Pat C:
Drop the kool-aid can you've been drinking -- with all due respect.
I love Oakmont and salute it for what it provides. But if you think BB and SH are THAT far below Oakmont you are seriously high on something. The Pennsy layout is a gem and I know it should host an Open every ten years if possible. BB and SH are no less viable from a course standpoint and from the immesne $$ they generate for the event.
The quality of the metro NYC area golf is far beyond my support and those of the media as you erroneously claim. Ask any knowledgeable source and they will admit that the metro NYC area has the greatest depth of superior courses in the USA -- albeit nearly all of them private. The idea that self-promotion from an army of scribes makes the US Open visit the NYC-metro area is inane. The course qualities are there for anyone with eyes to see.
Tom D / Phil M:
That's fine and dandy -- but I understand that the USGA is not going to run back to SH without serious concessions from what was done previously. Clearly, the LI layout is a gem and my desire -- along with Johnny Miller's was for the layout to be on the list more frequently. Clearly, that can't happen but the club was going with an Open every nine years until the run ended in 2004.
No doubt the move towards public courses is another leverage point for the USGA to reap even more $$.
My main concern is that SH is not a victim of internal greed because the layout is clearly a proven commodity of unsurpassed greatness.
Phil, I am not naive to believe that certain people have lobbied for the event for a whole host of selfish reasons. Hazeltine holding it in 1970 is one good example -- there are others. No doubt it helps build the enthusiasm for the game to bring an Open to an area where it's not been for quite some time. I can remember vividly seeing the faces of people when the Open returned to Olympic in '87 after 21 years being away. Ditto when the Open returned to OH/S in '85 after being away for 24 years. The same will likely happen in 2013 when Merion comes back onto the stage.
I don't know how well Chambers Bay will be received. Clearly, the stunning location will make for some fine blimp shots -- to say the least. At the end of the day -- the USGA needs the Open to be a financial windfall given what the balance sheet they have requires.
Final item -- no doubt a metro Chicago site -- (that includes Erin Hills) has to be on the short list for a future championship.
Jason:
Here's my response to your comments -- mine are in bold face only for separation purposes -- not emphasis.
*****
Please tell me in what meaningful way from a design and championship dynamic that the following NY courses are deficient ...
I in no way argued anything like that, and do not think that's the case. Please be sure you don't misrepresent my position.
I DIDN'T MISREPRESENT YOUR OPINION -- YOU MADE THE ARGUMENT FOR SOME SORT OF LEVEL PLAYING FIELD WITH OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTRY. I SAID THAT THE US OPEN IS MEANT TO BE PLAYED ON ONLY THE BEST OF THE BEST LOCATIONS. THE NEW YORK METRO AREA HAS LONG BEEN LAUDED AS THE FINEST COLLECTION OF GOLF CLUBS AND COURSES IN THE NATION. THEREFORE, IT STANDS TO REASON THAT THE AREA WILL HAVE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS FOR THE EVENT. THE US OPEN NEED NOT REDUCE ITSELF TO SIMPLY SPREADING THE HOSTING FUNCTION BECAUSE OF A NEED FOR GEOGRAPHICAL CORRECTNESS.
The reality is that from the golf design side of the aisle -- the courses I just mentioned are solid in so many ways for such an event.
I don't disagree - I just think 4 visits in 8 opens is rather enough. So I am glad the USGA will taking a break from NY for the next few years. JASON, THE RUSH IN NEW YORK RECENTLY WAS OVER A SHORT WINDOW -- NO DOUBT BUT AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY JUSTIFIED BECAUSE OF COURSE QUALITY. I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH "TAKING A BREAK" PROVIDED PLACES LIKE SHINNECOCK HILLS RETURN SOON.
The US Open should go to those sites that are clearly heads and shoulders above the rest.
Well, how small a circle are you going to draw? (And we both know that's not the USGA's sole criterion, so let's not stray too far in that direction.) THINK OF THE RATHER SMALL CIRCLE THAT THE R&A USES FOR THE OPEN CHAMPIONSHIP. NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. I SEE ROUGHLY 6-8 COURSES IN THE USA AS REPEAT MAINSTAYS. SH, WF AND BB ARE AMONG THAT EIGHT.
The idea that the Open must visit each section of the country because of political correctness is a dynamic that I see as way down the totem pole of importance.
Again, that's an argument I am not making. I am in Houston, and I know we won't ever get another Open for reasons both architectural and climatological. I am OK with that.
JASON, THE LIKELIHOOD OF TEXAS HOSTING IS INDEED A LONG ONE. NO DOUBT THE PGA TOUR VISITS DO NOT HELP MATTERS GIVEN THEIR USE OF SOME OF THE ALREADY EXISTING BEST COURSES. UNFORTUNATELY, THE USGA WENT TO SOCAL SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE MARKETPLACE. FORTUNATELY FOR THEM -- THE EVENT THAT HAPPENED THERE WILL FOREVER STAY IN ON'E COLLECTIVE GOLF MEMORY.
I was not a fan of Torrey Pines but what happened there last year with Woods winning will long be remembered. I don't favor going back there because the course overall is so lack luster.
Yet it's likely they'll be back, since there's no other SoCal venue at the moment.
AGREED -- BUT IT MAY BE AT ANOTHER SITE -- CAN'T RULE OUT RIVIERA IF CIRCUMSTANCES WORKED OUT WELL.
I have a great amount of respect for what Ohio has in terms of golf designs. But what OH site wants to have the US Open -- maybe Inverness -- and even then is that layout at the same level as the three from NY I just mentioned ?
Is Pinehurst at that level? Congressional? Chambers Bay? Inverness has the old guys in two years, btw, so I imagine there'd be interest.
JASON, PINEHURST IS CLEARLY ON THE ROTA OF LAYOUTS. FRANKLY, SOMEONE HAS TO TELL ME WHAT THE BIG DEAL IS WITH CONGRESSIONAL -- OTHER THAN BEING IN OUR NATION'S CAPITAL AND HAVING THE PRESIDENT POSSIBLY STOP BY AS CLINTON DID DURING THE '97 EVENT. I HAVE NO IDEA ON HOW WELL CHAMBERS BAY OR EVEN MERION WILL FARE. WE SHALL SEE ON BOTH FRONTS. I LIKE INVERNESS AND CLEARLY IN HOSTING THE NCAA MEN'S CHAMPIONSHIP THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN SOME SORT OF PROFILE. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHEN 0R MORE LIKELY IF THE TOLEDO-BASED LAYOUT WILL GET ANOTHER BITE AT THE OPEN APPLE.
No doubt the PGA Tour visits Ohio at least twice -- Fiirestone and Muirfield Village -- each year.
True, but not terribly relevant, since we both know that the PGA visiting two venues in a state does not militate against the USGA selecting a third venue in that state. Or even one of the PGA venues, in the case of Torrey.
JASON, THE MARKETING SIDE OF THE EQUATION COMES INTO PLAY -- EVEN MORE SO WITH A SLOW ECONOMY. THE USGA WILL BE THINKING LONG AND HARD IN USING ALREADY USED PGA TOUR SITES BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY SO MANY DOLLARS AVAILABLE FOR HAVING MULTIPLE EVENTS WITHIN THE SAME YEAR AT THE SAME SPOT.
We haven't mentioned MSP or anything in Michigan either. For that matter, aren't there NJ courses that should be in consideration? I believe you are not quite as much of fan of Baltusrol compared to some others, but surely NJ must have some options - other than Trump, of course. (I fully support the USGA's no-fake-waterfall rule.)
JASON, BALTUSROL MADE A VERY SMART AND STRATEGIC MOVE IN OPTING WITH THE PGA OF AMERICA. IT WAS EITHER DO THAT OR FOREVER BE PUSHED ASIDE. THE USGA WILL NOT BE RETURNING TO THE SPRINGFIELD CLUB FOR WHO KNOWS HOW MANY YEARS. IN REGARDS TO OTHER NJ CLUBS TO HOST THE US OPEN -- LIKELY ONLY TRUMP'S EFFORTS IN BEDMINSTER HAS THE WHEREWITHAL TO HANDLE ALL THE LOGISTICS FOR SUCH AN EVENT. PLAINFIELD AND RIDGEWOOD ARE TWO SUPERB LAYOUTS BUT CAN BARELY HANDLE THE MINOR EVENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PLAYED THERE. THE US OPEN IS A QUANTUM JUMP THE SCALE IN SO MANY WAYS.
IN REGARDS TO MI -- NO DOUBT OH/S IS IN THE MIX -- BUT IT SEEMS TO BE MORE ALIGNED WITH THE PGA THAN THE USGA.
Johnny Miller said it best -- the US Open needs to be at PB and SH every 6-7 years. They represent well the two (2) coasts and have demonstrated the wherewithal to be all that a US Open site should be.
I am not opposed to something along those lines, though I admit I think of it less in terms of a strict rota. And really, should the US have a smaller rota than the UK's 10 (9, but TOC twice)?
JASON, THERE'S NO REAL SUBSTANIAL ARGUMENT THAT CAN BE MADE AGAINST THE LIKES OF PB AND SH -- I AGREE W JOHNNY MILLER THAT BOTH SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN A 7-8 TIME FRAME PERIOD. THEY ARE THAT GOOD AND HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT IN NUMEROUS WAYS OVER THE YEARS.
Lastly, I say what I just said -- not as a homer for NY but for the mere elevation of the best venues for such an event.
Which is not what the USGA wants. Or it kind of is, but with conditions. We'd both appreciate an Open at Bandon, but it's not going to happen.
THE NEW YORK AREA HAS THE BEST COLLECTION AND DEPTH OF LAYOUTS -- IT STANDS TO REASON THEY WILL GET MORE OVER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME THAN OTHER LOCATIONS. I'D LIKE TO SEE OTHER LOCATIONS BE WORKED INTO THE MIX BUT I WONDER IF SUCH COURSES (E.G. PRAIRIE DUNES) WOULD WANT TO ALTER THEIR COURSE TO SERVE IN SUCH A HOST ROLE?
Why not Prairie Dunes? The TV execs would hate it, and so would that segment of the corporate chumps who are only there for schmoozing customers in the tents.* Perfect. (Before you mention weather, know that in mid-June it is rather similar to that of Pinehurst, btw.) Or can it not be lengthened? I realize it's a par 68 for the pros as is.
* I hereby propose that 2016 US Open be awarded to the best course in a dry county.