’s fairway.

“He just popped it up,” Watson told the News & Observer. “I was a little shocked when I first saw it, but I guess that happens sometimes.”

After a morning four-ball loss to Europe’s Henrik Stenson and Justin Rose, Simpson, 29, was one of four Americans left out of Friday afternoon’s foursomes competition. On Saturday, the Wake Forest alum didn’t play at all.

“I didn’t think Webb played very well Friday, and I thought we had other guys in better position to get points for us,” U.S. captain Tom Watson said.

Simpson was excluded from both the Saturday morning four-ball and afternoon foursome rounds, and he didn’t have a shot at redemption until Sunday’s singles.

[jim_lewis]

Very few great players in any sport have made great coaches.

[Will Lozier]

When the relative talent is equivalent, such as in the NFL, who wins? Most of the time it the better organizations. Possible for bad organizations to win but that is the exception.  Take it one higher than Watson, perhaps Ted Bishop?

Who would you rather hang out with?  The most interesting man in the world, Harrington, McGinnely etc or

Tom Watson, Andy North, Ray Floyd, Steve Stricker..... All interesting people, but hang out with.....

Give me the euros please........

Phil has a point,  not that we need Azinger back.

A little modern business management please........ Or modern military leadership, they are the same thing.

Brad,

The problem is, the relative talent is not equal.  The US was clearly the inferior team on talent, desire and, ability to do what what your captain asks you to do for the good of the team, agree or disagree.  The Americans don't know how to accept and embrace ANY role they are asked to play by the captain who has to sit somebody out.  The whining by the likes of Phil & even an in-form Reed undermined their captain and, by default, their team during the competition.  Simply by making it an issue, these guys are basically telling their teammates on the course they don't trust them.  

This is all very disappointing to say the least...but not surprising considering how spoiled American PGA Touring pros are and, likely have been their entire lives.  

Cheers

[Rich Goodale]

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.....

[John Kavanaugh]

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.’”

[Brad Isaacs]

George Allen of Rams and Redskins eventually wore out his welcome. Harbaugh with the 49ers seems to be doing the same thing.  Go to management, ie PGA of America for the true source of problem and ultimately the solutions.

In this episode of golf, the Ryder Cup,  a relevant leader is more important than a coach, other than that I totally agree with you Jim.

[JLahrman]

Interesting points here:

http://www.sbnation.com/golf/2014/9/30/6871439/phil-mickelson-tom-watson-ryder-cup-captain-2014

[Josh Tarble]

The lack of a clear plan or consistency.

I'm in the camp that says Captains don't really matter very much as long as they don't get in the way

The problem with Watson was he got completely in the way because of his inconsistencies.  He told the players that the ones that played well in the morning would play in the afternoon on Friday.   Didn't happen.

Didn't think thru playing Phil and Keegan on Friday afternoon, then had to hold them out for their strongest format on Saturday morning and couldn't play them in the event they struggle with in the afternoon.

Letting Rickie and Jimmy Walker play every session even though they were told they would rest at least once.

Switching up Kuchar's partners last minute...Zach Johnson and Kuchar never even played one practice round together.

Sure, the players hit the shots, but it seems like Watson did everything in his power to make them the least comfortable they could possibly be all weekend.

[Chris DeToro]

I'm not of the opinion that the captain really matters that much.  The players play and the captains are just there.  The fact of the matter is that the Euro teams of late have been birdie machines whereas the American players are more steady par makers which doesn't bode well for match play

That being said, I think there is something to be said for McGinley's approach.  I think you play better and more relaxed when you're comfortable with your playing partners and McGinley made sure of it:

http://www.golf.com/ap-news/mcginley-had-control-european-tour-tee-times?sct=hp1

[David_Tepper]

This NY Times article provides a good perspective on the situation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/sports/us-ryder-cup-team-needs-to-adapt-to-the-times.html?ref=golf&_r=0

[Brad Isaacs]

When the relative talent is equivalent, such as in the NFL, who wins? Most of the time it the better organizations. Possible for bad organizations to win but that is the exception.  Take it one higher than Watson, perhaps Ted Bishop?

Who would you rather hang out with?  The most interesting man in the world, Harrington, McGinnely etc or

Tom Watson, Andy North, Ray Floyd, Steve Stricker..... All interesting people, but hang out with.....

Give me the euros please........

Phil has a point,  not that we need Azinger back.

A little modern business management please........ Or modern military leadership, they are the same thing.

Brad,

The problem is, the relative talent is not equal.  The US was clearly the inferior team on talent, desire and, ability to do what what your captain asks you to do for the good of the team, agree or disagree.  The Americans don't know how to accept and embrace ANY role they are asked to play by the captain who has to sit somebody out.  The whining by the likes of Phil & even an in-form Reed undermined their captain and, by default, their team during the competition.  Simply by making it an issue, these guys are basically telling their teammates on the course they don't trust them.  

This is all very disappointing to say the least...but not surprising considering how spoiled American PGA Touring pros are and, likely have been their entire lives.  

Cheers

The average world ranking of Americans was better than euros. All of them are pampered spoiled pros.
Watson was wrong choice for wrong time. He would work great with tiger, not so with the average American pga player.

[Will Lozier]

The average world ranking of Americans was better than euros. All of them are pampered spoiled pros.
Watson was wrong choice for wrong time. He would work great with tiger, not so with the average American pga player.


> That's one measure...which dates back two years if I am not mistaken.  

> The Euros never seem to act like spoiled brats?

> That's your opinion...and Phil's apparently.

> Again, your opinion.  

And how many of these fellas do you actually know to say you'd rather "hang" with one or the other.  I am actually in agreement with you on choosing engaging personalities.  But, without knowing any personally, who's to say?  

And really, what does modern military strategy have to do with Ryder Cup Captaincy?!?!  I guess drone attacks might have improved our chances some!  

[Tony_Muldoon]

Welcome back Niall.  I too am a fan of Watson but...


Lets look at the memoirs and records of recent Euro Captains.

A best seller over here was "Into the Bear Pit" by Mark James. I reccomend this book as How NOT to do it. It being any organised team activity.  There are a hilarious couple of pages where he rips Faldo's character apart and finishes by saying Faldo's worst characteristic is his negativity and lack of sensitivity.  Mark James was a losing Captain as was Faldo.


Torrance lived for the Ryder Cup, he notes that as a player he always had his best seasons when the Cup was being played.  He set the model for
-Preparation of every detail including
- taking public speaking lessons
- gettng help with his speeches.
- having a no of vice captains who would then take their turn to step upto the maker.
Torrance was happy to take a backseat this time and support McGuinley as a vice Captain. I can't see an American who's prepared to do that.

Are the results a coincidence?  I don't think so.


Some other strange thoughts I'm reading on these threads.

Some gave the US team no chance as their oponents were so obvioulsy superiorior glofers.  However as the match started the average World Ranking was clearly in the US favour. After that it's the vagaries of matchplay, in a series of two horse races.

Anyone who thinks the US team was weaker because of the absense of Tiger Woods has not read the same Hank Haney book I have or looked at his record.  There is no Team in Tiger's eye.

Has anyone got the stats on how the teams fare in the relative formats over the years? Yes it was a foursomes session that made all the difference this time, but I don't believe it always has been.



For my part I observed the interviews after the matches on the first two days. On camera the Euor's were listening to what their partner said and he would repay that by reffering to his partner by name. As in "Sergio and I didn't play our best today, we can do better tomorrow."  By marked contrast the American who wasn't speaking, was almost to a man angled away from his partner and looking for friends or in one case examining his nails! None mentioned their partner by name.  

Phil was in the room.  Interesting to hear what he says and why he felt the need to blurt it out the moment the action stopped.  No one has commented on how knackered he looked coming down the stretch on Friday  PM. Perhaps Watson was P_______ at this professional athletes fitness level?

For those who don't like all the cheering turn the sound down.  To me it remains the most compelling TV golf bar none.

[Tim Pitner]

Leaving aside his management style (i.e., gruff old man) that seemed to rub some players the wrong way, some of his pairings weren't well thought out and then he was quick to abandon them if they didn't work out immediately.

For example, take Phil and Keegan--they were an established team, they struggled on Fri morning and won, then struggled badly on Fri afternoon and lost.  He basically picked Bradley to play with Phil.  Why give up on them when they were 1-1?  Given the course setup and their known wildness off the tee, it would have made far more sense to have sat them out of the Fri foursomes and then put them in for Sat fourballs.  

He picked Simpson to play with Watson.  He broke them up after one loss.  Contrast that with what McGinley did with Westwood and Donaldson.  They were beaten easily in the Fri fourballs but he stuck with them for the foursomes.  They rallied, won their foursomes match and then went on to win another.  

I wouldn't have had a problem with sitting Spieth-Reed for foursomes if it were planned, but that was inconsistent with Watson's reactive style that was very sensitive to performance in the last session.  

I'm in the camp that thinks Captains can matter--both in making teams for specific sessions and in creating an atmosphere conducive to success.  Watson was pretty bad on both counts.  Still no excuse for Mickelson's actions.

[Brad Isaacs]

Tim, I agree with your comments except for Phil. I am not a Phil fan but I think he's getting a bum rap here. He spoke perhaps without thinking, but he was correct. Just think of all the pleasure Phil has given us in the pursuit of this debate.

The Azinger analogy of when in a foxhole, you only care about the person in the foxhole with you applys  here.

[Tim Pitner]

Brad,

It's far from high treason or anything, but Phil did not speak without thinking--he knew exactly what he was saying and how it would be interpreted.  Phil is always thinking and positioning himself as the smartest guy in the room.  I confess I don't really care for the guy but his golf and comments are entertaining.  Sometimes, though, it's not all about entertainment.  Maybe he's an ass, but Watson, and any captain, deserves respect.   

The best part of the live press conference was Mahan's reaction to Phil--he adjusts his jacket about five times, checks his watch, checks his nails, rolls his eyes, and can't believe Phil is still talking.  Priceless. 

[Dan_Callahan]

Golf is an individual sport. This idea of team chemistry is overblown, in my opinion. You need reasonably compatible partners in alternate shot, but outside of that, the personalities shouldn't matter. What should matter is individual pride, competitiveness, and confidence.

The majority of the current US Ryder Cup team is made up of Ryder Cup losers. They need to purge the ranks and start over. Give me a team of Ryder Cup rookies over these veterans 10 times out of 10.

[Tim Pitner]

Maybe I'm a moron but I don't understand the controversy. PM was asked a question and answered it honestly. Would it have been better for him to give a "false" answer because Watson was sitting a few yards from him or does he deserve credit for speaking his mind in front of Watson and not behind his back.

No, he doesn't deserve any credit for delivering a cheap shot at his captain during a closing press conference.  The better option would have been to have spoken directly with Watson, preferably before the matches when it could have done some good.  Mickelson admitted he didn't do that.  

[Jud_T]

Uh, he sat Reed & Spieth after they won 5&4 Friday morning, thereby killing any possible momentum we had going into Friday afternoon.  The resulting 1-3 performance in the afternoon gave all the momentum to the Euros, which we never got back.  Who knows- they go out and win again, we come into Saturday all square and maybe it's an entirely different ballgame...His inability to take one for the team with the media only compounded his incompetence in the pairings...

[Dan_Callahan]

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.

[Rick Shefchik]

Ryder Cup captains can have a positive effect on their teams, but that might not translate into any extra wins. A captain's primary responsibility is to not make any obvious blunders that help the other side, and that's where Watson failed. Benching Spieth and Reed on Friday afternoon was simply inexplicable, as was playing the 44-year-old Mickelson in Friday afternoon foursomes when he was driving the ball all over Perthshire in his morning match. Then not putting Mickelson and Bradley out Saturday morning in four ball -- the format in which they'd won the day before -- was another obvious blunder, as was failing to even notify Mickelson in person. Watson's other mistake was picking Webb Simpson, who simply wasn't on form this summer and had no business being selected.

Watson was inconsistent, non-communicative and exhibited poor judgment on several important decisions. With another captain, the U.S. probably would have lost by just 15-13.