University of Michigan GC vs. Ohio State University GC

[Jeff Schley]

In honor of today's "The Game", these courses have impressive pedigree.  Mackenzie, Maxwell and a Nicklaus restoration speaks for itself.  I haven't played either, so head to head which one wins in this head to head matchup? Consider whatever you want, sort of like the GM survey where you ask the enlightened and you expect enlightened opinions. 

[Lou_Duran]

Can't help you with the match play as I've never seen the UoM GC.  I probably have played Scarlet over 500 times, but only once since the Nicklaus renovation.


I can tell you that during my time in Columbus, the Michigan course was not considered in the same light as its football team.  People I knew who played it thought it was a short, fun course, far from being of championship quality.  This is probably reflected in the number of Div. I NCAA championships hosted there: one to Scarlet's 10.


Scarlet suffers from four or five things.  1) it is a very demanding course even when it was under 7200 yards before the Nicklaus renovation; 2) conditioning was well below that of the private courses in the area as it is (or was when I was a student there) maintained by the Maintenance Dept. of the university and the approach seemed similar to that in taking care of buildings, green areas, and other infrastructure- tired and rough around the edges; 3) the golf operations are/were led by the Athletic Dept. and the approach was military in nature and at times adversarial with staff, maintenance, and students; 4) similar to Long Island, it is compared with some outstanding, well-maintained, lightly played private clubs (MV, Scioto, Golf Club, Double Eagle) nearby; 5) it is not a particularly attractive course, bounded on three sides by busy four-lane city streets.


Re: the Nicklaus renovation, based on reports from people on this site, I hadn't made a point to see the course since a visit when it was being cleared and much of the rough shaping had been finished.  My expectations, admittedly, were low, but I think that the removal of hundreds of trash trees greatly improved the course.  I didn't find the bunkers too deep or penal, nor the addition of back tees a problem- I played it around 6800+ yards and it felt pretty much like the old Scarlet, though with wider vistas and freedom of play.


I found that the biggest complaint, the re-routing of the last third of the par 5 #4, to be without merit.  Though it did create a walk-back to the tee for #5, a strong par 3, the original green site with its bunkering scheme and often poor condition due to its sheltered location, made this one of the lesser holes IMO.  The Nicklaus re-siting of the green makes for a more demanding lay-up and approach shots, bringing in part of the lake into play.  There is typically a wait for the fifth green to clear, so the longer walk-back, leaving the bag halfway to the green, does not interrupt the routing or the flow of the round.


IMO, Scarlet is a vastly underrated course.  Would it not be for the way it is operated and the heavy use, I'd be happy finishing my playing days there.


Oh, and the football appears to be pretty good too!
   

[Joe Bausch]

I’ve not played the Buckeye course.  But I have played the U of M course a few years ago.  It was fun. 

Photo album:

http://www80.homepage.villanova.edu/joseph.bausch/images/albums/UMichGC/index.html

[Tommy Williamsen]

I've played both. Scarlet wins as the better tournament course but Michigan is more fun and has more interesting terrain. I'd love to see a little bunker work at the course.

[Peter Flory]

I’ve not played the Buckeye course.  But I have played the U of M course a few years ago.  It was fun. 

Photo album:

http://www80.homepage.villanova.edu/joseph.bausch/images/albums/UMichGC/index.html

Great pics.  The course was looking good that day. 

If they ever truly restore it, I would love to see the current 18th hole changed back to its original form.  I've always found that hole to be awkward with the layup required off the tee somewhere between a driver and a 3 wood.  Originally, that hole had a creek in front of the green (instead of a massive pond) and the fairway bunker was much further right and not so much in the way. 


I feel like the rest of the holes are pretty close to their original intent. 

[Mike Schott]

I’ve not played the Buckeye course.  But I have played the U of M course a few years ago.  It was fun. 

Photo album:

http://www80.homepage.villanova.edu/joseph.bausch/images/albums/UMichGC/index.html

Great pics.  The course was looking good that day. 

If they ever truly restore it, I would love to see the current 18th hole changed back to its original form.  I've always found that hole to be awkward with the layup required off the tee somewhere between a driver and a 3 wood.  Originally, that hole had a creek in front of the green (instead of a massive pond) and the fairway bunker was much further right and not so much in the way. 


I feel like the rest of the holes are pretty close to their original intent.

You must be a very long hitter if that pond comes in play off the tee. Yes it’s downhill but   it must be 350 yards from the back tees to the water.

[Sean_A]

I was thinking the same thing. If a guy is long enough to reach the water, then laying up to hit a short iron in is little hardship. Although, the pond is very ugly and for this reason I would like the creek restored... assuming water is necessary. For all I know, the pond may be better because of constant flooding.

Happy Hockey

[Peter Flory]

I'm not a big hitter for my handicap.  If you split the fairway left of the fairway trap, it is about 307 to reach the rough from the middle of the back tee box (unless you count the tee box for 11, which maybe they use for this hole in tournament play?).  And that is with a 50 foot elevation drop.

But the real issue is that the fairway is only 20 yards wide in the 260 to 292 range because of the fairway bunker.  In the neck, the tree can still block off portions of the green from there. If you try to carry the fairway bunker off the tee, it is a 295 yard carry to reach the fairway over it.  But if you do that, you only have a 22-28 yard window to stop your tee shot. 

If you take a 3-wood or hybrid off the tee to layup short of the fairway trap (say a 260 shot down the hill), then you have about 200 left on your approach. 

Maybe moving the fairway bunker to the original location would be enough to make this less awkward.  Notice also that the tree planting and encroachment has narrowed the hole. 

[Mike Schott]

No question that U of M would benefit from a massive tree removal project. They’ve removed some but in particular holes like 16, 17 and 18 would benefit.


To keep to the OT, I’ve not played the OSU courses but have always enjoyed the U of M course, in particular the short par 4’s and the one shot holes. 14 and 15 are gems.

[Sean_A]

Peter

I can't say I disagree with you.  The 18th to me is an unsatisfying finish.  In fact, 15-18 is to me the weak link of the course, not least because of poorly placed trees. 

That said, UofM has a lot of lovely holes and a very good set of greens...not surprisingly.  Yet somehow, I find it difficult to see the course as anything but good when it should be special.  Of course, its a great deal for me to play as alumnus so I would prefer to play there than most anywhere else around Ann Arbor/Detroit.

Happy Hockey

[Peter Flory]

I just saw in a twitter discussion that DeVries suggested that the pond on 18 can technically be removed, but would have to be at a later time. 

[JWinick]

Even though I (sadly) love the football program and graduated there, it drives me nuts that they use the golf course for parking.  Sure, they don't park on the greens, but still.    They didn't use it Saturday because it was too late in the year, but I hate to see that.  Can anyone comment on the damage done to a golf course by parking cars?

Oh, forgot to add, Michigan is superior to Ohio State in every single area except football.   

[BHoover]

While in law school, I played the Scarlet course several times each week, but especially on football Saturday because the course was practically empty. The Nicklaus renovation was problematic for me, not so much because of what he did to the course, but because it meant the course was closed my third year of law school when I could have played golf all the time after having accepted a job offer.

I played the renovated version several times and, although difficult, I still enjoyed my rounds there. Also, Ohio State most certainly did not use its golf courses for parking.

[Jeff Schley]

Even though I (sadly) love the football program and graduated there, it drives me nuts that they use the golf course for parking.  Sure, they don't park on the greens, but still.    They didn't use it Saturday because it was too late in the year, but I hate to see that.  Can anyone comment on the damage done to a golf course by parking cars?

Oh, forgot to add, Michigan is superior to Ohio State in every single area except football.

Brookside GC which is 36 holes around the Rose Bowl.  They protect tees/greens, but it doesn't save some of the area from the car/truck traffic wear and tear.  Luckily there isn't a lot of rain there, but when any precipitation falls you can imagine the effect. I'm told they do adjust their parking plan if there is or are expecting rain as best they can.