TEPaul,
I've been an advocate of firm & fast, brownish-yellow-green playing conditions on every green committee that I've been on for the last 40 years.
As you know, I favor dictatorships at clubs.
I also see the trends in memberships.
You're a member at a club that your family has been at for generations.
Today, there are fewer and fewer members who fall into that category. Fewer and fewer members understand the history, tradition and playing conditions of their course over the last fifty years. And, that's the disconnect.
Many members are new to golf.
Many members think that what they see on TV is how their golf course should be.
I've been fighting the fight for a long, long while.
But, a revolt amongst superintendents isn't the methodology to further your cause. I know your post was tonque in cheek.
Political Correctness, the concept that the green committee should be composed of every element of the club, is one of the biggest impediments to the proper conditioning of a golf course. Most member's of the committee, when they're first appointed, simply don't get it.
Here is the problem as I see it.
The superintendent's job is partially dependent upon perceived playing and aesthetic conditions, especially relative to other golf courses.
The Superintendent KNOWS what he can and can't do to achieve the playing conditions the members want, and direct him to produce.
The members don't know what the ideal playing conditions are.
The USGA can be a great ally in educating and supporting the superintendent in identifying and implementing the ideal playing conditions.
The membership, the USGA and the Superintendent are often at odds because their goals can be different.
The key is to get all three in harmony with one another.
If you have a membership that wants green, lush conditions, it doesn't matter what the superintendent wants and what the USGA recommends.
The core issue is control of the Board and Green Committee.
You have to have knowledgeable people in positions of power.
And, they have to be there, or exert their influence over the long haul.
When a club rotates Presidents, Boards, Committee Chairs and committees every two years, it's difficult to achieve continuity, in thought, concepts, funding and conditions.
I've noticed that some clubs serve as "centers of influence", and that members visiting these clubs try to import what they've observed from them to their home club.
It's important that those special clubs "get it, and get it right, first". Then, other clubs can follow their lead.
It's hard to convince a club to undertake a tree management or tree clearing program after their members have been to Pine Valley or Augusta.
It's hard to convince a club to undertake a program where water is rationed when they've just come back from Emerald Fairways.
The real key to this process is the renounciation of what is seen on TV, which is diametrically opposed to your concepts.
TV wants lush green fairways, mowed in recognizable patterns. TV wants brilliant white sand. Blue or blue-green water. Fountains, waterfalls, rock walls and all of those things that present well to the camera's eye.
TV wants mile long tees with narrow chutes.
TV wants balls that hit the greens like darts.
TV wants, TV craves all that is bad about the ideal playing conditions at golf courses.
So, do you form your committee and forbid members to watch TV, or do you form your committee with just a few people, who are knowledgeable about the game and playing conditions ? The answer is the latter, but, you can't do that because PC dictates that you have many members from many factions on your committee.
And, even if you succeed at the committee level, you have to have a President and a Board that supports that committee.
But, whom is the Board comprised of ?
So, you see, there is no easy answer.
My way of thinking is that certain "elite GOLF clubs" have to be the leaders in this area, and that the golf magazines have to support your maintainance meld and firm & fast, brownish-yellowish-green playing conditions, and that you have to constantly remind your committee, board and members that what they see on TV is not good for their golf course.
TV has more influence over the fads that golf courses subject themselves to than almost any other factor. It's the biggest impediment to achieving the ideal maintainance meld.
End of rant
