Meaning that they will bring RTJII (or Jay Blasi) back, tweak the course, and have another Open in about 30 years?
BTW, I think the overall verdict will be positive. Results were good, Pac NW deserves an Open every dozen years or so. Not too many course complaints, out of the ordinary for a tournament course, and the grass can be improved a bit. Some stuff may get modified for spectators. But why would anyone remember these course complaints any more than the other annual course complaints at the US Open?
Not to mention, the USGA will still be pushing water reductions, etc., and go on the offensive as saying this is just what golf needs, and we are providing it. They won't admit to being wrong (and weren't) and won't feel offended by having learned from their experience here.
I tend to agree Jeff, except if RTJjr can come back in even years, I want what ever he is drinking, not withstanding his old man lived a pretty long life. Hell, Blasi will be that age in 30!
They will need to tweak the fescue slopes so spectators don't fall and kill themselves. That was a big thing when Whistling Straits held its first major with crowds on the slippery slopes. But, we have to remember the compromise in the design to give use and access to park walkers within the confines of the course so that general public wasn't excluded from this beautiful public park setting, even if he don't golf.
Giving all these parameters to the design architect with the notion of holding a new sort of standard USGA event, on a freakin sand mine gypsum facility was not exactly easy peasy.
And Phil, to say all MD cares about is the gate and money receipts, well in this age of mass marketing and media ratings along with merchandising every aspect of the event from tee shirts to logo sponsors, how else would a national and international rules and governance organization approach the financial issue? On this scale, pure not-for-profit organization don't cut it, IMHO. Sure, the USGA can dial down the marketting meter for their other multitude of events from US Ams men and women, to mid-ams to pub links (have they scrapped that one?) etc. But the ladies and men's national open has to carry the other stuff they do from the library and archives that some of our GCA historians love and have contributed to, to the kids programs, etc.
I think we need to cut these USGA guys a break. The responded to some loud voices crying for change from the 'shlog' of narrow fairways-insane high thick rough. They changed the Pinehurst presentation using some of our darlings of C&C to do a relatively faithful restoration of the fairway-waste needles areas. What the hell do we want from a large org with board of directors, mostly made up of long time country club VIPs who are accustomed to all the cultural traditions of the country club set. That is not necessarily a pejorative. Just a consideration to what is 'standard' values and traditions that go into staffing the national ruling body BOD. Remember when Geoff Shack had an ongoing set of grievances with the Manhattan property purchase and the criticism of the USGA over spending money on pretentious trappings. Then, the criticism they should manage finances better and develop a war chest to enforce and push back on costly expected legal action threats by club manufacturers to force restraint on distance. There is just too many masters to serve and issues and fires to put out to satisfy the critics.
I for one don't think the USGA is 'ruining' golf. I'm cutting them a break and let them post mortem and adjust.
Let's see what they do when they get past the traditional staid old venue next year at Oakmont and get to another 'built to hold the open' venue of Erin Hills.
Let's hear the critics give their considered consructive advise in the face of what ever lessons the critics feel the USGA should have learned this time and tell us what should be done with Erin Hills, two years from now, particularly from those that know EH and the holes design and routing as it currently exist. There is a ton of issues and tweaking that 'could' be done, and conditions that naturally exist that could screw up the national tournament from overly lush native-unplayable to flex in tees and wide corridors of fairways that can be adjusted wider to narrow with a half year prep. Will EH have better spectator sight lines and circulation around the course? Let's get the critics on record now, so they can either say, 'told you so' or back off once you start trying to come up with something better than you are currently criticizing.
