The 45th Ryder Cup is underway this morning at Bethpage Black.

The buildup to this match has been tremendous, further cementing the Ryder Cup’s standing as golf’s grandest spectacle.

A lot of questions will be answered in the coming days.

Can a road team finally win on foreign soil? The Ryder Cup has been dominated by the home side as eight of the last nine hosts have defended their turf. Will the New York crowd be over-the-top obnoxious or more subdued than anticipated because of historically high ticket prices? In the showmanship battle between Bryson DeChambeau and Rory McIlroy, who will come out ahead?

While we all wait to find out the outcome to these questions—some of which we’ve been asking for multiple years now—I have another question that has been stuck in my mind all week.

Is the American team going to regret their decision to ask for extra money?

Two teams with different approaches

For those who want to get up to speed, you can read my story from last November that details how the American side has pushed for a bigger cut of the Ryder Cup’s substantial profits.

The short summary is that the Ryder Cup makes a lot of money. The PGA of America is the primary beneficiary of a 15-year, $440-million TV contract with NBC—and that is just the TV revenue.

American players have long been given a couple hundred thousand dollars to be donated to charity while receiving no other compensation for their services. European players have never been paid.

As of this year’s Ryder Cup, Americans are receiving $300,000 earmarked for charity and an additional $200,000 stipend that can be used however they wish (the Europeans continue to not be paid).

This is a similar structure to what the PGA Tour uses for the Presidents Cup. Several players (and captain Keegan Bradley) have indicated they will donate all of the $500,000 to charity.

“The PGA of America asked me to help out with this,” Bradley said. “This is the best way we came up with to do it. I’m not concerned about what Europe does or what they think. I’m concerned about what my team is doing. We did the best we could, and I think a lot of good is going to come from this. I think the players are going to do a lot of good with this money, and I think it’s great.”

Xander Schauffele, another player who plans to donate all $500,000, thinks writers like me are getting it all wrong.

“You guys keep talking about it and trying to make it this negative thing. It’s whatever everyone views it as. I try to look at this in the most positive of lights as possible: an opportunity to do some good, which isn’t always the case.”

But this doesn’t seem to pass the smell test for a couple of reasons.

First off, there has been a growing sentiment over the years that certain American players want to make money off the Ryder Cup. This dates back to 1999 when the U.S. was first paid (in charity contributions) after players wanted more say where the money was going. The Brookline crowd got on their case until an epic Sunday comeback.

Whether a more recent push for a pay increase is fact or fiction, the bump in compensation comes directly after a lot of money-related discussion at the 2023 match in Rome.

But, more importantly, if American players really wanted more money to donate to charity of their choosing, why wouldn’t all $500,000 just be earmarked … for charity?

Why take this completely unnecessary PR hit to make an extra $200,000? That is a pittance considering the massive sums these elite players are competing for on a weekly basis.

Right or wrong, this comes across as a thinly veiled stopgap to appease some players who want to make money off the Ryder Cup.

Meanwhile, the Europeans have no desire for money to enter the equation.

“I wanted to get ahead of this when I first heard about it last year and looked like it was likely going to happen,” Euro captain Luke Donald said. “I reached out to all the 12 guys from Rome to see how they felt. Their voices are important. Everyone was like, ‘We haven’t even considered playing for money for that event.’

“We just don’t see that. We understand what it represents. We have a great purpose and that’s really enough for us. We understand that the money raised goes to help the European Tour Group and the grassroots.”

Donald even suggested the New York crowd could turn on their own team because of the decision to get paid.

“We all know how high the ticket prices are and it’s going to be an expensive trip out for a family of four. If the U.S. players are getting paid a stipend, or whatever it is, and they aren’t performing, the New Yorkers could make them know about it.”

A fundamental question about the meaning of the Ryder Cup

It’s important to note that the proceeds from the Ryder Cup go into separate coffers that mean different things to both main organizers—the PGA of America and the DP World Tour.

The money the PGA of America makes is mostly going back to supporting club professionals and other organizational missions to help recreational golf in America. In other words, not much of the money is going back into the PGA Tour, a completely separate entity.

(The PGA of America pays the Tour 20 percent of the TV contract—around $11 million a year—to secure releases for the Tour players to take part in the matches but it’s not much relative to the overall profits brought in).

On the European side, most of the money from the Ryder Cup directly supports the DP World Tour. All Euro players on the team are members of the DP World Tour so the Ryder Cup is funding purses they have the option of playing for in the future.

Putting that notable variable to the side, money in the Ryder Cup has become a philosophical question.

As the event gets bigger and bigger—comically so, to the point where tickets are $750, parking costs $55 (despite there being a 20-minute shuttle ride after you pay that fee) and beers that are $19—should the men responsible for making the event possible get their slice of the pie?

It brings up similar discussions we’ve had in other sports, such as NIL payments in college sports or Olympians profiting off of their likeness for commercial success. Playing for the love of the game isn’t an economic reality for most athletics nowadays.

My argument with the Ryder Cup is that this is a biennial event with more than money at stake.

Professional golfers of this caliber are drowning in money, playing for winner checks in the multi-millions. It’s not like they don’t have the option to make money for their work.

Is it so much to ask that you play for your country just one weekend every two years?

Is it too much to ask that you act like playing in this historic event is a privilege? Because it is one.

The American players can dress this up however they want but at least some of them want to be paid more money for playing. Some of them think it’s unfair the PGA of America rakes in many millions off their abilities and doesn’t share enough of the profits.

If that statement is false, then just announce all $500,000 for each player is going to charity.

If it truly is all for charity, then this is a non-issue. I’ll happily write an article detailing all the ways the money is helping local communities.

I think, ultimately, this mishandling of the financial component—and the communication around it—is going to come back to haunt the American side.

Personally, I am turned off by the possibility of players demanding more money with the unspoken threat that they won’t compete unless their needs are met.

Whether it’s justified or not, that just gives an undertone of greed.

If I was a player, I would leave the greed to the Ryder Cup organizers.

Top Photo Caption: Patrick Cantlay has found a hat that fits this year. (GETTY IMAGES: Jamie Squire)

The post Will American Money Talk Come Back To Haunt U.S. Team? appeared first on MyGolfSpy.