Opinion & Analysis
Carney: Who will win the Ryder Cup? It’s all about the BIG GUYS

Come Friday, when the U.S. faces Europe in the 40th Ryder Cup, I’ll be watching through Irish eyes. Paul McGinley’s eyes.
I won’t be worried about how the captain’s picks are doing.
I won’t be thinking, What if we only had Billy Horschel!
I won’t be trying to figure out what “pods” Watson is putting together or how his rookies are faring.
That’s not how McGinley will be judging things. He’ll be looking at “the big guys.”
A while back I had a chance to talk to the European captain at length about the matches. One thing he said then has stuck with me.
Why, I asked, had the Europeans had been so successful of late against the Americans, winning 7 of 9 and 5 of the last 6 Matches. They have won, or tied to retain the Cup 10 of the last 14 Matches!
McGinley answered quickly. The reason, he said, is because “our big guys” — he mentioned Poulter — are playing better than “your big guys”— no names. The top Europeans players, McGinley said, were scoring 3, 3.5, sometimes 4 points. The top Americans averaging only 1 or 1.5 points.
It’s not quite that cut and dried. If we count the “big guys” as major winners and those who have played the Ryder Cup as if it were a major (such as Lee Westwood, Poulter and Steve Stricker), not all of the Europeans scored that well in Chicago. Westwood, Luke Donald and Sergio Garcia were just 2-2-0, and Graeme McDowell was 1-3, but Poulter (4-0) Justin Rose (3-2) and Rory McIlroy (3-2) carried the day. On the U.S. side, “big guy” Mickelson was 3-1, but Jim Furyk (1-2-0), Tiger Woods (0-3-1) and Stricker (0-4-0) undermined the strong showing by Jason Dufner, Keegan Bradley and the Johnsons, Zach and Dustin. (Zach has been an exceptional “big guy” on the U.S. side).
In 2010, Woods and Stricker were good (3-1), but veterans Mickelson (1-3) and Furyk (0-2-1) were not. On the other side, Poulter and Donald were 3-1, McDowell and Miguel Angel Jimenez both 2-1. Mickelson became the “losingest” American in the Ryder Cup. He’s now 14-18-6. Woods is 13-17-3. Those are big guys with little records.
Look at these averages from the last four Ryder Cups matches for veterans on this year’s sides. For the Cups they’ve played in, here are European “big guy” point averages:
- Poulter: 3.7
- Rose: 3.0
- McIlroy: 2.5
- Westwood: 2.4
- Garcia: 2.3
- McDowell: 2.0
And for the U.S.:
- Z Johnson: 2.2
- Mickelson: 1.6
- Furyk: 1.5
- Stricker: 1.2
If you add Hunter Mahan, his average over two sessions is 2.3.
We had very close finishes in the last two Cups (14.5 to 13.5 in 2010 and 2012), but I have no doubt that McGinley believes that in the end, his “studs” made the difference. The “A” flight has to lead the “B” flight. Not the other way around.
The Americans don’t talk that way.
“The Ryder Cup is getting desperate for the United States,” former captain Paul Azinger said this month. “Tom Watson is going to have to pull a rabbit out of the hat.”
The rabbit Azinger would have pulled, he made clear, the one Watson did not, was Chris Kirk.
“He is hot and I like hot players.”
In 2008, when Azinger’s squad punished the Euros 16.5 to 11.5, I remember someone pointing out that American rookies scored 4.5 of the 5.5 needed on the final day.
“Maybe going with rookies over experience is not such a bad idea,” posted one happy American fan.
Not for McGinley. I’m sure he wants all the hot players he can get and if they’re rookies, that’s fine. But his view of captain Nick Faldo’s 2008 debacle would be the play of Padraig Harrington (0-3-1), Garcia (0-2-2) and Jimenez (0-2-1), undoing the good that Poulter (4-1-0) McDowell (2-1-1) and Rose (3-1-0) had done. (He told me that a captain’s motivational ability was a second key factor and praised Sam Torrance energetically. He didn’t mention Faldo).
This year, the European big guys may be feeling just a bit more pressure, and the Americans less, because finally the Euros are favored. It’s the best thing that could happen to the U.S. side, especially under Watson, who I think adds to the weight the Americans carry — he’s not the loosest guy in the world — and American players tend to put awful pressure on themselves when they’re favored.
I think McGinley senses this could be a problem. His recent reference during a press conference to a great Dublin football team losing inexplicably to a lousy one reminded me of Lou Holtz, when he coached at Notre Dame, reminding the press how good that Akron team could be, before the Irish beat them 52 to 6.
“That’s just an illustration when you are talking about top-level sport, these things happen. And that’s always a worry.”
But McGinley is betting that if Poulter, Rose, Westwood, McDowell and McIlroy play with the their usual Ryder Cup passion, it won’t.
McGinley will do all he can to keep the mood light; no one has a lighter touch when necessary. But his approach won’t change.
No rabbits, no hats for the European captain.
It’s all about the big guys.
TV Times for the Ryder Cup
Thursday, Sept. 25
9 a.m. – 1 p.m. (Golf Channel)
Friday, Sept. 26
Session 1 (Four-ball): 2:35 a.m. (Golf Channel)
Session 2 (Foursomes): 8:15 a.m. (Golf Channel)
Saturday, Sept. 27
Session 1 (Four-ball): 3 a.m. (NBC)
Session 2 (Foursomes): 8:15 a.m. (NBC)
Sunday, Sept. 28
Singles: 6:36 a.m. (NBC)
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
Jafar
Sep 25, 2014 at 3:22 pm
Europe will choke. They’re filled with a bunch of pansies 😛
And there’s no extra incentive to beat a team with Tiger Woods. Instead the USA has the underdog role of beating the #1 in the world.
Bollix
Sep 23, 2014 at 3:18 am
The US might steal this one, I reckons
Bill
Sep 22, 2014 at 9:16 am
The Ryder Cup is the best display of world golf competition..It’s great viewing and every match means something. Love the passion that goes into it from both sides. Names don’t mean all that much, the hot hand can turn it around. The Europeans have the name talent this time but we had it the last two Ryders and we know what happened.
Knalleich
Sep 22, 2014 at 4:42 am
If you are watching through McGinley’s eyes, why would the thougth “What if we had Billy Horschel” ever even cross your mind?
Also the players on each side you call “Big Guys”, the U.S. big guys at the moment are for example Stricker and Mickelson. Both are getting old, one even plays a limited amount of events, the other hasnt really played well all year and on the other side you have McIlroy and Garcia who play great all year.
Why does it matter how many majors any of these players won 5 years ago?
Right now McIlroy is big, Mickelson isnt in my oppinion.
And how is McDowell or Rose an european big guy right now and kaymer isnt???
Dave
Sep 21, 2014 at 7:04 pm
Come on people this is ryder cup! It’s not about who you think will win its about backing YOUR country/team ! Let’s go USA!!!!!!
Rwj
Sep 21, 2014 at 10:06 pm
…and fantasy football players should only choose players from their state or city
Carl truitt
Sep 21, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Mods….why delete all the previous comments?
Rich
Sep 22, 2014 at 4:18 am
Because they might have hurt everybodies feelings. Plus they finally decided to edit the first line of the article because it was wrong so most of the comments wouldn’t have made sense.
Joseph
Sep 21, 2014 at 10:54 am
Come on. Horschel chunked a shot on the last hole to lose the tourney the day before Watson had to make his picks. Kirk arguably might have been a solid pick. I’m so tired of hearing about how much the Europeans love this event and play more as a team than the US. There is no magic formula. To me it’s simple, just play better golf over a 3 day day period than your opponent.
James Brown
Sep 21, 2014 at 7:29 pm
You and captain watson share the same philosophy. I believe it is that simple but I also believe that team USA shows up with all stars and gets beat by a TEAM of players with far less major wins or total tour wins. I think the USA needs to approach the Ryder cup like Herb Brooks did for the 1980 Olympics. Azingers adjustments were a start in the right direction. It’s not about getting the best players, it’s about getting the right players for the different formats.
Dan
Sep 21, 2014 at 10:21 am
I want America to win but Europe seems to have the better team. Plus the European players seem to enjoy the team event much more than the Americans. I think that’s a huge advantage.
Christosterone
Sep 21, 2014 at 9:58 am
My captains picks wouldve been:
Kirk
Horschel
Moore
John
Sep 21, 2014 at 5:12 pm
Completely agree, was surprised with Moore being left out considering he’s had a win, 7 top 10’s and was 39th in fedex cup this year
Dick
Sep 21, 2014 at 8:43 am
It’s over before it even starts.