I wonder if golf's thought leaders' efforts to try and kick-start growth of the game haven't been a bit bass-ackwards. It seems to me that the general message out there around this issue is something like:
"Golf, in its current form, is fun for a lot of people, but not fun enough for a lot more people to start thinking it's fun and worth learning. We are going to start changing some aspects of the game that we think will make the game a bit easier to enjoy for people who don't play it."
What would the impartial observer infer from that message? To me, it seems that the message is saying "We acknowledge that there are things that are wrong with the game; we are going to try changing some of those things to get you to like it."
That statement doesn't seem to belie a lot of confidence on the part of the message-maker. As a non-golfer, what about that attitude is going to make me want to try golf out, even if they change some things I don't know anything about in the first place (because, you know, I don't play golf)? How in the hell is that sort of attitude going to energize me?
Instead, why don't golf's thought leaders pour all of their creative energies (and, god-forbid, maybe a couple of their own dollars?) into a game-wide PR campaign that, instead of acknowledging certain apparent negatives about the game, reinforces the best things about the game (which are many enough in number that the right marketing minds should have little trouble producing positive stuff that might move the needle)?
The best thing about going positive, rather than acknowledging negatives and promising non-golfers that "Don't worry, guys, we're going to overcome these abstract problems that you don't really understand!!!!!" is that we don't have to change anything about a game that many millions of people think is the bees' knees.
Of course, it's probably just easier to cut a 15-inch hole into your greens and pat yourself on the back for "growing the game."