What makes a good Greens Committee Chairman?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian - would you not say that there are a lot of greenkeepers out there that are simply prepared to accede to the demands of whatever committee is present at the time to keep their jobs? I don't know, just wondering. I played a Heathland a while back and to my dismay the fairways were sopping wet - dark green with bits of black mud appearing everywhere under the surface. But get to the semi rough and it was bone dry, the grass was finer and an off green colour - perfect. I asked a nearby greenstaff member who was raking the bunkers why that was and he proudly stated that those fairways were "fed" regularly to keep them nice and green. Now I know nothing about maintaining a course - zero - but instinctively this did not seem right to me - to be negating this piece of land's number one asset by drowning the fairways in water and feeding them like that. Maybe a change of regime is needed at greens committee level?

Brian - There are definetly some that turn up and do what they are told and they know they are doing it wrong. At certain levels its always happening and the classic is the order "to put more water on because my 3 iron never held the green". Its a real shame when a numpties command ruins the health of the turf.

[Brian Potash]

Having served in a co-chair role (which drove me nuts) for several years, my basic advice is to spend some time on the committee before seeking the chair position.  Setting that aside, I loved the role but there are several tasks you need to embrace:

I view the role as green chair to be custodian of the club's money spent on the care of the golf course.

 You need to understand the club's expectation and desires with respect to the upkeep of the course.

 You need to advocate for the budget from the club to meet those expectations.

You need to have an understanding of what is going well and poorly with respect to the condition of the course from the perspective of the membership and from the perspective of the super and be willing to weigh in to resolve differences on that front and to advocate for one side or the other as needed.

 You need to do everything you can to make sure those dollars are being spent in the most effective manner possible. 

You need to anticipate how to deal with the budget this year and for the long term so that you can anticipate and address issues over the course of years rather than in the face of a problem.  It is important to have an understanding of the overall direction of the club from a business perspective in order to effectively address these issues.

When something goes wrong on the course (which it inevitably will) you need to be able to communicate to the membership what happened and what is being done to address the issue. 

When a member makes a stupid suggestion or complaint you need to be able to handle such suggestions.

All of these requirements demand communication and listening skills.  None require a phd.

Jason,

Your response really helped, and will likely be the crux of my "campaign" at our board meeting this week.  To be continued...

Brian

[Dan Herrmann]

Patrick - Earlier, the original poster said that his club may become non-equity.  If so, the green committee becomes more of a focus group than a decision-making body.

In that world, the best you can hope for is that the owner hires an expert that understands architecture and is an expert on growing grass, keeping to budget, and hiring the right people.  You can suggest all you want in the non-equity model, but ultimately it's up to the ownership and who they hire.

To me, it doesn't make much sense for a non-expert (say, an MD) to be put in charge of a guy with a MS in agronomy and tell him how to do his job.  If you hire the right super, your job becomes extremely easy.  Get out of his way, have him keep you informed, and watch the property bloom.

[Tim Martin]

One attribute that is a must is thick skin as this position takes plenty of heat regardless of how the course is being maintained as it is virtually impossible to keep everyone happy.

[Don_Mahaffey]

1. A focus on results not methods. Good turf management is all about keeping everything in balance. Cultural tasks, chemical/fert inputs, irrigation, personnel management...success comes when all the different pieces are kept in balance by an experienced superintendent. Laymen tend to focus on one thing...so and so country club uses this, or does it this way...they think focusing on one task out of hundreds somehow will make things better when what it often does is upset the balance. Good oversight is about communicating what is expected and then measuring results.

2. Don't be afraid to communicate those same expectations to the membership. For whatever reason, this isn't always done. There is nothing worse for your super then telling him to give you something, then when some of the members don't like what he has done, hiding from the fact that he did exactly what was asked of him.

3. Avoid at all costs giving instructions like "take it to the next level" or "be the best in town".  Quantify what is expected. develop a document that details the desired course conditions, then let your super develop his plan for reaching your goals. If you can't afford his plan, work with him to achieve a balance between resources and expectations.

4. Be 100% honest in evaluation. Focus on the results and the process, don't make it personal or about personalities.

[Michael George]

Brian:

Any suggestion that you are not prepared for being the Greens Chairman is silly.   You are likely more qualified for this position than any other member of the club that would assume it.   It constantly amazes me at not only the lack of knowledge of most greens chairman, but also their lack of interest in becoming learned in the subject.   We know of your knowledge of golf courses and architecture.  Further, it is clear from your post that you have the time and desire to learn about maintenance ... that puts you ahead of pretty much everyone else at your club.   Your club would be lucky to have you.

Suggestions:

(1) A greens chairman is necessary to oversee the greenskeeper (probably don't need a whole committee though).  As Pat Mucci correctly stated, the greenskeeper has to answer to someone.  However, that should be the role - answering to the chairman.  I don't think the chairman should be "instructing" the greenskeeper.  Let the superintendant do his job.  You find out what he is doing and why he is doing it.  Learn as much as you can and maybe act as "devil's advocate" - but that is about it.  Then report to the membership.  If at some point the "answers" from the greenskeeper are insufficient, then you fire him.

(2)  While now is certainly not the time, I would propose that your club follow the advise of Donald Ross re: greens committees.  Appointing someone to the position on an annual or bi-annual basis is not what any club needs:

"A chairman of the green committee has pretty much all the say of what work shall be done on the course each year…. The following year a new chairman is elected and he starting putting his own ideas in force.  Over in England they do these things better.  They have  paid secretary, who continues in office year after year.  He handles the course on a definite plan.  He is working toward certain well-defined results.  There is a continuity of purpose in his work."

(3)  It is a good thing that Fazio and his group are still involved with the course.  They should be used to set a direction for the course and the goals of the new greenskeeper.  While Jason is right that you have to know what the membership wants, my experience is that these ideas are often pretty varied.   Your club hired a good, well respected architectural firm.  That firm should be guiding the goals for the course.  Again, I would follow the advise of Donald Ross:

"Courses should be laid out by an expert, the plan submitted to the green committee and agreed upon.  This plan should in turn be thoroughly understood and passed upon by the club as a whole.  Then this plan becomes the chart for all future operations of the club."

(4) Be modest at your initial suggestions at the board meeting.  99% of members do not have the critical eye that many of us have on this board.  They think their golf course is wonderful and view any criticism in an offensive manner.  The enthusiasm and ideas that many of us would bring to the job would scare most other members.  A tempered approach is usually received better.  

"Criticizing a golf course is like going into a man’s family.  The fond mother trots up her children for admiration.  Only a boor would express anything else than a high opinion."

(5)  As I think is described in Jason's post, it is important to be the liason between the greenskeeper and the club membership so that the greenskeeper can do his job.  I think the most important part of this job is to be a good listener.  Club members love to hear themselves talk.  Let them, even if it is the dumbest suggestions that you have ever heard.   It is rare to find a club member that doesn't think he knows "what needs to be done" to the course".   Listening to them helps in the political portion of the position.

Anyway good luck.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adrian & Dan,

Your responses are naive at best.

So the superintendent is to act independently ?NO

Then, to whom does he report ?

He's to consult Kreskin to determine the membership's priorities ?HE WORKS TO A BRIEF PREPARED BY THE BOARD/COMMITTEE

Does that committee have a chairman, or is it rudderless ?

He's to have no oversight ?HE WORKS UNDER THE GM AND PERHAPS A CONSULTING AGRONOMIST WHO VISITS ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR

Oh, the GM ?  And what agronomic expertise does he possess ?

He's to have no advocate with knowledge of his operation at the board level ?HE CAN PRODUCE HIS OWN MONTHLY/QUARTERLY REPORT THAT CAN BE DISTRIBUTED

DISTRIBUTED ?  That's nice.
If he and that report don't have a dedicated advocate at the board level, either chaos, confusion and neglect will be the result.

Let's just do away with every chair and let the Superintendent, Head Pro and Chef do whatever they want without any supervision or direction.

I'm surprised that you guys don't form a consulting firm and tout your concept to all of the clubs that are doing it the old fashioned way

YES, ITS THE WAY FORWARD

It's a formula for disaster

Have you ever:

1.    Been a green chairman
2.    Been a board member
3.    Been a member of a private club

[hhuffines]

Sorry if it's been mentioned but get a copy of Tom Doak's book, The Anatomy of a Golf Course.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian & Dan,

Your responses are naive at best.

So the superintendent is to act independently ?NO

Then, to whom does he report ?

He's to consult Kreskin to determine the membership's priorities ?HE WORKS TO A BRIEF PREPARED BY THE BOARD/COMMITTEE

Does that committee have a chairman, or is it rudderless ?ZERO COMMITTEES ARE BEST SO IF ITS A YES OR NO TO RUDDERLESS THEN PUT ME DOWN FOR RUDDERLESS

He's to have no oversight ?HE WORKS UNDER THE GM AND PERHAPS A CONSULTING AGRONOMIST WHO VISITS ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR

Oh, the GM ?  And what agronomic expertise does he possess ?MOST GENERAL MANAGERS WILL HAVE SOME UNDERSTANDING, BUT BY DEFINITION HE IS THE GENERAL MANAGER

He's to have no advocate with knowledge of his operation at the board level ?HE CAN PRODUCE HIS OWN MONTHLY/QUARTERLY REPORT THAT CAN BE DISTRIBUTED

DISTRIBUTED ?  That's nice.
If he and that report don't have a dedicated advocate at the board level, either chaos, confusion and neglect will be the result. LET THE SUPERINTENDENT SPEAK FOR HIMSELF, INFORMATION PASSED ON CAN BE DISTORTED

Let's just do away with every chair and let the Superintendent, Head Pro and Chef do whatever they want without any supervision or direction.LET THE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE DO THEIR WORK, MOST CLUBS HAVE REALISED THIS IS BEST ROUTE

I'm surprised that you guys don't form a consulting firm and tout your concept to all of the clubs that are doing it the old fashioned way

YES, ITS THE WAY FORWARD

It's a formula for disaster YOUR OPINION V MINE

Have you ever:

1.    Been a green chairman
2.    Been a board member
3.    Been a member of a private club

PATRICK I HAVE DESIGNED 12 GOLF COURSES AND BEEN INVOLVED AS A GOLF COURSE CONSULANT TO 23 OTHERS, SOME ON AGRONOMIC MATTERS, I AM THE BOARD AT MY CURRENT CLUB, I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF SEVERAL GOLF CLUBS, I TURNED PROFESSIONAL AGED 16 AND MOVED INTO COURSE MANAGEMENT 4 YEARS LATER AFTER I HAD ONLY EARNED £8 THAT YEAR, I then moved into golf course design having spent a lot of time exploring golf courses, I started my golf company with £6,000 in 1989, today we have borrowings of £880,000 and assetts of close to £9,000,000, yes I have done it my way but my way has worked for the other 12 courses I have designed. In the UK 86% of new golf course fail, I am 10 out of 10 (2 clubs have 36 holes)

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sorry if it's been mentioned but get a copy of Tom Doak's book, The Anatomy of a Golf Course.

Best idea so far. Beards book is very good too. Brian read those for two years then do the job.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Adrian & Dan,

Your responses are naive at best.

So the superintendent is to act independently ?NO

Then, to whom does he report ?

He's to consult Kreskin to determine the membership's priorities ?HE WORKS TO A BRIEF PREPARED BY THE BOARD/COMMITTEE

Does that committee have a chairman, or is it rudderless ?ZERO COMMITTEES ARE BEST SO IF ITS A YES OR NO TO RUDDERLESS THEN PUT ME DOWN FOR RUDDERLESS

"ZERO COMMITTEES" ?
How likely is that at a local club ?
While I favor dictatorships, that's not the case we're discussing.
We're discussing a situation where there are committees

He's to have no oversight ?HE WORKS UNDER THE GM AND PERHAPS A CONSULTING AGRONOMIST WHO VISITS ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR

Oh, the GM ?  And what agronomic expertise does he possess ?MOST GENERAL MANAGERS WILL HAVE SOME UNDERSTANDING, BUT BY DEFINITION HE IS THE GENERAL MANAGER

And how does that make him agronomically qualified ?
How is the GM any different than the Green Chair in terms of oversight. ?

He's to have no advocate with knowledge of his operation at the board level ?HE CAN PRODUCE HIS OWN MONTHLY/QUARTERLY REPORT THAT CAN BE DISTRIBUTED

DISTRIBUTED ?  That's nice.
If he and that report don't have a dedicated advocate at the board level, either chaos, confusion and neglect will be the result. LET THE SUPERINTENDENT SPEAK FOR HIMSELF, INFORMATION PASSED ON CAN BE DISTORTED

There's a time when it's appropriate for the superintendent to make a presentation to the board, or to answer questions on a specific project, but to have him sit through a green report to the board and the debates that follow would lead to either his resignation or firing within the year.

Let's just do away with every chair and let the Superintendent, Head Pro and Chef do whatever they want without any supervision or direction.LET THE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE DO THEIR WORK, MOST CLUBS HAVE REALISED THIS IS BEST ROUTE

That's simply not true.
You can't allow free reign. It has NOT worked without supervision, oversight and direction

I'm surprised that you guys don't form a consulting firm and tout your concept to all of the clubs that are doing it the old fashioned way

YES, ITS THE WAY FORWARD

It's a formula for disaster YOUR OPINION V MINE

Have you ever:

1.    Been a green chairman
2.    Been a board member
3.    Been a member of a private club

PATRICK I HAVE DESIGNED 12 GOLF COURSES AND BEEN INVOLVED AS A GOLF COURSE CONSULANT TO 23 OTHERS, SOME ON AGRONOMIC MATTERS, I AM THE BOARD AT MY CURRENT CLUB, I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF SEVERAL GOLF CLUBS, I TURNED PROFESSIONAL AGED 16 AND MOVED INTO COURSE MANAGEMENT 4 YEARS LATER AFTER I HAD ONLY EARNED £8 THAT YEAR, I then moved into golf course design having spent a lot of time exploring golf courses, I started my golf company with £6,000 in 1989, today we have borrowings of £880,000 and assetts of close to £9,000,000, yes I have done it my way but my way has worked for the other 12 courses I have designed. In the UK 86% of new golf course fail, I am 10 out of 10 (2 clubs have 36 holes)

Most of the above is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
This isn't about designing golf courses, it's about the operation and governance of a local member owned golf club.
In particular, being the green chairman
I favor dictatorships as the best form of governance at golf clubs, but, that's not the fact base on this thread.
In my first reply I indicated that I favored a committee of one, but that's not the case here.

So you haven't been a green chairman at a local club of your peers. And,
You haven't been a Board member at a local club of your peers,

The fact base is that there's a board, committees and committee chairs, and Brian is considering applying for Green Chair, a position that is accountable to, and reports to the board.

You want him to just let the superintendent do whatever the superintendent wants to do, understanding that this club just fired their superintendent and dismissed their green chair.

Having just fired their superintendent, how insane, reckless and irresponsible is it for you to suggest that he just get out of the way and let the superintendent do whatever he pleases ?

And why did they fire the former superintendent ?
Based on Brian, because they had agronomic issues with the greens, so how likely are they to give a new superintendent carte Blanche, free reign in caring for the golf course. ?

Stick to what you do best, because you don't have a clue with respect to how local member owned clubs operate in Brian's neck of the woods.

[Keith Phillips]

Adrian, it is wonderful that you have such a background and are able to offer so much to your clients, and to the club of which you are a member.  However, it is also true that very few clubs have such expertise amongst their memberships, and in fact require dedicated volunteers to 'serve' and to help steer the direction and the priorities of the club, the course, the golf calendar, etc.

I am just finishing my second year as Green Chairman at my club in the United States.  I have absolutely no formal training in agronomy, but have been reading about the subject passionately for over a decade...I'm typing this in my TV room, and the coffee table is littered with golf books, including with The Confidential Guide, The Evangelist of Golf, World Atlas of Golf, Discovering Donald Ross, etc (my wife is very tolerant).  In my library are dozens of books on the subject, including everything from Doak, Klein, Dye, etc. - I have read each of these more than once, and constantly refer to them when interested in a subject (tree management, for example).  I have lurked / participated in this forum for years, and have attended sessions such as Pat Mucci's event last year at Mountain Ridge, with Brad Klein, Ron Prichard, etc.  In short, while I still know precious little about pesticides, growth regulators, etc., I believe I have established a strong set of priorities, and I believe I can benefit my club by 'pitching in'.

My club has an outstanding superintendent, who has been in place for over 20 years - I am in awe of his knowledge of the subject, and have been stunned to learn how much goes into the job from an agronomic perspective...like most, I had absolutely no idea how much was involved!  Having said that, it is also clear that he needs strong guidance on what the clubs priorities are, and that is provided by the Green Chair - we have moved aggressively in prioritizing 'tree management' and 'firm and fast conditions', among other things - this clarity of mission has come from the Green Committee, and is being executed by the Superintendent, to everyone's immense satisfaction.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Patrick - I dont normally reply to your posts. Most people have got your number. You are a Bully. You are a Snob. You are Rude. You live in the Iron Age. You like the golf club to be a snobotorium. You distort. Golf Clubs are morphing into everything you wont want. That aside I'd still give you a courtesy if you were in my town.

I fully accept golf clubs run differently..... but we are talking here about a man who openly stated he wants the Greens Committee Chairmans job with no knowledge of Agronomy. Surely he should sit on a general greens committee before he gets 'kinged'. I am not saying that a chairman of greens should understand cation exchanges or know every fungicide for every treatment, but there should still be a situation where he can explain to a member the reasoning behind why the superintendant is coring or top dressing. Its the communication back to the membership where he is likely to get in a pickle. Some knowledge of the job is required if this man is to know if the super is doing a good or bad job. The reason why many clubs have dropped the greens committee idea is because of the advancements in the last 20 years are massive, its a job that is far more technical than yesteryears and smart clubs have sensed this.

I think if Brian wants to do it, he should learn a bit first. This is a discussion group, he asked for an opinion after all.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Keith - Your doing it as I am suggesting really..... learn a bit first.

[Neil White]

Keith - Your doing it as I am suggesting really..... learn a bit first.

+1

Playing devil's advocate to Adrian's point though is that a little knowledge and a position of influence can also be very dangerous - that said I believe any head greenkeeper worth their salt would prefer a green chair who was prepared to self-teach; if only to have an idea what the HG is talking about / proposing.  It makes their lives easier.

Neil.

[Scott Stearns]

Brian-  call me.

[Bill Gayne]

Not that anyone has ever asked me but this thread makes it clear to me that I should never be a Committee Chairman.

[Mark Johnson]

For once, I complete agree with what Patrick has to say.

To build on this, I think you need to differentiate between the roles of the Greens Committee, Board of Directors and General Manager.

The Greens Committee job is to recommend strategy both in terms of maintaince standards (e.g.  rough length), special projects (tree removal) and long-term strategy (turf management, water reduction, etc.) and budgets/capital plannings.

The BoD's job is to approve these strategys.

The General Manager's job is implement whatever strategies the board approves.

The Greens Chairman should not be managing the Super.   In fact, I've seen when several different people try to manage the Super, that is when issues arise.

The Greens chair needs to be a great communicator, explain what is being done and why.  

[Ulrich Mayring]

put more water on because my 3 iron never held the green

I'd answer this by saying let's put less water on the course, so you'll have a 6 iron into the green

Ulrich

PS: http://turf.lib.msu.edu/gsr/1990s/1994/940908.pdf

[Bill Brightly]

For once, I complete agree with what Patrick has to say.

To build on this, I think you need to differentiate between the roles of the Greens Committee, Board of Directors and General Manager.

The Greens Committee job is to recommend strategy both in terms of maintaince standards (e.g.  rough length), special projects (tree removal) and long-term strategy (turf management, water reduction, etc.) and budgets/capital plannings.

The BoD's job is to approve these strategys.

The General Manager's job is implement whatever strategies the board approves.

The Greens Chairman should not be managing the Super.   In fact, I've seen when several different people try to manage the Super, that is when issues arise.

The Greens chair needs to be a great communicator, explain what is being done and why.  

Mark is right, the Greens Chair does not manage the Superintendent. The GM does, but they both report to the full board. Presumably, the Board has some pretty clear goals laid out for the new Supeontendent, and your role is to help him succeed. A good Grounds Chair is an excellent buffer between the Board and the Super, the membership and the super, the finance committee and the super, etc.

Adrian is wrong, you do NOT need to know abour agronomy, but you absolutely must know how to ask thoughtful questions. You need to understand what he is doing and why, and be able to explain that to the full board and to the memebership. Reading The Anatomy of a Golf Course will be intersting, but to think that Brian will somehw catch up to the super in terms of knowledge, and then be better able to direct him, is simply wrong. The guy they hired knows about turf, what he may not know is how to approach the board, the membership, etc. That is where a good, TOUGH, well-respected member can help as Grounds Chair.

Some superintendents write very well and are comfortble writing monthly updates, for exmple. Others are not, but a good Grounds Chair can absolutely help the super here.

Good Ground Chairs don't manage the super, but they make sure he is doing a good job managing the golf course.

[Gary Slatter]

a very good super! 

[Jason Walker]

Leave your course every now and then for a road game, and encourage the committee to do the same. 

Amazing how many Green Chairs/Committees/BofD members never leave their home course.  Problems related to complacency quickly arise.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick - I dont normally reply to your posts.

I hadn't noticed

Most people have got your number.

They should, it's not unlisted

You are a Bully.

I don't suffer fools well

You are a Snob.

That's funny, don't recall ever being called a snob.
Never having met me, and not knowing anyone who knows me personally,how are you qualified to make that assessment ?

What's interesting about your comment is that you won't find me announcing the amount of my line of credit or my net worth as you have done.
That seems a little arrogant/elitist/snobbish to me.

You are Rude.

I don't suffer fools well

You live in the Iron Age.

No, I don't live in the ironbound section of Newark, I live about 15 miles from there

You like the golf club to be a snobotorium.

Not at all.
But again, I didn't parade my line of credit and net worth on this site as you did.
I don't consider favoring behavioral standards such as no cell phone use and no jeans as promoting a "snobatorium"

You distort.

I guess, when you get slammed in a debate, when facts are cited that refute your position, you claim "foul" or that I "distort"
I've distorted nothing.
I have far more experience with green committees than you do, having served on numerous green committees for over 50 years.
I've served on the Boards of numerous member owned clubs for well over 20 years
My knowledge of their workings is based on factual first hand experience, not fiction.
I have in depth knowledge regarding the administrative workings of member owned clubs, at the green committee level and at the Board level.
I've also served, sometimes as chairman, on many other committees.
Hence, compared to my experience, you may consider yourself a novice when it comes to the governance of member owned clubs.


Golf Clubs are morphing into everything you wont want.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
My fingers are firmly on the pulse of many area clubs and none of them are morphing into "everything I don't want".
That statement alone reveals your ignorance on this topic, local clubs in the Met/NYC area and me.

That aside I'd still give you a courtesy if you were in my town.

I've extended courtesy to many from near and far.
That's a fact.
Talk is cheap

I fully accept golf clubs run differently..... but we are talking here about a man who openly stated he wants the Greens Committee Chairmans job with no knowledge of Agronomy.

That's neither uncommon nor a prerequisite for the job.
It's certainly helpful to have some agronomic background, but a lack of same doesn't automatically disqualify Brian as a viable candidate

Surely he should sit on a general greens committee before he gets 'kinged'.

That would certainly be a plus, but again, it doesn't disqualify him from being a good Green Chairman, it merely flattens his learning curve.

I am not saying that a chairman of greens should understand cation exchanges or know every fungicide for every treatment, but there should still be a situation where he can explain to a member the reasoning behind why the superintendant is coring or top dressing.
I don't think the acquisition of that knowledge takes that long.
Surely Brian has seen similar letters to the membership, and if he possesses requirement # 3 from my initial repl, he'll be able to handle that task

Its the communication back to the membership where he is likely to get in a pickle.

That's more a function of common sense, and again, if he possesses requirement # 3, he'll be able to handle the communication facet of the position.  I sent a monthly letter to the membership detailing conditions, projects in progress and upcoming projects.
Keeping members informed is the easy part, keeping them happy is another matter

Some knowledge of the job is required if this man is to know if the super is doing a good or bad job.

On that we both agree.
But, didn't you say he should just step aside and let the professional do his job.
Now you're agreeing with me and saying that he needs to provide oversight in case he's doing a bad job.
I'm glad you've finally come around and now share my position.  

The reason why many clubs have dropped the greens committee idea is because of the advancements in the last 20 years are massive, its a job that is far more technical than yesteryears and smart clubs have sensed this.

You're contradicting yourself again.
I am not aware of any clubs in the greater NYC area or in Southeastern Florida that are abandoning the position of Green Chairman.
Nor am I aware of any trend or proposal to eliminate that position

I think if Brian wants to do it,

Agreed

he should learn a bit first.

It sounds like he expressed a willingness to do same

This is a discussion group, he asked for an opinion after all.

I thought that he was looking for encouragement, offering that he would be a dedicated chair.

And I disagreed with the opinion you offered based on my knowledge of his club, and the peer clubs in the area.
Then you advocated for the elimination of the position, and it seems that that idea is being universally rejected.

Your advice on gaining experience and knowledge were well advised, but advocating for the elimination of the position of Green Chairman was more than I'll advised, it was foolish and unrealistic.

If you're ever in the greater NYC area I'd be happy to extend playing privileges to you as well.
But, do I have to play with you ?  

[Brian Potash]

Patrick - I dont normally reply to your posts.

I hadn't noticed

Most people have got your number.

They should, it's not unlisted

You are a Bully.

I don't suffer fools well

You are a Snob.

That's funny, don't recall ever being called a snob.
Never having met me, and not knowing anyone who knows me personally,how are you qualified to make that assessment ?

What's interesting about your comment is that you won't find me announcing the amount of my line of credit or my net worth as you have done.
That seems a little arrogant/elitist/snobbish to me.

You are Rude.

I don't suffer fools well

You live in the Iron Age.

No, I don't live in the ironbound section of Newark, I live about 15 miles from there

You like the golf club to be a snobotorium.

Not at all.
But again, I didn't parade my line of credit and net worth on this site as you did.
I don't consider favoring behavioral standards such as no cell phone use and no jeans as promoting a "snobatorium"

You distort.

I guess, when you get slammed in a debate, when facts are cited that refute your position, you claim "foul" or that I "distort"
I've distorted nothing.
I have far more experience with green committees than you do, having served on numerous green committees for over 50 years.
I've served on the Boards of numerous member owned clubs for well over 20 years
My knowledge of their workings is based on factual first hand experience, not fiction.
I have in depth knowledge regarding the administrative workings of member owned clubs, at the green committee level and at the Board level.
I've also served, sometimes as chairman, on many other committees.
Hence, compared to my experience, you may consider yourself a novice when it comes to the governance of member owned clubs.


Golf Clubs are morphing into everything you wont want.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
My fingers are firmly on the pulse of many area clubs and none of them are morphing into "everything I don't want".
That statement alone reveals your ignorance on this topic, local clubs in the Met/NYC area and me.

That aside I'd still give you a courtesy if you were in my town.

I've extended courtesy to many from near and far.
That's a fact.
Talk is cheap

I fully accept golf clubs run differently..... but we are talking here about a man who openly stated he wants the Greens Committee Chairmans job with no knowledge of Agronomy.

That's neither uncommon nor a prerequisite for the job.
It's certainly helpful to have some agronomic background, but a lack of same doesn't automatically disqualify Brian as a viable candidate

Surely he should sit on a general greens committee before he gets 'kinged'.

That would certainly be a plus, but again, it doesn't disqualify him from being a good Green Chairman, it merely flattens his learning curve.

I am not saying that a chairman of greens should understand cation exchanges or know every fungicide for every treatment, but there should still be a situation where he can explain to a member the reasoning behind why the superintendant is coring or top dressing.
I don't think the acquisition of that knowledge takes that long.
Surely Brian has seen similar letters to the membership, and if he possesses requirement # 3 from my initial repl, he'll be able to handle that task

Its the communication back to the membership where he is likely to get in a pickle.

That's more a function of common sense, and again, if he possesses requirement # 3, he'll be able to handle the communication facet of the position.  I sent a monthly letter to the membership detailing conditions, projects in progress and upcoming projects.
Keeping members informed is the easy part, keeping them happy is another matter

Some knowledge of the job is required if this man is to know if the super is doing a good or bad job.

On that we both agree.
But, didn't you say he should just step aside and let the professional do his job.
Now you're agreeing with me and saying that he needs to provide oversight in case he's doing a bad job.
I'm glad you've finally come around and now share my position.  

The reason why many clubs have dropped the greens committee idea is because of the advancements in the last 20 years are massive, its a job that is far more technical than yesteryears and smart clubs have sensed this.

You're contradicting yourself again.
I am not aware of any clubs in the greater NYC area or in Southeastern Florida that are abandoning the position of Green Chairman.
Nor am I aware of any trend or proposal to eliminate that position

I think if Brian wants to do it,

Agreed

he should learn a bit first.

It sounds like he expressed a willingness to do same

This is a discussion group, he asked for an opinion after all.

I thought that he was looking for encouragement, offering that he would be a dedicated chair.

And I disagreed with the opinion you offered based on my knowledge of his club, and the peer clubs in the area.
Then you advocated for the elimination of the position, and it seems that that idea is being universally rejected.

Your advice on gaining experience and knowledge were well advised, but advocating for the elimination of the position of Green Chairman was more than I'll advised, it was foolish and unrealistic.

If you're ever in the greater NYC area I'd be happy to extend playing privileges to you as well.
But, do I have to play with you ?  

Thanks Pat!!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick - I dont normally reply to your posts.

I hadn't noticed

Most people have got your number.

They should, it's not unlisted

You are a Bully.

I don't suffer fools well

You are a Snob.

That's funny, don't recall ever being called a snob.
Never having met me, and not knowing anyone who knows me personally,how are you qualified to make that assessment ?

What's interesting about your comment is that you won't find me announcing the amount of my line of credit or my net worth as you have done.
That seems a little arrogant/elitist/snobbish to me.

You are Rude.

I don't suffer fools well

You live in the Iron Age.

No, I don't live in the ironbound section of Newark, I live about 15 miles from there

You like the golf club to be a snobotorium.

Not at all.
But again, I didn't parade my line of credit and net worth on this site as you did.
I don't consider favoring behavioral standards such as no cell phone use and no jeans as promoting a "snobatorium"

You distort.

I guess, when you get slammed in a debate, when facts are cited that refute your position, you claim "foul" or that I "distort"
I've distorted nothing.
I have far more experience with green committees than you do, having served on numerous green committees for over 50 years.
I've served on the Boards of numerous member owned clubs for well over 20 years
My knowledge of their workings is based on factual first hand experience, not fiction.
I have in depth knowledge regarding the administrative workings of member owned clubs, at the green committee level and at the Board level.
I've also served, sometimes as chairman, on many other committees.
Hence, compared to my experience, you may consider yourself a novice when it comes to the governance of member owned clubs.


Golf Clubs are morphing into everything you wont want.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
My fingers are firmly on the pulse of many area clubs and none of them are morphing into "everything I don't want".
That statement alone reveals your ignorance on this topic, local clubs in the Met/NYC area and me.

That aside I'd still give you a courtesy if you were in my town.

I've extended courtesy to many from near and far.
That's a fact.
Talk is cheap

I fully accept golf clubs run differently..... but we are talking here about a man who openly stated he wants the Greens Committee Chairmans job with no knowledge of Agronomy.

That's neither uncommon nor a prerequisite for the job.
It's certainly helpful to have some agronomic background, but a lack of same doesn't automatically disqualify Brian as a viable candidate

Surely he should sit on a general greens committee before he gets 'kinged'.

That would certainly be a plus, but again, it doesn't disqualify him from being a good Green Chairman, it merely elongates his learning curve.

I am not saying that a chairman of greens should understand cation exchanges or know every fungicide for every treatment, but there should still be a situation where he can explain to a member the reasoning behind why the superintendant is coring or top dressing.
I don't think the acquisition of that knowledge takes that long.
Surely Brian has seen similar letters to the membership, and if he possesses requirement # 3 from my initial repl, he'll be able to handle that task

Its the communication back to the membership where he is likely to get in a pickle.

That's more a function of common sense, and again, if he possesses requirement # 3, he'll be able to handle the communication facet of the position.  I sent a monthly letter to the membership detailing conditions, projects in progress and upcoming projects.
Keeping members informed is the easy part, keeping them happy is another matter

Some knowledge of the job is required if this man is to know if the super is doing a good or bad job.

On that we both agree.
But, didn't you say he should just step aside and let the professional do his job.
Now you're agreeing with me and saying that he needs to provide oversight in case he's doing a bad job.
I'm glad you've finally come around and now share my position.  

The reason why many clubs have dropped the greens committee idea is because of the advancements in the last 20 years are massive, its a job that is far more technical than yesteryears and smart clubs have sensed this.

You're contradicting yourself again.
I am not aware of any clubs in the greater NYC area or in Southeastern Florida that are abandoning the position of Green Chairman.
Nor am I aware of any trend or proposal to eliminate that position

I think if Brian wants to do it,

Agreed

he should learn a bit first.

It sounds like he expressed a willingness to do same

This is a discussion group, he asked for an opinion after all.

I thought that he was looking for encouragement, offering that he would be a dedicated chair.

And I disagreed with the opinion you offered based on my knowledge of his club, and the peer clubs in the area.
Then you advocated for the elimination of the position, and it seems that that idea is being universally rejected.

Your advice on gaining experience and knowledge were well advised, but advocating for the elimination of the position of Green Chairman was more than I'll advised, it was foolish and unrealistic.

If you're ever in the greater NYC area I'd be happy to extend playing privileges to you as well.
But, do I have to play with you ?  

Thanks Pat!!