While I'm excited to see how Green goes about changing things, the reporting on this has been disappointing and agenda driven. As mentioned above, the project is a renovation, not a restoration, despite many outlets characterizing as a restoration. There are no Ross design plans available and he re-designed the course after Bendelow. While most outlets are inferring Rees moved away from Ross' design here, I haven't seen anyone mention it was Cobb who did most if not all of that with his re-design in the 1960's. Rees was asked to work on the course in the early 1990's when Tom Cousins made the effort to to revitalize the course and surrounding area that had been in significant decline for decades. Rees was asked to create a competitive tour venue, restore original intent features, yet most importantly provide a golf course centered around the renewal of the surrounding community. Rees brought back the peninsula green that Tom Bendelow (original architect) had in play before Ross did his re-design and Rees left the routing intact except for the Seventeenth fairway. Bradley Klein described Rees’ work as “magical” and “simply stunning” while director of golf Jim Gerber remarked, Rees “left his mark here by not leaving his mark.”
[/color]I find it sad and a bit lazy for some in the media to constantly rely on this vilification of the Joneses. At East Lake, Rees was a big part of its revitalization, which ended up working out by the way. Sure there are those who don't like the course and his work to it, which is fine. But claiming or even inferring he eliminated original Ross or other work here and Green is returning it to what is was before is incorrect. Like Rees, Green will need to impart his own interpretation of Bendelow/Ross/Cobb(?), which I'm sure will be great, and celebrated, until decades later when we all decide to pretend we always hated it. [/size]