Pat Mucci said:
"TEPaul,
You're wrong with respect to my comments about Notre Dame and Easthampton."
Pat:
Am I? I don't think so. Some time back out of the blue you asked why Notre Dame and Easthampton weren't top 100 courses. You can say now that remark has nothing to do with Coore & Crenshaw and only to do with idolators. That doesn't make much sense to me Pat.
I don't recall anyone at all saying that either Easthampton or Notre Dame were courses worthy of top 100 ranking--nobody at all--not the people you label as C&C idolators or anyone else.
So basically in that post above I gave you my feeling about why they aren't top 100 courses--plus I've never seen Notre Dame except for a bunch of photos of Coore's---and furthermore I've never said anything about Notre Dame on Golfclubatlas. And I don't remember anyone else on here saying Notre Dame was a top 100 golf course.
So where were you coming from when you asked us on this board to explain why Notre Dame and Easthampton weren't top 100 courses? You're taking shots at a bunch of people you gratuitously label as C&C idolators who aren't anything of the kind. The only earthly reason you do things like that on here, in my opinion, is to constantly attempt to make the point that various people are bashing Rees Jones and Tom Fazio and being biased towards them.
There're some people on here who don't really like the architecture of Rees Jones and Tom Fazio for a number of reasons and I really can't see why that's so hard for you to accept. People have different preferences in architecture and some happen to like the work of architects like Coore/Crenshaw, Doak and Hanse. I can't understand why you have a problem with that and I don't think many on here can either. At the very least you must admit that the architecture of C&C, Doak and Hanse is very little like the architecture of Fazio and Rees Jones. You can at least see the differences and distinction, can't you?
You said;
"C&C are extremely selective in their site/project selections, and as such, shouldn't they be held to a higher standard ?
If one "cherry picks" sites, one would expect the product to be superior. I understand, at Easthampton, that the routing was inherited."
What kind of bullshit is that that one would expect their product to be superior and your question that shouldn't they be held to a higher standard? Talk about lack of facts! What do you know about the facts of why Coore and Crenshaw took on various projects?
What do you mean by 'cherry picking' sites? Please tell me exactly what you mean or are implying by that. Tell me at least you don't mean to imply that they select sites simply so each and every one of their courses has the best chance possible of making something like the top 100. Because if you're even remotely implying that you don't have the vaguest idea about Coore and Crenshaw and what motivates them in all their project selections. It certainly can be a number of things and it certainly sounds like you don't really know much about why they probably selected the projects they've already completed.
And what's this about idolators? What's that supposed to mean? Do you have any preferences in living architects Pat? Do you have any real preferences in architecture of current architects? And if you do who are they and what are they? Are you afraid to go on the record and commit to a preference in architecture and architects? I guess most of us on here would have to say what you generally do on here is ask a hundred questions and then take people to task for answers that don't suit you for some reason.
My preferences in architects happen to be Coore & Crenshaw, Doak and Hanse. And I'm sure there'd be a number of others if I'd get out there and familiarize myself with the work of others more. I don't idolize those three either, I just really like most of the work they do more than I like the work of anyone else I've seen. That's no idolatary in my book---that's nothing more than architectural preference!
What's your preferences in current architects and architecture Pat? Why don't YOU answer THAT quesiton for a change and go on the record instead of just asking everyone else questions?
Commit to a statement of your preferences for a change. Or are you concerned that someone is going to accuse you of being an idolator? And shitcan, at least for a little while, all the questions about what everyone else thinks!
Matter of fact, when some of those you accuse of being Coore/Crenshaw, Doak and Hanse idolators say nice things about the product of Tom Fazio and Rees you don't seem to even notice or acknowledge that or you're oddly silent on that FACT. Why is that?