[V_Halyard]

For Discussion: Should more colleges (Private and Public) seek to define (re-define) golf courses as strategic assets?
Architectural design, conditioning and maintenance of authenticity seems to matter to athletes and non-athletes.

During this current "back to school" period, I have been enjoying a of number interesting discussions centered on collegiate golf courses.  The first was with a U.S. High School Senior and her parents. She was interested in better understanding the quality of the golf courses at her prospective institutions. “My Mom saysYou’re a golf geek right?…”    How do you answer that from a High Schooler?  That says so much about the conversations regarding me in their household. I guess they could be worse... The student is a single-digit handicap who was not interested in going through the recruiting clearinghouse process, but was doggedly researching and weighting various college golf/physical education opportunities, potential golf lessons, practice facility, intramural golf club access and any discounted student golf available at the courses. She even wonders if the courses had reciprocity at other “nice” courses. Impressive. I of course thought this was fantastic and we had quite the discussion which led to a decision matrix.

Unrelated to the previous discussion, a pal had just finished playing his alma-maters golf course. He came ranting to me with disgust regarding the condition of his former school's golf track. He led with: "I know we can raise the money to upgrade this s#**hole, where should we start?"  Off to the races on that one as well.

Many collegiate golf facilities are well known to be essential athletic recruiting tools E.G.: (Mich,OK State,Yale,OSU,Wisconsin,Perdue,Stanford) but I was struck by the level of interest by an increasing number of non-athletes.To spark up the GCA Best College Course discussion, I proclaim that investment in college courses can and should made in ways that actively benefit and support a wider golf community, recruitable workforce and alumni network. Well-architected, maintained and programmed golf courses increasingly matter to a wider demographic, which now include staff, faculty, non-athlete students and places for alumni gathering. In many places the courses are still undervalued by the colleges as well as the community. 
   
Should colleges seek to define or re-define golf courses as strategic assets? Those that do seem to benefit by defining and delivering on missions that support athletes, staff, students, faculty, youth and student golf participation, as well as the community at large.  The quality of the architecture matters.

Agree/Disagree/Thoughts?
- Do UK/EUR higher learning institutions own courses of note? E.G: Is St. Andrews University formally attached to St. Andrews?

[Kalen Braley]

Vhal,


How many US colleges or universities actually own a course?  I'm guessing that number is pretty small.


Here locally, the University of Utah got rid of its 9 holer a few years back, good riddance, it was a terd sandwich.

[Matthew Petersen]

I don't dislike the ASU Karsten course (I did a photo tour of the infamous Doak zero layout a few years back), but I still think they are upgrading by moving to Papago in the coming years. However, the downside is that the course, while still close to campus, is no longer essentially on campus. I did not go to ASU and am loathe to ever admit to saying I envied anything about the Scum, er Sun Devils ... but I did envy the ability of students living on or near campus to literally walk across the street and play discounted. Not sure if the deals are still in place but when I first moved to Phoenix I know students and faculty could play for truly cheap rates.

[Michael Whitaker]

How good is the Warren Course at Notre Dame? How does it compare to other C&C courses?

[Jim_Kennedy]

There are 125 +- colleges in the USA that own/operate their courses, large field to choose from.


I'd say she ought to be thinking about an academic fit first, unless she plans on becoming a touring pro.   

[Brad Tufts]

How good is the Warren Course at Notre Dame? How does it compare to other C&C courses?

The Warren Course is good Mike, but it suffers from the lack of topography and naturalized bunkering found at most C&C (Music Factories) courses.  I'd call it as good as it can be given its' site.


About 90% of the course is situated in a flat field that doesn't undulate much at all, with only a few holes interacting with a shallow ravine next to the clubhouse, so most everything is man-made.

[Joe_Tucholski]

I'm torn on this one.  My knee jerk reaction is no a school shouldn't seek to define or re-define golf courses as strategic assets it should focus on those assets that provide students with a better education in the class room to prepare them for their future.  That being said I guess it depends on the objective of the college.  Education in the United States seems to be turning into quite the business (kind of like health care has).  Having nicer facilities allows an increased price (also comes with increased costs).

I also understand a lot of people go to college and use very little of their studies in their future careers and the contacts and people skills are much more important.

I also have to admit the golf course was a very important place that kept me sane during my 4 years of undergrad.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Gotta throw in the 9-holer at Culver Academy in Indiana.
It's a high school and has one of THE best 9 hole courses in country (Langford/Moreau)....and a killer hockey team!


http://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/culver-academies/

[Peter Pallotta]

Vaugh - hoping that this is neither too far afield nor putting words in your mouth, but I think you're asking about universities making their golf operations more a part (if only a very small part) of their core business -- but this at a time when, at many universities I know of, even the traditional undergraduate liberal arts program is no longer seen as part of the core business. Instead, it's about (the money that comes from, eg) foreign graduate-student recruitment; business-industry partnerships; high-tech/Big Data research & commercialization; and start-up ecosystems and accelerators.
Which is to say: on the one hand, the possibilities you're raising might be so outside the current approach/business model as to never get a hearing; but on the other, your timing on this 're-definition' might be impeccable, with universities never before being as open as they are now to seeing/using their golf courses as strategic assets.
Peter

[V_Halyard]

There are 125 +- colleges in the USA that own/operate their courses, large field to choose from.


I'd say she ought to be thinking about an academic fit first, unless she plans on becoming a touring pro.   

Great point and to clarify, by all indications, appears that she will have some very nice academic/collegiate choices and is bypassing competitive golf opportunities to go to a college of her choosing.


Your very valid point highlights the relevance my pondering, the fact that she is weighing the recreational and lifestyle aspects of a golf environ, not the athletics.

[V_Halyard]

Vaugh - hoping that this is neither too far afield nor putting words in your mouth, but I think you're asking about universities making their golf operations more a part (if only a very small part) of their core business -- but this at a time when, at many universities I know of, even the traditional undergraduate liberal arts program is no longer seen as part of the core business. Instead, it's about (the money that comes from, eg) foreign graduate-student recruitment; business-industry partnerships; high-tech/Big Data research & commercialization; and start-up ecosystems and accelerators.
Which is to say: on the one hand, the possibilities you're raising might be so outside the current approach/business model as to never get a hearing; but on the other, your timing on this 're-definition' might be impeccable, with universities never before being as open as they are now to seeing/using their golf courses as strategic assets.
Peter

Excellent points. Of course some of the larger universities have used alumni/outside funding means to support multi-million dollar clubhouses and training facilities. Perhaps some of the smaller (If they do not already) should/could benefit by positioning their courses as key components in the campus quality of lifestyle portfolio. View it as an asset rather than a "cost center". (If they don't already)
This can extend to relationships with Municipals if they don't have a course. This is all pondering.

[Peter Pallotta]

Vaughn - a case in point:
A golden age course in town, with a complicated ownership history, that directly abuts the local university.  In later years, the course was member-owned and private, but struggling. Members sold it to the university, which in turn re-named it and then leased it right back to the members. Both the golf members and the university faculty that I know tell me there are no other arrangements, i.e. the course is still for member-play only, the (fairly steep for this 'neighbourhood') initiation fee and monthly dues still in place, with no 'privileges' whatsoever for university staff/faculty/students/alumni and no marketing/activities outside the usual member-attraction-retention schemes. 
In short, the best that *this* university administration could do was to conceive of the potential 'golf asset' as nothing more than empty, unused land that they could rent out for a couple of dozen years.
Which is to say: there is an 'educational' opportunity here, i.e. to bring smaller universities to understand the potential for their golf courses to be genuine (and marketable) assets. It often amazes me that, even in this age of instant and incessant and world-wide communications, so few companies/institutions really know about and actualize 'best practices'.       
Again, I hope I haven't taken this in a direction that you didn't intend or that is not relevant; I may have misunderstood what you're asking about. 
Peter

[Jake Marvin]

Vaughn,


Lot of good points. I'd say that most notable college courses are already operated as strategic assets rather than cost centers. It's hard to justify a college using golf as a way to pad the pocketbook, for one thing, but really it's the more pragmatic option.


First, "strategic asset" can mean many things, including but not limited to:

• Recruiting tool/playing field for athletes
• Recruiting tool for non-athletes
• Recreational facility for students and faculty
• Connection point between school and outside community
• Publicity tool for school
• Tool for building alumni morale/"buttering them up"
• Supplement to a visit to campus, etc., etc.

These are the first few strategic points, at least, that come to my mind when I think of how we use the two courses here at ND. Most of the same points apply to the other colleges in the region, like Birck Boilermaker and Michigan. Indiana is renovating now to add strategic value (both golf- and asset-wise) to their dog track.


If any college views its course as a cost center, a course won't be there in the first place because there are so many more efficient ways to drain the cash out of students and locals that don't require a large maintenance budget (for example, the Burke ND course is slowly being paved over for this exact reason). I think it's more helpful to see all college courses as strategic assets, but to group them by the level of value, sort of like this:

• Level one: Course exists as recreational facility for students, staff, locals. Probably a dog track. (Burke ND, Les Bolstad MN)
• Level two: Course also serves as a recruiting tool for prospective students because of its quality. (Furman, UNC Finley)
• Level three: Course also rightly impresses alumni and adds significant value to any golfer's visit to campus. (Birck Boilermaker, OSU)
• Level four: Course also creates positive publicity for the school in golf and public circles, outside of the school's typical reach. (Yale, Warren ND)

(I justify my last and entirely biased example with the 2019 US Senior Open hosted by ND)


If you look at the renovations happening on campus courses, I think this makes sense of the goals of the schools which undertake them. When Indiana renovates, it wants to move from Level One to Level Three (or maybe Two. I'm hypothesizing here). When Sewanee had Gil Hanse rework its course, it wanted to make the exact same jump. I'm sure most colleges would love to jump to Level Four, but obviously that's hard to do, so it ought to be a matter of finding the proper type of course to keep to serve the school's needs given the land and money available.


Really, anywhere golf isn't the focal business, the course is a strategic asset. The difference between the various courses owned by colleges, resorts, the military, etc. is the strategic aims to which they can aspire, and how far they choose to go in meeting them.

[Tom_Doak]

Vaugh - hoping that this is neither too far afield nor putting words in your mouth, but I think you're asking about universities making their golf operations more a part (if only a very small part) of their core business -- but this at a time when, at many universities I know of, even the traditional undergraduate liberal arts program is no longer seen as part of the core business. Instead, it's about (the money that comes from, eg) foreign graduate-student recruitment; business-industry partnerships; high-tech/Big Data research & commercialization; and start-up ecosystems and accelerators.
Which is to say: on the one hand, the possibilities you're raising might be so outside the current approach/business model as to never get a hearing; but on the other, your timing on this 're-definition' might be impeccable, with universities never before being as open as they are now to seeing/using their golf courses as strategic assets.
Peter

The mission statement for The Rawls Course at Texas Tech was all about that.


The donor, Jerry Rawls, actually wasn't that big of a golfer; he was an mechanical engineering major who got into the chip business at the right time.  After undergrad work at Texas Tech he went to grad school at Purdue, if I remember correctly, and he said that one of the things that led him to business success afterward was playing golf at the university course there, and the opportunity it presented him to mingle with professors and various alums and learn from them.  He thought that just like football games, a good university golf course would bring alums back to campus, and that would be of benefit to current students.


So he donated $8m for an on-campus golf course, separately from the $25m he donated to the business school.


I've had some really good clients . . . even the ones that aren't so well known.

[V_Halyard]

Which is to say: there is an 'educational' opportunity here, i.e. to bring smaller universities to understand the potential for their golf courses to be genuine (and marketable) assets. It often amazes me that, even in this age of instant and incessant and world-wide communications, so few companies/institutions really know about and actualize 'best practices'.       
Again, I hope I haven't taken this in a direction that you didn't intend or that is not relevant; I may have misunderstood what you're asking about. 
Peter

Peter, this is exactly the hope.

[V_Halyard]

Vaugh - hoping that this is neither too far afield nor putting words in your mouth, but I think you're asking about universities making their golf operations more a part (if only a very small part) of their core business -- but this at a time when, at many universities I know of, even the traditional undergraduate liberal arts program is no longer seen as part of the core business. Instead, it's about (the money that comes from, eg) foreign graduate-student recruitment; business-industry partnerships; high-tech/Big Data research & commercialization; and start-up ecosystems and accelerators.
Which is to say: on the one hand, the possibilities you're raising might be so outside the current approach/business model as to never get a hearing; but on the other, your timing on this 're-definition' might be impeccable, with universities never before being as open as they are now to seeing/using their golf courses as strategic assets.
Peter

The mission statement for The Rawls Course at Texas Tech was all about that.


The donor, Jerry Rawls, actually wasn't that big of a golfer; he was an mechanical engineering major who got into the chip business at the right time.  After undergrad work at Texas Tech he went to grad school at Purdue, if I remember correctly, and he said that one of the things that led him to business success afterward was playing golf at the university course there, and the opportunity it presented him to mingle with professors and various alums and learn from them.  He thought that just like football games, a good university golf course would bring alums back to campus, and that would be of benefit to current students.


So he donated $8m for an on-campus golf course, separately from the $25m he donated to the business school.

I've had some really good clients . . . even the ones that aren't so well known.

Thanks Tom. that is the crux of, and the intended hopeful pathway for my thread.As Peter, Jake and you have so aptly pointed out, I believe it is perhaps a good time to nudge colleges and communities D1,D3,Community Colleges et al to build some golf into their repertoire. Many have but just as many others have dormant and underutilized assets that would benefit from operational, strategic and architectural thought leadership.  A blend of the Rawls Model with a touch of Common Ground would go a long way. It will take expert execution but a project and facility that can support athletics, intramural, collegiate club teams (Many with single digit players), local and staff/faculty leagues, Phys Ed instruction and the local community and First Tee is not far fetched.

[Peter Pallotta]

Vaughn -- that's what I meant by an educational opportunity, i.e. I meant that someone like *you* could prepare a presentation (ideally, in audio-visual format with a leave-behind paper copy for 'the numbers') that would serve much like Brad Klein's presentation to/for club committees did re the benefit of culling trees and restoration more generally (if I'm remembering correctly). I say that both because of your own experience/background, and because it seems to me that -- absent someone like Mr. Rawls, who brought both the vision & the finances -- no one *inside* those D1, D3, or community colleges would have either the clout or the vision to 'nudge' his/her colleagues in a new direction.  It's just a (semi-educated) guess, but I think that the 'new model' you're suggesting has to be provided by someone from *outside* the institutional setting. Then, with any luck, some high-hat from the inside will co-opt that vision and rationale and make out like it was his/hers all along...
Peter   

[jeffwarne]

I'd say she ought to be thinking about an academic fit first, unless she plans on becoming a touring pro.   

While academics are important, to a passionate golfer, I'd say her questions have great merit.
Golf is a HUGE part of a passionate golfer's life, and there are MANY schools that will prepare one "academically" within a persons's skill set.
I could argue that the golf portion may be quite a bit more valuable both in terms of satisfaction, self esteem, academic focus and priorities, and potential business contacts.
To say nothing of future golf or other athletic business opportunities.


Imagine the hireability of a low handicap female College graduate with a business degree from a College in line with her academic abilities(whatever they are). Time spent researching golf courses and architecture or perhaps playing evening/afternoon rounds with well connected alumni and business people at her chosen college golf course, as opposed to (perhaps) dealing with the inevitable team/coach politics and pressure of team play in an individual sport-driving hundreds of miles travelling to play good to mediocre golf courses in bad weather on good-mediocre courses against other good-mediocre players. Time that certainly could be better spent with less (or at least more carefully chosen) travel on local quality golf, academics and networking.


I'd say she's on a great track-one that more should consider.

Kudos and good luck to her

[V_Halyard]

Vaughn -- that's what I meant by an educational opportunity, i.e. I meant that someone like *you* could prepare a presentation (ideally, in audio-visual format with a leave-behind paper copy for 'the numbers') that would serve much like Brad Klein's presentation to/for club committees did re the benefit of culling trees and restoration more generally (if I'm remembering correctly). I say that both because of your own experience/background, and because it seems to me that -- absent someone like Mr. Rawls, who brought both the vision & the finances -- no one *inside* those D1, D3, or community colleges would have either the clout or the vision to 'nudge' his/her colleagues in a new direction.  It's just a (semi-educated) guess, but I think that the 'new model' you're suggesting has to be provided by someone from *outside* the institutional setting. Then, with any luck, some high-hat from the inside will co-opt that vision and rationale and make out like it was his/hers all along...
Peter   

The has thought crossed my mind... A GCA confab would make it that much more impactful!

[Sean_A]

At least for public university courses, its a fine line between servicing students, alumni, potential students, donors, golf teams and the public at large all while keeping the product well presented, affordable, very PC (not a party hearty place for alumni to sleeze it up during football weekends) and not a drain on the university budget.  I haven't played that many university courses, but I think in the end, most are compelled to pay the bills by serving the public at large probably a bit more than they would like...which isn't necessarily a negative from a university marketing PoV...assuming the course actually shines bright enough to leave a good impression of the university.  However, I suspect much of this public access isn't focused to enhance the rep of the university...its treated more as pay and play.  So yes, maybe universities could do more to create an asset which helps drive the business end of the school.  The danger is these courses can then lose their university identity (less students and more suits!) and seem more tinnie corporate than educational. 

Ciao

[Ryan Hillenbrand]

Vaugh - hoping that this is neither too far afield nor putting words in your mouth, but I think you're asking about universities making their golf operations more a part (if only a very small part) of their core business -- but this at a time when, at many universities I know of, even the traditional undergraduate liberal arts program is no longer seen as part of the core business. Instead, it's about (the money that comes from, eg) foreign graduate-student recruitment; business-industry partnerships; high-tech/Big Data research & commercialization; and start-up ecosystems and accelerators.
Which is to say: on the one hand, the possibilities you're raising might be so outside the current approach/business model as to never get a hearing; but on the other, your timing on this 're-definition' might be impeccable, with universities never before being as open as they are now to seeing/using their golf courses as strategic assets.
Peter

The mission statement for The Rawls Course at Texas Tech was all about that.


The donor, Jerry Rawls, actually wasn't that big of a golfer; he was an mechanical engineering major who got into the chip business at the right time.  After undergrad work at Texas Tech he went to grad school at Purdue, if I remember correctly, and he said that one of the things that led him to business success afterward was playing golf at the university course there, and the opportunity it presented him to mingle with professors and various alums and learn from them.  He thought that just like football games, a good university golf course would bring alums back to campus, and that would be of benefit to current students.


So he donated $8m for an on-campus golf course, separately from the $25m he donated to the business school.

I've had some really good clients . . . even the ones that aren't so well known.

Thanks Tom. that is the crux of, and the intended hopeful pathway for my thread.As Peter, Jake and you have so aptly pointed out, I believe it is perhaps a good time to nudge colleges and communities D1,D3,Community Colleges et al to build some golf into their repertoire. Many have but just as many others have dormant and underutilized assets that would benefit from operational, strategic and architectural thought leadership.  A blend of the Rawls Model with a touch of Common Ground would go a long way. It will take expert execution but a project and facility that can support athletics, intramural, collegiate club teams (Many with single digit players), local and staff/faculty leagues, Phys Ed instruction and the local community and First Tee is not far fetched.

Vaughn,


You may be interested in a project we’re working on here in St. Louis. Normandie golf club was a former private club that folded and went public in the early 80s. A 1901 Foulis that claims to be oldest continually operated course west of the Mississippi. It’s in an economically challenged yet rich golf area (next door to Norwood hills and Glen Echo) and was gifted to the University of Missouri’s St. Louis satellite campus a few years ago. Since then it’s been operating purely to not lose money.


Now we’re in the process of fundraising to renovate the course, which is a very cool layout btw, and make it a training ground for kids to learn the game, caddying and potentially agronomy. It’ll still be the university’s course, as well as the HQ for our local USGA section.  It’s going to be about a $10 million project.


Oh, and we’re also in need of a good videographer to tell our story and vision to donors.

[V_Halyard]

Vaugh - hoping that this is neither too far afield nor putting words in your mouth, but I think you're asking about universities making their golf operations more a part (if only a very small part) of their core business -- but this at a time when, at many universities I know of, even the traditional undergraduate liberal arts program is no longer seen as part of the core business. Instead, it's about (the money that comes from, eg) foreign graduate-student recruitment; business-industry partnerships; high-tech/Big Data research & commercialization; and start-up ecosystems and accelerators.
Which is to say: on the one hand, the possibilities you're raising might be so outside the current approach/business model as to never get a hearing; but on the other, your timing on this 're-definition' might be impeccable, with universities never before being as open as they are now to seeing/using their golf courses as strategic assets.
Peter

The mission statement for The Rawls Course at Texas Tech was all about that.


The donor, Jerry Rawls, actually wasn't that big of a golfer; he was an mechanical engineering major who got into the chip business at the right time.  After undergrad work at Texas Tech he went to grad school at Purdue, if I remember correctly, and he said that one of the things that led him to business success afterward was playing golf at the university course there, and the opportunity it presented him to mingle with professors and various alums and learn from them.  He thought that just like football games, a good university golf course would bring alums back to campus, and that would be of benefit to current students.


So he donated $8m for an on-campus golf course, separately from the $25m he donated to the business school.

I've had some really good clients . . . even the ones that aren't so well known.

Thanks Tom. that is the crux of, and the intended hopeful pathway for my thread.As Peter, Jake and you have so aptly pointed out, I believe it is perhaps a good time to nudge colleges and communities D1,D3,Community Colleges et al to build some golf into their repertoire. Many have but just as many others have dormant and underutilized assets that would benefit from operational, strategic and architectural thought leadership.  A blend of the Rawls Model with a touch of Common Ground would go a long way. It will take expert execution but a project and facility that can support athletics, intramural, collegiate club teams (Many with single digit players), local and staff/faculty leagues, Phys Ed instruction and the local community and First Tee is not far fetched.

Vaughn,


You may be interested in a project we’re working on here in St. Louis. Normandie golf club was a former private club that folded and went public in the early 80s. A 1901 Foulis that claims to be oldest continually operated course west of the Mississippi. It’s in an economically challenged yet rich golf area (next door to Norwood hills and Glen Echo) and was gifted to the University of Missouri’s St. Louis satellite campus a few years ago. Since then it’s been operating purely to not lose money.

Now we’re in the process of fundraising to renovate the course, which is a very cool layout btw, and make it a training ground for kids to learn the game, caddying and potentially agronomy. It’ll still be the university’s course, as well as the HQ for our local USGA section.  It’s going to be about a $10 million project.

Oh, and we’re also in need of a good videographer to tell our story and vision to donors.

Emailing You.  -v

[Jim_Kennedy]

I'd say she ought to be thinking about an academic fit first, unless she plans on becoming a touring pro.   

While academics are important, to a passionate golfer, I'd say her questions have great merit.
Golf is a HUGE part of a passionate golfer's life, and there are MANY schools that will prepare one "academically" within a persons's skill set.
I could argue that the golf portion may be quite a bit more valuable both in terms of satisfaction, self esteem, academic focus and priorities, and potential business contacts.
To say nothing of future golf or other athletic business opportunities.


Imagine the hireability of a low handicap female College graduate with a business degree from a College in line with her academic abilities(whatever they are). Time spent researching golf courses and architecture or perhaps playing evening/afternoon rounds with well connected alumni and business people at her chosen college golf course, as opposed to (perhaps) dealing with the inevitable team/coach politics and pressure of team play in an individual sport-driving hundreds of miles travelling to play good to mediocre golf courses in bad weather on good-mediocre courses against other good-mediocre players. Time that certainly could be better spent with less (or at least more carefully chosen) travel on local quality golf, academics and networking.


I'd say she's on a great track-one that more should consider.

Kudos and good luck to her

Vaughan's high school senior has already narrowed down her prospects to colleges w/access or on-campus golf courses. All things being equal academically, sure, opt for the one with the best golf fit. I don't think anyone should sacrifice the former for the latter.

[Carl Rogers]

Sewanee

[Jason Topp]

Vaughn - how do you think the University of Iowa course does on this front?  It is a classic 60's design (in both the good and bad sense of the term) on nice land that I always enjoy but would never recommend that an architecture enthusiast seek out.  It seems to me that it enhances the university but I have no idea whether it is a financial asset or liability.  At a minimum, I would think it rakes in money during football games.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()