Davis makes 3 of his 4 Ryder Cup picks

mcavoy

The only reason I'm personally not overly critical of Phil being on the team is because he earned it. Otherwise (imo) he wouldn't be playing. I like Phil, he's one of my favorites... but so many times in these events - we end up with guys who aren't playing particularly well going into the event, despite having played well enough over the two seasons prior to qualify. And I think that's part of the problem.

But I also recognize that it's impossible to predict how well a player is going to perform in the matches. That's why I think the captain's picks are vital... he has the ability to look beyond the 2-year playing history and reward 4 players who have played very well as of late, the 4 players who've stood out over the past several months.

There just all too often seems to be an "entitlement" approach with regard to who gets picked, and I'm almost at the point personally to where I'd simply rather the entire team be determined 1-12 based on points earned than continue watching our captains snub deserving players because of the good ol' boy preferences.

At least then I'd have absolutely no reason to bitch about it anyway! lol

mikeintopeka

What really started all of this was the initial discussion about how the Americans were stealing a page from the Europeans with regard to the players demanding that they be more involved with the entire process, from picking a captain all the way down to having active input with team pairings and order-of-play in the matches themselves.

Duval pointed out that Mickelson's public outspokenness in the media immediately following the loss 2 years ago, how the players had zero input under Watson's captaincy, was ultimately the catalyst for change that was needed. Brandel quickly chimed in that what Mickelson did was distasteful and that not everyone saw it as a positive thing, and that ultimately started the bickering.

Duval has played at a high level well enough, long enough, to fairly represent (or side) with the players in situations like this. It's worth noting that he's probably still pretty good friends with most of the older guys on tour, like Woods, Mickelson, Furyk, etc. and he's certainly not going to throw them under a bus. And he really doesn't need to. I think Mickelson simply had the balls to say what every other player on that team had said in private or was thinking, and knew that (1) he wasn't going to fall on the grenade for Watson's inability to manage the team, and (2) he is probably as sick and tired of losing as anyone else, and felt that unless someone spoke up - nothing would change.

Brandel clearly didn't see it that way, and in fact - singled Mickelson out for not being the leader he needed to be, and Duval just wasn't in the mood to hear that.

Anyway... maybe there will be a small blurb about it somewhere. Then again - I think Golf Channel will downplay what transpired and I seriously doubt it'll make their own highlight material tomorrow.

The look on Brandel's face was priceless.... you could read his mind as Duval was countering every point he made. "You sonofabitch. Why don't you go back to what you were doing before you were offered a job here, whatever that was, and stop trying to make me look like a complete ass."

If there had been a cloud above his head captioning his thoughts - that's precisely what it would've said. LOL...

ode

Great post. I completely concur.

And I completely whiffed when I forgot to add that Duval told Brandel he was never wrong! That was probably the best line of the argument. LOL... I literally laughed out loud when he said that!

I've often been critical of both Tiger and Phil with regard to their Ryder Cup performances, but I've never questioned their desire to win or their attitudes in general involving where they might rank the Ryder Cup in their overall list of career achievements. I think people who make those type comments are just looking for a negative excuse to bash... none of us truly know what these guys go through just to qualify for the team, or the honor that comes with just being considered good enough to represent their country in a historic contest like that. To think they don't care would be egregiously short sided.

If you want the honest truth - I think pressure has everything to do with how they've performed. Not just pressure associated with being considered the best two players in the world or on this side of the pond, but also the pressure of knowing that we've lost this event so many times the past two decades and desperately wanting to change that, not to mention the ultimate pressure - not wanting to let your teammates down. I know that pressure at my own level... I know how hard it is to play focused, to play well, and how hard it is to do those two things while at the same time not wanting to let your teammate down playing alongside you. If, on some level, you're not thinking about that the least bit standing over a shot in a team match - you're not human! A player wants to give his partner every opportunity to hit a good shot or a good putt without having to factor in that his teammate might not be able to help him if he doesn't pull it off! I'm personally much more comfortable playing a singles match than a team match. And I'm sure a lot of golfers much better than me feel that way too. I never once feel like I have to play perfectly when it's just me. But you put someone with me, then suddenly that can change with the first miscue. The mindset goes from focusing on the target to focusing on what you want to avoid, and that hardly ever works out well.

Anyway...

What Zinger did, more than anything else, was he gave his team something they could believe in, some confidence that his psycho-scientific approach went well beyond establishing good chemistry between teammates. They believed in his approach, and that enabled them to go out and play with confidence, that they suddenly had an edge. The mind is a crazy thing... I can stand over a 10-footer to win the match and if I feel like I'm gonna drain it - I will drain it more times than not. But if I'm standing over a 3-footer to win the match and deep down I feel like I might miss this - I will probably miss it 99% of the time.

I think we have a good team, but I also know that we've had the better team on paper in all 6 of these events the past 14 years, and we've come back with the cup only once. The one thing that Europe has going for them, like just about every other time we've played them, is they're underdogs. The pressure is once again on us, and for that very reason I think it would be very unwise to assume we're gonna come away with the win without a serious challenge. If that pressure affects guys like Phil and Tiger - you better believe it is being felt by everyone else.

That's what makes Ryder Cup so thrilling, imo. One shot, one putt, one hole can change the entire competition.

Looking forward to watching it.

mcavoy

It's not surprising to anyone that Sutton chose to take Mickelson's comments the way he did. I think where Phil is clearly being disingenuous is that equipment excuses aside (including the different ball) neither he nor Tiger were exactly best buds and neither wanted to share the exact same stage with the other as teammates. Sutton knew that better than anyone, he was still very much active on tour back in those days and he knew the sensitive nature of their situation. And yet he still felt qualified to play matchmaker...

Phil, to either his credit or blame (whichever one prefers to look at it), didn't want to come right out and say that several years after his and Tiger's rivalry has pretty much ended. I think both Phil and Tiger have softened a bit, I think there's a significantly higher degree of respect that they have toward one another, and I think just by virtue of the fact that from 1997 through 2009 they were clearly the two greatest players in the world during that 12-year span - they can look back and realize and appreciate the impact that the one had on the other and the game in general. Now certainly their rivalry wasn't quite as pointed as the Palmer-Nicklaus rivalry was, because it was a completely different game being played back then, but nevertheless it was somewhat similar. As was the case with Arnie and Jack over the years, I think Phil and Tiger are on a similar course... they won't ever be as close as Arnie and Jack were, but I'm already sensing Phil being much more appreciative of what Tiger not only meant to the game, but how Tiger motivated Phil to become a much better player in his own right.

Maybe 20 years from now both Phil and Tiger will have reached a point in their lives to concede, in a lighthearted and respectful way, that early on there wasn't any love lost between them, the same way after retiring competitively that Arnie and Jack talked about their rivalry back in their days. But to expect either of them to concede that point now, while they both still see themselves as competitors and not has-beens? I don't think either would want that. It's much too early for that level of olive-branch extending imo.

That's just what I sense, from afar, with what limited scope I have. I think that has more to do with Phil clinging to the different-ball excuse than it does an unwillingness to accept his share of the blame because of how poorly he played. He doesn't want to come right out and say he and Tiger didn't want to play together, despite the fact that just about everyone following the game already knew that.

It seems fairly obvious that Sutton, still to this day apparently, struggles to admit that his idea to pair Batman and Superman together just backfired right in his face. And what leads me to believe that is his comment about "controversy having a way of following Phil around." Twelve years removed from that horrendous decision, Hal Sutton still feels a need to defend himself.

Maybe Sutton is the one who really needs to do some soul searching.

Here's Hal basically confirming what I opined above. Oddly enough, and honestly, I had yet to see this interview before giving my thoughts in my prior post.

I think Hal is a good guy, but he clearly still has his pride.

One other thing I'll add... Hal simply wasn't a good selection as captain. Not just because he stupidly wanted to be Captain Matchmaker, but also because he was too thin-skinned. As bad as I thought Watson was as a captain two years ago, at least Watson stood there and faced the music. Hal states that he readily accepted the blame, and yet he left the game altogether for several years waiting for the criticisms and armchair quarterbacking to subside. To me, that's not taking ownership. That's called avoiding it.

It was a good decision to apologize, if for no other reason than to hopefully put the issue to rest.

There's no refuting that a captain can make decisions that don't help his team in a winning effort, but at the same time there's the other side of the coin too when players deserve their fair share of the blame... whether it's playing poorly, or doing something or say something that takes the focus off of event itself and becomes a distraction for the team. No matter how much I respect Phil for taking a stand and wanting to see the process change for the better, or for that matter - how poorly I thought Sutton's performance was as team captain back in '04 - two days prior to the start of the event isn't the time nor place to open that can of worms. It is fairly obvious that despite Phil's seemingly good intentions, he still carries a grudge when he gets overruled in certain situations. I guess I would too if I felt that those particular instances, in some way, influenced my performance and ultimately impacted my record in a negative light where it could be criticized so often by the critics who most always single out the stars on the team for not getting it done.

But that was not needed yesterday. And I think he recognized the distraction he'd needlessly created.

Then on the other side of the pond, a European player's brother creates a distraction himself on social media, casting American fans in such an overwhelmingly negative light. Although much of what was written was both humorous and true, and although Willet's brother claims the piece was written in satire - you're always gonna have those who either can't recognize and appreciate comical satire when they read it, or take what was said at face value and take offense.

Two instances this week where two players felt obligated to apologize for something that was either said or written, one who instigated, the other completely blindsided. It is a shame that Danny Willet has had to watch what had every reason to be a celebratory week of his life suddenly become a hurdle that he now has to figure out a way to overcome. And I seriously hope that the American fans in attendance, who might've taken his brother's comments personally, avoid taking it out on him. If these fans don't - then they'll have proven every stereotype that was written accurate.

The media today has never been a bigger whore for sensationalism... very few writers and reporters these days represent their profession admirably. I used to question why celebrities and sports stars seemed so eager to remain private and off the record, but I don't question them anymore.

Long gone are the days of truly great reporting and writing. Armchair bloggers and tabloid turds have essentially taken over journalism.