Dean:
Put down the kool-aid and understand this -- I NEVER said the Ryder Cup is not about business and making $$.
What I did say was that reverting back to some sort of connection through the classic courses every now and then would not be a bad idea -- you need to wake up and smell the coffee -- the USGA did that with its selection of Merion for the 2013 US Open. An event which draws considerably more attendance and overall $ than any Ryder Cup site.
The USGA opted to go that route as a celebration of the 100th anniversary of Ouimet's win at TCC and at the same time it resurrects Merion into the picture after a 32-year absence.
The USGA could have easily gone to more user-friendly places such as Hazeltine or other such non-descript courses and simply cashed in.
So yes the architecture does matter -- the history does matter.
Just because the folks who run the Ryder Cup don't see it that way doesn't mean that people should not push for its inclusion every so often.
The folks who run golf should know its history and try to incorporate it into the game's future -- those who are carnival barkers looking to squeeze money out of every corner should be seen for what they are.
I previously opined that a number of top players have raved when classic courses were/used for events.
Dean, take off the cynical approach and look towards optimum outcomes that can combine $$ and golf's grand traditions. Otherwise, let's auction off everything and simply call the Ryder Cup the McDonald's Ryder Cup.