There is nothing wrong with Medinah. It is a fine course and for any one of us would be a challenge. The problem lies with advancement. Everything has become TOO good. The players are too good, the equipment is too good, and the courses maintenance is too good.
Contrast this PGA to the PGAs of the late 1940s. The players had 2 or 3 woods, irons of 1-9 or 2-9, 2 wedges, and a putter. First the ball was not only shorter, but also prone to be inconsistent. Thus each ball was more likely to behave differently than the prior. Today's ball length is only part of the issue. It is so consistent that the manufacturing variables become almost non-existent to even Tiger Woods. As for the clubs, not only were the heads smaller and the misses worse off. But also, the players were not able to finely tune a set as they can today. Even the pros had off-the-rack clubs, which were then adjusted by the feel only. Finally, when a wood broke an exact replica could not be immediately produced. It could take years for a player to replace a lost or broken driver.
Next, the grass and sand is now so perfectly groomed that the player knows almost exactly how the ball will react if that player makes the intended stroke. This is especially true on the greens. The ball rolls so perfectly during a pro tournament that 8 and 10 footers have become the equivalent of 3 and 4 footers.
All of this results in every pro playing with extreme confidence. There is no fear of a slight miss-hit. There is no fear of a bumpy putt. There is no fear of the sand being too hard, too soft, or too shallow. There is no fear of the ball doing anything funny or unusual.
The ironic thing is that most courses are groomed into ideal conditions for the perfect golfers, yet the casual golfers have to play with imperfect conditions and with equipment which is not ideally suited to that person.
We can not undo technology, or force professionals to play with equipment which is imperfect. However, we can force professionals to play with equipment which is not quite so forgiving: v-grooves, driver heads no bigger then the typical persimmon heads from 30 years ago, and a limit of maximum loft. Also, perhaps a limit on the size of the putter head. Finally, perhaps we have finally reached the point where a set needs to be limited to 10 or 8 clubs. When a professional can carry 2 drivers and 3 wedges, there are too many clubs in the bag. Also, limiting a set to 8 or 10 would require more shot making, even with all the other perfect conditions.
Second, although a course can not be intentionally tricked-up, it does lead one to wonder why they try to make a course so difficult, while also making the conditions unusually perfect. Would it not be better to present the course in the same manner as that course would be presented for say a member-guest weekend tournament? With the only exceptions being to just try to dry out the course more so for the majors and to just let the rough grow and get the greens to the maximum speed possible under normal maintenance.
Why should the fairways be unusually perfect? Why is the rough being "fluffed"? I think I do know one argument for giving the best players the best conditions. I believe that we here in America do not like luck to be a factor. However, the purpose of keeping luck as a factor is not just for sake of the lucky and unlucky bounces and lies, but rather as another test of each player's perseverance.
With more exacting equipment, less “specialty clubs”, and more typical golf course maintenance, these perfectly fine turned golfers would be forced to play a greater variety of shots, and the professional game would receive an injection of excitement.