The PGA Tour Must Address Problems with the Allocation of FedEx Cup Points

It took several embarrassing moments and multiple formatting changes, but the PGA Tour has finally gotten it right with regard to the four FedEx Cup playoff events.

The Tour has found the perfect mix of volatility which both rewards players for strong play throughout the year while also allowing a player such as Billy Horschel to get hot at precisely the right time and make a run at the FedEx Cup title.

So credit must be given where credit is due. Very few ever thought it was possible for the PGA Tour to create a playoff format that would actually work for a sport such as golf.

But, where the FedEx Cup point system is still falling miserably short is with regards to the way in which points are allocated during the course of the regular season, and this issue has moved further into the spotlight as the PGA Tour has expanded its schedule.

As much as the PGA Tour would like its fans, and particularly its sponsors, to believe that all tournaments are created equal, the reality is that some fields and tournaments are significantly stronger than others.

Yet the PGA Tour’s allocation of FedEx Cup points does very little to address Grand Canyon-sized discrepancies in the strength of tournament fields.

For example, Sang-Moon-Bae was awarded 500 FedEx Cup points for winning the Frys.com Open a few weeks ago, which was an event attended by just four out of the top 30 players in the world.

Bubba Watson received a measly 50 points more than Bae for his win at last week’s WGC-HSBC Champions, despite the fact that Watson’s win came against most of the top golfers on the face of the planet.

Amazingly, PGA Tour events held opposite to majors and World Golf Championships still award 300 FedEx Cup points to the winner.

This means that Tim Clark, who lost in a playoff to Bubba Watson at last week’s WGC-HSBC Champions, received virtually the same number of FedEx Cup points for his second-place finish at a WGC event as Nick Taylor did for his win at the Sanderson Farms Championship against a field that contained none of the top 50 players in the world.  

Is the PGA Tour attempting to say that Taylor’s accomplishment at the Sanderson Farms Open was every bit as valuable as Clark’s accomplishment in China?  

Major Championship winners receive 100 points more than winners of standard PGA Tour events, and those that finish within the top five at a major will typically receive fewer points than the winners of tournaments such as the Travelers Championship.

Are we to believe that a U.S. Open victory is worth just 100 points more than a win at the Travelers Championship?

Scott Halleran/Getty Images

And on top of that, is the PGA Tour truly attempting to have us believe the accomplishment of a player finishing second at one of the four biggest events in the world is worth less than a player winning a very weak-fielded tournament such as the McGladrey Classic? Really?

Examples of this poor allocation of points throughout the regular season is not limited to just the majors and WGCs. It is quite obvious to anyone who follows the game that all standard PGA Tour events or not created equal, either.   

Tournaments such as The Memorial, the Arnold Palmer Invitational and the Famers Insurance Open possess fields considerably stronger than the fields players are competing against at tournaments such as the John Deere Classic or Valero Texas Open.

Yet a win at a very strong-fielded event such as The Memorial is worth exactly the same number of FedEx Cup points as a win at the John Deere Classic.

How is that possible?

Two golfers could conceivably play four tournaments in a season.

Golfer number one could go out and win the Masters, finish fifth at the Players Championship, finish 10th at the U.S. Open and finish fifth at the WGC event.

Golfer number two could win the Frys.com Open, win the Sanderson Farms Championship, finish second at the Valspar Championship and finish second at the Travelers Championship, and golfer number two would have accumulated nearly as many, if not more, FedEx Cup points than golfer number one.

How anyone in their right mind could award golfer two more points for his accomplishment when compared to golfer number one is simply inconceivable.

This is just plain nonsensical.

Now, this is by no means meant to be just another article bashing the PGA Tour’s FedEx Cup. Most golf fans, myself included, were quite skeptical of a playoff system in golf right from the beginning. But, the PGA Tour has managed to implement a four-tournament playoff system that really works, and it must be commended for that accomplishment.

However, something needs to be done about the lack of discrepancy in points awarded during the regular season.

Whether the PGA Tour uses the average World Golf Ranking of tournament participants to determine the allocation of FedEx Cup points, or simply weights some tournaments more heavily than others prior to the start of the season, something needs to be done about the fact that Watson was awarded just 50 points more for his WGC win in China than Robert Streb accumulated for his victory at the McGladrey Classic.

While the PGA Tour can now approach its sponsors and promote the fact that all tournaments are created equal in the eyes of the FedEx Cup point system, this equality in point distribution makes very little sense to anyone who knows anything about the game of golf.

The Tour has made multiple changes to successfully address issues with the four-tournament playoff series. It is now time for the Tour to take the steps necessary to address the FedEx Cup point allocation during the regular season.