Opinion & Analysis
Watson admits he screwed up, but where did he go wrong?
“This is no democracy. It is a dictatorship. I am the law,” Coach Herman Boone proclaimed in Remember the Titans. Maybe U.S. Ryder Cup Captain Tom Watson would have done better to adhere to Paul Azinger’s tactics than the Boone approach.
Watson admitted he screwed up, but I think we knew that already. Phil Mickelson wasn’t particularly shy in pointing that out after the U.S. Team got stomped out by the Europeans in the 2014 Ryder Cup 16.5 to 11.5 points.
Watson issued an open letter in the wake of his fallout with the U.S. team, taking ownership for the mistakes he made during, and leading up to, the Ryder Cup rout at Gleneagles.
“First, I take complete and full responsibility for my communication, and I regret that my words may have made the players feel that I didn’t appreciate their commitment and dedication to winning the Ryder Cup,” Watson said in the open letter. “My intentions throughout my term as captain were both to inspire and to be honest. Secondly, the guys gave everything. They played their hearts out.”
But really, what were his mistakes? OK, there were plenty.
Watson decided to bench Phil Mickelson and Keegan Bradley — a pairing that’s decidedly passionate and proven in team settings — for ALL of the Saturday. He also benched the hot-hands of rookies Patrick Reed and Jordan Spieth, who all but showed off in their Friday morning match, winning 5&4.
You don’t sit a basketball player who opened the game with four 3-pointers in a row. Coaching 101, really.
His Captain’s picks were also head-scratchers — leaving Billy Horschel and Chris Kirk off the team — but that’s besides the point. The point is that Watson approached his captaincy with dictatorship, a tactic that the U.S. players seemed not to like, to say that least.
“A leader must be able to direct people but he must also be able to make people willing to accept direction,” said Vince Lombardi, the storied head coach of the Green Bay Packers. “The strength of a company or a team is in the will of the leaders. If the manager is weak-willed, the company will be poorly directed.”
Captain Watson did not show weak-will, but he was coaching a team that did not trust his approach. As Mickelson so eloquently pointed out in his press conference, the U.S. Team has shown an eagerness to be involved in the decision-making process. They’ve responded to “pods” and teambuilding, but not alienation and decrees.
Watson wanted his team to play better; he didn’t want to bring back a gift from his team to the states. He wanted to bring back a “W” and the storied golden trophy. Vince Lombardi once preached that he sought respect for authority from his players, and Watson sought the same respect from his players. For one or more than one reason, however, it didn’t work. So what did we learn?
The U.S Ryder Cup team needs a democratic leader, not a dictator, in order to thrive against its European opponents in 2016.
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
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!
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.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Ben
Oct 8, 2014 at 8:15 am
I’m sick of all the Watson talk. As far as I know he didn’t hit a single shot in the Ryder Cup. We flat out got beat. The US team did not perform. Watson should not be the scapegoat.
marcel
Oct 9, 2014 at 12:31 am
exactly – 12 pro golfers should have some pride and take the blame for their own poor playing.
Did Tom give them a bad talk before the game or what – otherwise i dont see why he would be any worst than other 8 failed captains
Scott Rose
Oct 7, 2014 at 12:56 am
This was clearly an example of admiring an icon that has lived past his prime. With all due respect, Mr. Watson was not the correct Captain at this point in the history of these matches. He is a gentleman golfer but his past is not prologue. I think we need to put diligence aside going forward, as a team, and choose the best Captain for the job. And for now, that person is an individual who can connect on a personal level with all of the players, motivate the younger guys and partner with the senior players. That man should also possess the ability to study team management and create an environment in which the players will thrive. All that being said, the US needs to stop playing table tennis and start drinking beer…get to know one another…have fun…form a brotherhood. You fight for brothers…that’s the game changer…IMHO.
Joe
Oct 7, 2014 at 1:44 am
Absolutely great advice. But unless they’ve been in the military, Americans aren’t built that way. Especially American Professional Golfers! Europeans on the other hand are built exactly that way. I really think the greatest advantage to euro golfers is playing the U.S. tour, because they form a brotherhood playing over here. While Americans, in general, look at each other, and everyone else, as competitors. Hard to change that mindset for one week every two years.
Eric
Oct 6, 2014 at 9:07 pm
The Americans deserved to lose – no captain could have avoided that.
Let’s give the American players what they want – then see what their excuse is in 2016 when they lose again.
Until they learn to WIN – as the European tour players have – they will not be able to handle the pressure of match play, and will under-perform. Pick the team that has the most number of players with two wins in the last year, and you have the winning team.
Joe
Oct 7, 2014 at 12:53 am
I don’t know a single person that really thought the U.S. would win, nobody. We put together a bracket of player records, who would beat who, which team would win, and by how much. One guy, out of 95, picked the U.S. to win, because he liked the possible payout. The talking heads have to say what they say or suffer being called anti-American, but I just can’t believe they truly thought the U.S. would win. Especially after not getting the hottest player on the planet. There was just no way we were gonna win this one, no way.
Leslie Chow
Oct 7, 2014 at 1:22 pm
The U.S. would have had chance if a complete team was assembled. Foursomes was the Achilles heel this year otherwise it would have been much closer going into Sunday. I’m not saying the U.S. would have won but they would have had a chance and that’s all an underdog needs. Picking players statically for each particular format is what needs to happen in the future to avoid weakness big weaknesses in one format or another. Then assemble teams focusing on youth that don’t have battle scars or egos to big to avoid certain pairings. The closer it comes to a college team atmosphere the better.
Jason
Oct 6, 2014 at 4:35 pm
The US team had a higher average world ranking than the Europeans so I’m not sure where the giant underdog story came from. I think the Europeans hold the Ryder Cup in higher regard than American players do and are willing to put aside their egos to score the most points for their team. The American captain has a job that sounds more like a daycare provider, making sure everyone feels loved and is only playing with people they like and that all their opinions count. These are the most talented golfers in the world, it shouldn’t matter who they play with or what ball they use.
Harold
Oct 6, 2014 at 9:24 pm
Stupid.
Schooner
Oct 7, 2014 at 8:01 am
I’m not sure on what basis you are calling this a stupid comment. A captain should not have to worry about how a player feels. A captain needs to worry about how a player performs. If a player is so self obsessed that they can’t perform in a team environment, and put his own feelings aside, he has no place being on a team to begin with. Modern golf probably breeds this narcissistic behaviour. 51 weeks of the year it is an individual sport, one week it is not.
Ken
Oct 6, 2014 at 3:33 pm
The PROFESSIONAL golfers lose and place all the blame on the captain. OK, some of them didn’t like his style … and it was vocalized. If the U.S. would have made a few more putts and won this thing, would there be as much criticism of management style? While I generally like Phil, he’s had a miserable 2014 and his Saturday participation is debatable. Heck, he asked to sit out the last time around. Disappointing all around.
Duncan Castles
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:41 pm
The only American captain to win the Ryder Cup on European soil in over three decades? Tom Watson…
Resting Spieth and Reed on Friday afternoon was hardly the indefensible decision it has been portrayed as. Both were debutants, Reed’s streaky game is better suited to fourball than foursomes, and for all Spieth’s quality he has a tendency to lose his head when things start to run against him (as McDowell demonstrated on Sunday).
The Muni Golfer
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:32 pm
What I find interesting is that in 1993, when the US actually WON, no one was complaining about Tom Watson’s captaining style or his communications. So let the players have say in the selections and the pairings. Then, when they lose in 2016, they will be complaining that they had no leadership or direction from the captain
Matt
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:31 pm
Wasn’t there an article less than a month ago saying that you couldn’t blame Watson for leaving Horschel off? He got hot to late for the selection process.
Leslie Chow
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:43 pm
Exactly right Matt. Horschel peaked to late. Keegan was obviously picked to pair with Phil and they were benched. The questionable pick for me was Web Simpson who was not playing well and doesn’t statistacllly fit a foursomes format making him a really bad pick and pairing him with Bubba turned out to be disastrous. Golf channel ran an article that Watson picked Haas, who was successful in the presidents cup, announced it to a few players on the team and then changed his mind to Simpson after being coerced by a few team players.
Gabe
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:25 pm
The European team was simply better. “Why were they better?” or “why were they so much better?” might be a better question than “How did Tom Watson screw this up?”.
The population of Europe is more than twice that of the United States. That is quite an advantage.
Additionally, how many of the “European” players actually call the USA “home”? How many spend more time in the US than in Europe? How many play more US Tour events than European Tour events?
Factor in that European athletes, by and large, aren’t going into the NFL, MLB or the NBA and that means fewer of the highly skilled athletes are choosing golf in the US.
It doesn’t matter if you have pods or a captain making all of the decisions if the playing field isn’t level. Maybe we need to pick players who really deserve to be there because of their current play, not players who have the big name. This isn’t an issue with Tom Watson and any pro athlete that can’t take a little tough love or even dictatorial coaching needs to look in the mirror about whether or not they were the best teammate and team member that they could have been. Maybe it’s also time to redefine what it means to be a “European” for the purposes of the Ryder cup.
Duncan Castles
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Are you seriously suggesting that Europeans playing on the USPGA Tour shouldn’t be allowed to play for Europe? The essence of the Ryder Cup is that top sportsmen used to playing solo form a team with their compatriots to compete against another team for no financial reward. Redefine the teams on the basis of Tour membership and you destroy the competition.
By all means try and convince the Africans or Asians to strengthen the American side if you feel disadvantaged by population (though I’d argue that the real comparison should be the number of active golfers in the US versus Europe). Think you’ll find the Africans would much prefer to play for Europe if they were ever to be invited into the Ryder Cup however…
Robeli
Oct 6, 2014 at 3:43 pm
Typical American response. Let’s change the rules who can play for whom so USA can get benefit. You should rather change the picking method to not be based on money won, but ranking positions. Rather, pick better (captain & players), manage better and then play better.
Captain Custer
Oct 7, 2014 at 8:40 pm
I’m an American and I know why we are losing. When I hear people trying to change the rules about adding countries to the USA it makes me upset, not because I wouldn’t love to see Adam Scott play but Because those that cry for that change are still in the old mindset that talent alone will win just as it did from the early 1980s all the way back. After watching the last two Ryder cups I don’t believe it’s because the USA doesn’t have enough talented players but it’s because the USA doesn’t assemble a team of players for the specific formats. I was fine with this years cup as well as Medinah. Medinah the USA had a 10-6 lead and the guys came out and were complacent. This year would have been a close cup going into Sunday if the USA had guys that were better or picked statically for foursomes and if the foursomes had been closer the USA may still have lost but they would have had a chance. The USA needs to overhaul how the Ryder cup is approached and played long before this becomes a World Cup. Getting the right players for the formats, not necessarily the worlds highest ranked players has never been more apparent then by the play of Spieth and Reed. If the USA played like a college team with passion and will to do whatever it takes and is asked of them then In the end you may win and sometimes you just get out played so a tip of the cap and be hungry to play in two years.
Derehk
Oct 6, 2014 at 4:05 pm
~29 million active golfers in USA
~8 million active golfers in Europe
As long as you don’t get why you are losing…
Rich
Oct 6, 2014 at 4:53 pm
I’m pretty sure each player on that European Ryder Cup team has to be a member of European PGA tour. That requires them to play a minimum amount of events on that tour. I’m not sure what that number is but I’m sure it’s around 10 or so. There are players that may have qualified in the past that weren’t eligible because they didn’t play sufficient events in Europe to qualify. So there is a rule in place that stops players playing all their golf in the US and then play for Europe. Time to stop complaining about the rules and start winning within the rules you’ve got like the Europeans do.
Colin Gillbanks
Oct 7, 2014 at 7:55 am
What does the population of Europe have to do with any of this? How many of the 142,000,000 Russians were in line for a European team pick?The US has a far higher number of active players to pick from and a far higher world ranking number of professionals than Europe.
The US team had a better average world ranking, a higher number of major wins and a higher number of individuals that had won majors. So where is the imbalance?
As for ‘redefining’ what it means to be European, that is just utterly, utterly crass.
Knallerich
Oct 8, 2014 at 5:15 am
English isnt my mother tongue so im not 100% sure of i understand you correctly but in the middle part You’re saying One should factor in That European athletes Arent going into Basketball, American Football or Baseball, so American athletes “have to” fill those Spots and therefore less American Top athletes can go into pro golf.
European Top athletes go into football(Soccer), Tennis, Track and Field,Winter Sports and probably 10 other Sports before golf comes up. Golf is incredibly unimportant (sadly) because its very expensive in Most Parts of Europe. So i could probably turn your Argument around that almost no americans are going into typical european Sports so more europeans have to.and that Argument Would ne 10 times stronger.
JD
Oct 6, 2014 at 2:06 pm
On paper and on the course, the European players were the overwhelming favorite. It’s kind of like the Olympics, and you compare the total medals won by the US compared to the medals won by all of the nations that make up Europe.
Robeli
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:52 pm
What does changing the time of the picks has to do with winning? Both Watson and McGinley made their picks ON THE SAME DAY, 2nd September. McGinley just made better picks and they played better – end of story.
Sodapoppin
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:51 pm
OMG please cry more. What a silly article.
hurricane
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:48 pm
He did what he was always going to do. Old School has never worked—even for Team Europe—who in 2008 had the Old School captain for a change… We have the wrong organization picking the wrong captain for the wrong reasons. How else do we not have the Fed Ex champion suited up, who leads the Tour in Eagles, is ranked 14 in OWGR, seemingly born for this moment, in a competition featuring 24 of the best players in the world? In 2004, Ryder Cup Europe, LLC took over ownership and management for their side, leaving the Euro Tour with a 60% stake and control of the event. It benefits great causes throughout Europe, so everybody wins.
Large chris
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:36 pm
Normally the captains role in the Ryder Cup, win or lose, is massively overstated. McGinley is given credit for choosing blue and yellow fish for the team room for example. Absolutely it is the players who need to produce the birdies.
I have huge respect for Watson, 5 times Open champion, and don’t want to see him hurt by this loss. He did get out there, play a few tour events, tried to get to know potential picks.
BUT unusually in the Ryder Cup, poor decisions by him as Captain (not getting Ted Bishop PGA head to change the wild car pick date until nearer the end of the Fedex, and playing Mickelson Friday afternoon, not Saturday morning) arguably cost the US team the win, if you consider a possible 3 point swing. It surely would have been much closer at least without these mistakes.
Ponjo
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:32 pm
Changing the selection process would have helped a lot. So would playing your best players when they have just trounced the opposition. Like any sport you do not feel tired when winning. Not sure Simpson in his current form would make it into our local scratch team.
Wonoo
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:21 pm
How could Watson pick Horschel, picks were already in by the Fed Ex finish. Yea, he finished second in one event and didn’t make the cut in another. Change the system and I guarantee Horschel would have been on the team, not Simpson. Bradley was a tactical no brainer for crybaby Mickelson’s partner. Mahan or Kirk. each had a win in the Fed Ex. He went with Mahan and experience. Watson was very bad this time around as captain but his players were no better. Birdies win Cups not pods. Europe was over 100 under in 3 days …U.S. was just over 70.
Dennis
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:41 pm
Sorry, but I don’t think it was Watsons fault or the captain’s picks or anything else but Europe was just the better team and played that way.
Mark
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:52 pm
AMEN!
Robeli
Oct 6, 2014 at 1:55 pm
Maybe you miss reading the part how Watson messed up the pairings for the Saturday sessions.
Leslie Chow
Oct 6, 2014 at 3:20 pm
Watson picked Web Simspon under pressure from the team. I firmly believe the entire approach the USA takes must be overhauled. Quoting Kurt Russell from miracle, “Gentlemen, you do not have enough talent to win on talent alone.” The USA no longer has the talent advantage it once did which is Watsons era. The USA sends over its top 9 all stars and 3 picks that were all stars at one point and wonders why USA fails so often. Until the USA figures out a system to assemble to RIGHT players for the ryder cup formats, not necessarily the best, the USA is going to struggle. Everyone that wants the USA to win shouldn’t be focused on blaming but rather learning. The USA loses ryder cups even though there is equal talent in the selection pool on both sides of the pond. Sometimes the USA is outplayed like Sunday at Medinah. To have an obismal win percentage leads me to believe there is a problem not with the quality of play from the USA but a fault that lies somewhere else in the process before the shots are struck. Did Watson make some mistakes sure but so did Mcginley picking Poulter and Watson picking Simpson. There were much better foursome players Watson should have looked at before Simpson. Maybe the captain needs 12 picks to build a complete team. This year the Ryder Cup was lost in Foursomes because of two reasons, first the USA didn’t really have and or play players suited to that format and two Europe outplayed the ones that did play. My article is not about crying, whining, or making excuses for the results but rather a push for a change to get a better built TEAM to give the USA the best chance to compete and possibly win and if they are outplayed from that point there will only be a tipping of the hat, congratulations and satisfied golf fans for being witness to an amazing spectacle.
brian
Oct 6, 2014 at 4:04 pm
Why does everyone keep harping on the Simpson pick? Mahan is the biggest choke artist in Ryder Cup history. Not only does he blow a 4 hole lead, he speaks of “how proud he was of his play”. No compassion whatsoever.
Leslie Chow
Oct 6, 2014 at 11:19 pm
The reason I don’t blame Watson for picking Mahan like I do for Simpson is because Mahan is much better statistically than Simpson. While Mahan weakness has been pressure chips and streaky putting he is a much better driver of the ball and ball striker than Simpson. On paper I think Mahan stats favor fourball but he could be used in foursomes if someone’s game was off where as Simpson is to streaky in all areas and wasn’t really coming into form like Mahan prior to the captains picks during the FedEx playoffs. The USA was clearly weak in foursomes and picking players showing good stats for that format maybe should have been a higher priority.
ChrisG
Oct 9, 2014 at 12:44 pm
While I agree statistics are good for some things, when it came to making the Mahan pick, one simply needs to remember the #1 mantra in golf (well aside from “keep your head down), and that is “Drive for show, putt for dough.” Picking someone who can hit the long ball, but has a weaker short game is not a smart move. The short game wins golf tournaments. Plain and simple.
CairnsRock
Oct 6, 2014 at 5:05 pm
Right on. Birdies win, pars don’t. Everybodies going on about strategic pairings. I get the feeling that the European team members would happily have played with any of their team members. Much better team spirit and camaraderie.
Vs
Prima donnas, I don’t like this, I don’t like him, don’t play me today, but don’t cut me unless I ask to be cut. I don’t like your management style, I don’t like your decisions. I can’t putt, but that’s your fault too.
We didn’t win, time to change the rules again.
Boo hoo.
Joe
Oct 7, 2014 at 1:25 am
Yep. Most Euros, imho, come up playing muni type course conditions and play in real weather, not to mention that in Europe you don’t just go play whichever course you want. Players have to prove they have the skills to play each level of course. They don’t generally see American type courses until the come over here for college. American golfers, inho, grow up playing golf in pretty much ideal conditions, unless you live in the NW! Plus, course conditions are generally much nicer here, especially if you live in the south. Euros are just hardier golfers. Also, again imho, euros seem humbled and honored to be chosen. Where Americans seem expecting and think of it more as a contract bonus. I mean seriously, Reed or whatever his name is, shushing the crowd? That’s really setting a nice example. Just generalizations I know, but that’s what I see.
Rich
Oct 7, 2014 at 7:38 pm
But Reed is a top five player in the world so he can do what he likes can’t he?