Jim Nugent,
I can't imagine Oakmont being more difficult with NO rough.
If a ball is running, it's usually running closer to the green, leaving a shorter approach.
And, the rough at Oakmont is ROUGH.
Extracting oneself from it, and getting to the green are extremely difficult.
Without rough, the golf course would be easier, not more difficult.
Curt & Mark,
One of the things I liked most about Oakmont's work was the deepening of the bunkers.
Over the last five (5) decades, between improvements in equipment, grooming and the general softening of bunkers, deepening the bunkers and adding fronting berms returned the bunkers to their intended strategic and tactical purpose.
For quite some time, the fear and tactical elements were being diminished.
That's no longer the case.
Recently I played a course that used to have reletively deep bunkers with fronting berms/lips.
A green chairman took it upon himself to fill the bunkers with sand such that a "ski ramp" was effectively created from the low point in the bunker to the top of the lip, allowing golfers to hit 3-woods, where formerly, mid to high irons were required.
Bunkers have lost their architectural, strategic, tactical and intended purpose at many clubs over the years.
Hopefully, more clubs will follow Oakmont's lead and return bunkers to a configuration that best accomplishes their intended purpose, as opposed to the simple eye candy that many have devolved to.
Deepening bunkers should be a consideration for any club considering methods to recapture the challenge for the modern day golfer.