Is 'Eradicating' PGA Tour Signature Events Really The Only Way To Improve Them?

Signs of four PGA Tour Signature Events - (top left) AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am, (top right) Genesis Invitational, (bottom left) the Memorial Tournament and (bottom right) the Arnold Palmer Invitational

(Image credit: Getty Images)

'Inside The Ropes' is the chance for Golf Monthly's tour experts to share their honest opinions on the biggest subjects in the game. This week, it's all about Signature Events.

Ever since Signature Events were introduced to the schedule as 'Designated Events' in 2023 in a bid to curb the threat of LIV Golf, a number of players, fans and analysts alike have vented their frustration regarding the PGA Tour's group of exclusive tournaments.

Erik Van Rooyen once said he "hates" Signature Events while Lucas Glover has been a long-time opponent of the elevated competitions despite regularly being a part of them.

Those who dislike Signature Events point to reduced playing opportunities and smaller fields which consequently reduces the interest factor for those competing and watching on TV.

The AT&amp;T Pebble Beach Pro-Am trophy — The AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am is the first Signature Event of 2026

Then there are the qualifying criteria which, while offering chances to those in the best form, can still leave some of the best PGA Tour members in the world sitting on their couches instead of strengthening the fields through no real fault of their own.

Add in the fact that only three of the eight Signature Events have a cut in them and critics have plenty of evidence to say these tournaments are not really working.

On the other hand, supporters argue that Signature Events encourage the best players in the world together far more often than normal and the huge pots of guaranteed money up for grabs is a significant plus point for players.

Regardless, the general consensus seems to be that there are more downsides to Signature Events that upsides at the moment. So, what can be done to improve them?

Are there any obvious changes that the PGA Tour could make or, actually, are they fine as they are? Let us know your thoughts in the comments box below. In the meantime, our tour experts have had their say.

HOW TO IMPROVE SIGNATURE EVENTS

Elliott Heath

The way for the PGA Tour to fix Signature Events would essentially be to remove them. They are not improved by limiting the field, which I believe makes them unfair.

Tony Finau, the World No.105, received a sponsor’s invite this week while Michael Brennan (37th), Kristoffer Reitan (38th) and Rasmus Hojgaard (40th) all failed to qualify. They’re not Majors and should be open to every player who holds PGA Tour status, or at least 120 of them.

Removing a cut is also something I don’t feel strengthens them, either, so the key ways to fix them would be to increase field sizes and ensure they all have 36-hole cuts.

I am hopeful this plan is in the works under Brian Rolapp and think this could be the final year of Signature Events in this guise at least.

Matt Cradock

I'll be honest, I've never been a fan of the Signature Event model, and see it more as a financial reward for those who have remained on the PGA Tour circuit.

As we see at this week's AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am, there are certainly better players who should be in over those who secured sponsor's invites, and that's one of the key ways it can be fixed.

How is it that Nicolai Hojgaard, who is World No.50 and 18th in the FedEx Cup, is listed as the 10th alternate, while Billy Horschel and Tony Finau, who have made a total of three cuts in eight starts between them this year, are listed in the field?

The AON Swing 5 and Next 10 does at least help with narrowing down the players who are in-form, but the main problem lies with the fact that it's a limited field, no cut event.

Nicolai H&oslash;jgaard using the Callaway Quantum Triple Diamond Max driver — Nicolai Hojgaard

Because only a certain number of players can qualify, it means that there will always be worthy individuals missing out. The reason I enjoy the traditional PGA Tour events is that when a cut is implemented, it still matters. Who doesn't love someone grinding to make the weekend while under immense pressure?

To me, the Signature Event model is somewhat of an exhibition. Inflated purses and points make it important for the overall FedEx Cup standings, which is not great, given that it's almost a free week for those who are already in a strong position.

Basically, it's harder for players to play their way out of the Signature Events than it is for players to play their way into it, and that's the problem. If there was actually jeopardy, such as a 36 hole cut, there would be far more excitement and eyes on it, I believe.

Nick Bonfield

I think the PGA Tour should eradicate Signature Events. I've never been a fan of them at all – they're simply a vehicle by which to pay the top players more money.

They came about in response to LIV Golf's arrival because many of the top players, such as Rory McIlroy, felt they were under-compensated. In my view, these events have just made what preceded them slightly worse.

Full-field events are always better as there's more potential for drama and great storylines. There's a reason why the Tour Championship is one of the worst events of the year and a tournament I pay very little attention to until Sunday afternoon. I don't care if the top players feel they deserve a bigger slice of the pie – they're absurdly rich as it is.

The way to make the PGA Tour even bigger – and thereby attract more commercial revenue – is to create more compelling tournaments. Signature Events don't deliver on this brief as far as I'm concerned.

I think Brian Rolapp, the tour's new CEO, is making all the right noises when it comes to the schedule. The number of tournaments should be reduced, thereby making what's left stronger without any contrived initiatives aimed at lining the pockets of multi-millionaires.

Give us more players, give us a cut and banish two-ball golf on a Thursday and Friday.

Barry Plummer

Call me a traditionalist, but I want to see a cut at PGA Tour events. Maintaining the integrity of the competition is crucial at the top-level, so giving the best players in the world a free hit eight times a year to haul world ranking points and ludicrous amounts of cash without having to 'earn it' in the first two days of the competition seems unfair.

I'm also not a huge fan of the way that sponsors exemptions seem to be handed out to players that perhaps aren't in great form, but are big names in the game, so therefore their role in the event is pretty irrelevant.

They aren't going to win, or even add much of a competitive improvement to the field, so why not invite three or four players who have just narrowly missed out on qualifying for the Signature Events in order to boost the strength of the field?

I would suggest that sponsors exemptions should be limited to a certain OWGR ranking band just outside of the field qualification parameters, meaning the field isn't diluted by a player ranked in the 100s just because they won a major once upon a time or have a few PGA Tour titles to their name in distant past.

Jonny Leighfield

Given the rumors which are circulating about a potential new-look PGA Tour and the general ill-feeling towards them, it does feel to me like it's only a matter of time until Signature Events disappear - certainly in their current guise.

But if Brian Rolapp was to stick with the idea, I'd suggest a couple of key changes. He can keep the name, but a few of them on this year's list could lose their status and just become regular tour events.

I would nominate the Pebble Beach Pro-Am, the Arnold Palmer Invitational, the Memorial Tournament, the RBC Canadian Open and the Scottish Open as the new five Signature Events - with an emphasis on the most historic and prestigious titles on the circuit.

A Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer places the winner's trophy during the award ceremony at the 2024 Canadian Open

I would remove the inflated payouts and ensure each tournament on the full schedule before the Playoffs offers around the same amount which gives tournament directors the chance to operate with realistic and sustainable budgets.

However, I would retain the increased number of FedEx Cup points on offer at the five new Signature Events as an incentive to ensure the top players competed against each other more often.

Finally, all five of them would have cuts and feature 120 players with room for the up-and-coming rookies and the five most in-form talents in the game. Sorted.

Jonny Leighfield is our Staff News Writer who joined Golf Monthly just in time for the 2023 Solheim Cup and Ryder Cup. He graduated from the University of Brighton with a degree in Sport Journalism in 2017 and spent almost five years as the sole sports reporter at his local newspaper. During his time with Golf Monthly, Jonny has interviewed several stars of the game, including Robert MacIntyre, Ian Poulter, Lee Westwood, and Joaquin Niemann. An improving golfer himself, Jonny enjoys learning as much about the game as he can and recently reached his Handicap goal of 18 for the first time.

You must confirm your public display name before commenting

Please logout and then login again, you will then be prompted to enter your display name.