JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Using that analogy the Premiership should only have 5 teams... and we already KNOW how boring the Scottish League is!
Precisely why they need to drop the number.....
- Thread starter Dodger
- Start date
Using that analogy the Premiership should only have 5 teams... and we already KNOW how boring the Scottish League is!
I am not following your logic,and what has football got to do with this topic?The EPL is as un interesting as the SPL where 2 teams can win from 12 teams compared to 2/3 from 20 in England?
Taking it back to 80 would give more opportunity for young blood to try and start careers.
Taking it back to 80 would give more opportunity for young blood to try and start careers.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Isn't that exactly what Sam Hutsby is trying to do? (and getting royally criticised for it too)
I am not following your logic either
I think it's fine as it is, and have no hang-ups with how much money someone else makes.
surefire
Challenge Tour Pro
As for the high earning, young doctor thing - locum work.
However this is getting well off track. The original article was going on about how a loser can do so well. My point is being in the top 125 people at your field is in my opinion not being a loser.
With the Dr and other profession thing, I was trying to point out that there are many people who are nowhere near the pinnacle of what they do, being just as well or better off, yet not getting criticised for being losers, or earning too much.
Would be interesting to see a similar system applied to the wider world. If you're not among the best at what you do, you have to resign and give a young graduate\school leaver your job, so they can have a chance.
However this is getting well off track. The original article was going on about how a loser can do so well. My point is being in the top 125 people at your field is in my opinion not being a loser.
With the Dr and other profession thing, I was trying to point out that there are many people who are nowhere near the pinnacle of what they do, being just as well or better off, yet not getting criticised for being losers, or earning too much.
Would be interesting to see a similar system applied to the wider world. If you're not among the best at what you do, you have to resign and give a young graduate\school leaver your job, so they can have a chance.
percy_layer
Challenge Tour Pro
I can't see it happening anytime soon but it would be great if up and coming golfers were given a fairer chance to get on the main tour and create a career. It has been too easy to stay on tour compared to getting on tour in the first place.
Also, in my opinion i would like to see less sponsors invites for tournaments go to players that are past their best years and take up a space that could be given to a player trying to establish themselves.
Also, in my opinion i would like to see less sponsors invites for tournaments go to players that are past their best years and take up a space that could be given to a player trying to establish themselves.
He is indeed but is only going to maybe scrape his card,if he is in the top 115 by a whisker then I don't think he should be in a position to keep his card as he hasn't done enough to merit it.Now if he was in the top 80 then yes he has under my proposal.He has had 5 top 30's in a season and only twice better than 21st....just a bunch of plodders finishes.Make them have to actually accumulate another £150k to keep their card and you might actually see something worth watching from these guys instead a pile of nothing finishes.
Only having a top 80 exempt would free up places weekly for newbies to play and try to play their way in that way and take the places of the guys who plod along having multiple 40th to 70th places to keep their card.
Many a time over the past 5 years or see we have seen nobodies with a chance to win playing it safe for a top 5 place to secure their cards instead of having an ambition to go on and actually win.
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
Don't see a problem with this myself. You can't compare golfers to doctors or lawyers any more than you can compare me as a network engineer and what I earn compared to a nurse or fireman.
Some people just happen to be lucky enough to be in a job that pays better than others. Nurses do more good on a daily basis than I do yet I get more money for doing my job. It's not fair but that's the way it is.
You simply can't relate what golfers and other top sportsman earn to the rest of us.
What I do know is saying the 125th ranked golfer in the world doesn't deserve what he gets is nonsense. There are footballer's knocking around in Man City's reserves earning more than that and they're not even playing. Most of the players in the Premier League aren't ranked in the top 125 players in the world yet most get paid more than the 125th ranked golfer.
We could argue all day whether they deserve it but again, you can't relate them to the rest of us. I don't know whether it's jealously that makes people say they don't deserve it but what I say is good luck to them. They're lucky enough to have been born with a talent that they can earn great money from, none of us would complain if we were in their shoes.
Some people just happen to be lucky enough to be in a job that pays better than others. Nurses do more good on a daily basis than I do yet I get more money for doing my job. It's not fair but that's the way it is.
You simply can't relate what golfers and other top sportsman earn to the rest of us.
What I do know is saying the 125th ranked golfer in the world doesn't deserve what he gets is nonsense. There are footballer's knocking around in Man City's reserves earning more than that and they're not even playing. Most of the players in the Premier League aren't ranked in the top 125 players in the world yet most get paid more than the 125th ranked golfer.
We could argue all day whether they deserve it but again, you can't relate them to the rest of us. I don't know whether it's jealously that makes people say they don't deserve it but what I say is good luck to them. They're lucky enough to have been born with a talent that they can earn great money from, none of us would complain if we were in their shoes.
It's not a case of not deserving it...............I am hoping a tougher standard would see a higher percentage of top class players in Europe and a lower percentage of plodder journeyman picking up money for doing next to hee-haw.
Lets breed more winners not plodders.
Lets breed more winners not plodders.
Tommo21
Tour Winner
Forget doctors nurses and football players, It’s golf we’re talking about. It’s a fair point if there’s a bigger turn over of players the cream will rise to the top. The tougher something is the more reward for the individual and the better class of player has got to result. If players come in for a short time and don’t make it then it doesn’t mean the end, it could mean they have to try harder. New players will not be able to rest on a couple of mediocre results, they’ll need to work hard to stay inside the wire.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Not sure what the problem is unless we're not happy with the guys already at the top?
Tommo21
Tour Winner
Dont think it's the guys at the top, it's the guys at the bottom that need to move up or move out.
USER1999
Grand Slam Winner
Why? The guys at the bottom will always be mediocre, that's why they are at the bottom. The true superstars get their card easily, like Rory Mac. He didn't faff about being 120th. The guys ranked 100 + aren't holding any one back. If you are good enough, you'll make it.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
That's what I was thinking, we'd only be moaning about the guy who finishes 80th making £300K instead of the guy who finishes 125th making £200K, and besides.... WHO ARE these other players that would be worth joining the tour? 20 will be coming up from the Challenge Tour, do we need the next (worst) 20 of them to come up too?
RGDave
Money List Winner
Interesting thread. Just seen it.
What amazes me is not so much that certain people can make lots of money doing stuff, or that a sportsman can earn more at 20 than a highly qualified *something else* but where all the money comes from.
HSBC (my bank) sponsors things, some worthy, some not....but essentially if comes out of their profits, so either from me (or people like me) or from business or whatever.
I earned some regular money years ago thanks to sponsorship from a Water Company. Ironically, 15 years later, I discover that their customers (I am one, now) pay £320 p.a. for their water. They have 8 million customers and have made up to £400 million in profits per year. By my reckoning that's £50 per year/customer that we've all overpaid.
The world is truly mad. Millions of people in this country pay over the odds for all sorts of things and don't question when the shareholders and fat cats cream off a load of cash.
I don't object to fairly decent players making a career from sport and the top X amount making more than is "necessary". But the knock on effect is that we are really the ones who pay, through TV subs, through companies making huge profits and then sponsoring sport or whatever to keep in our good books.
I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it's out of hand.
What amazes me is not so much that certain people can make lots of money doing stuff, or that a sportsman can earn more at 20 than a highly qualified *something else* but where all the money comes from.
HSBC (my bank) sponsors things, some worthy, some not....but essentially if comes out of their profits, so either from me (or people like me) or from business or whatever.
I earned some regular money years ago thanks to sponsorship from a Water Company. Ironically, 15 years later, I discover that their customers (I am one, now) pay £320 p.a. for their water. They have 8 million customers and have made up to £400 million in profits per year. By my reckoning that's £50 per year/customer that we've all overpaid.
The world is truly mad. Millions of people in this country pay over the odds for all sorts of things and don't question when the shareholders and fat cats cream off a load of cash.
I don't object to fairly decent players making a career from sport and the top X amount making more than is "necessary". But the knock on effect is that we are really the ones who pay, through TV subs, through companies making huge profits and then sponsoring sport or whatever to keep in our good books.
I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it's out of hand.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Overpaid? They shouldn't make a profit? Maybe you should ask the government how they will make their taxes if companies don't make profits... I already get robbed for buying a pack of ciggies
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
^
^
^
wot he said
For there to be guys at the top, there has to be guys at the bottom and those guys won't be as good as the guys at the top. If you made it top 80, how do you decide who takes the place of those who don't make it? I guess you have a bigger Q School but most of the guys who have been on tour will probably qualify anyway so you'll end up with the same plodders. If you don't use q-school, the bigger turn over will just mean more players who aren't good enough getting a shot at it for a year and they will be at the bottom. The ones that are good enough now will get their chance with the current system, the ones that aren't just need to get better.
funkyfred
Challenge Tour Pro
Surely if you dump more players you run the risk of diluting the quality you already have. Where do you stop?
So the figure is 115 or 125, its not them who are being dump, it the lesser player.
I was watching the USPGA Children tournament in Florida last night, the guy leading, Thatcher, was 179th on their money list, another good round today and hey presto.
My point is how many players are struck off the list?
In football, imagine relegation for the bottom 6 in the PL, you would be bringing in teams not good enough from the Championship.
So the figure is 115 or 125, its not them who are being dump, it the lesser player.
I was watching the USPGA Children tournament in Florida last night, the guy leading, Thatcher, was 179th on their money list, another good round today and hey presto.
My point is how many players are struck off the list?
In football, imagine relegation for the bottom 6 in the PL, you would be bringing in teams not good enough from the Championship.
Tommo21
Tour Winner
Football again.....
You know, there is now a good case to increase the amount
You know, there is now a good case to increase the amount
Wayne Riley wrote about this a while back,Monty the same but hey what do they know?
coolhand
Head Pro
I think cutting the list will have opposite effect on developing new talent. The step up to the full tour is a big one and new players need a chance to learn the ropes, often needing 3 or 4 years of settled time to develop their true potential. They won’t get this if keeping their card is much harder and becomes their primary focus.
Something does need to be done to address the issue of the plodders, maybe something along the lines of a certain number of top 30 places over a 5 year window is needed to keep your card.
Something does need to be done to address the issue of the plodders, maybe something along the lines of a certain number of top 30 places over a 5 year window is needed to keep your card.
Similar threads
