To offer the inverse (or converse, what have you) of the Sandpines thread, and building off the idea that Sandpines is often pointed to as the example of a great site that was "wasted" in the opinions of some.
As more and more world-class courses are being built now than were ever being built in the dark ages, or even, arguably, the 90s...more attention seems to be turning to the site on which a course is to be built. Not that this was overlooked before, but in the information age, you and I and 1500 of my GCA compatriots are privy to the information that a little parcel of Long Island is being worked on by Mr's Doak and Nicklaus...information that would not have travelled in the same way as 20 years ago.
With this comes the unavoidable "hype" factor that plays into our initial impressions of courses.
We follow the ever-expanding portfolios of the architects we love, and we wonder not only where they're going to find the next Sand Hills or Bandon, but what they're going to do with it. And sometimes in those portfolios, a site or project pops up that makes us scratch our heads.
We talk all the time about missed opportunities, and we talk all the time about courses that are great built on land that is not, but I am specifically curious about a larger process at work on the opposite side of the coin - a piece of land that was known (due to city proximity, a well publicized land reclamation project or development, or any other reason) and followed by many, but not really considered good land for golf. On this appointed land, I am wondering what would be considered the biggest "pleasant surprise". Has any notable architect taken land that onlookers panned, and turned it into a great course? I'm talking about specifically a process where the architect was ridiculed, questioned, and lampooned along the way - the Spruce Goose of golf courses. But were there any Spruce Geese that actually ended up flying further than a few hundred feet?
I think in a world where land is at a premium, it's easy to dismiss a less-than-perfect use of it, like Sandpines or SilverRock in La Quinta, and a course like Sebonack seems destined for a sink-or-swim fate given it's neighborhood...but what about the courses that would be easily given a pass under the guise of "hey, he did what he could with what they gave him"?
Are there any world class courses that a notable architect was pretty much laughed at for starting, and then criticism was silenced on opening day when it was received with a chorus of wow and "well damn, we were wrong - nice work"
As I was not a follower of the art until the last couple of years, I have no idea what anyone said when C&C first said they'd build in Nebraska, or when Fazio and Wynn conspired in a dark room to build a high rollers course in the desert.
Anyone have interesting stories to relate or examples to cite? Without firsthand knowledge, I'd have to think that Shadow Creek might be the finest example of a course that people thought was crazy to build on land that the 19th century US government might not even have considered for an Indian Reservation, that came out and won everyone over solely on the merits of it's design (well, in this case, its opulence too).
Sorry, it's a bit of a roundabout post/question, but the questions are in there, and as I'm heading to the home of everything artificial (Vegas) tomorrow, it's on my mind.