Just saw this thread and appreciate the discussion that has ensued. I do want to respond to a few comments:
Right off the bat, the primary point of the blog entry is the re-direction of golf course architecture to a more genuine form (in my opinion), not to extol the misfortunes of people losing their jobs in this low point of the economy.
Pretty callous to give thanks to folks losing their jobs; it smacks of condescension and arrogance in its most extreme form.
George: Do you really think that I am giving thanks for people losing their jobs? Come on! I was also around in the early 1990's and lost my job twice due to that recession. You are jumping into a sensitive subject that I am not really referring to (but have first-hand experience that is on the forefront of my mind today). I am just discussing GOLF ARCHITECTURE, nothing else. Please don't read into it too much.
Charlie: Thanks for your input. Let me respond:
"Reason #1: A Far Overdue Contraction of Golf Courses"
Many golf courses have already closed in the past few years to be turned into purely residential developments because of the over-construction of golf in a particular area. That trend will continue. Again, I am sorry about job losses and this is not the place to discuss that. My blog and GCA are places to discuss golf architecture.
"Reason #2: A Downsizing of Conditioning"
Conditioning is a bit of a loaded term. Nobody likes bad conditioning, but many disagree on what constitutes good or bad conditioning.
We can discuss the definition of conditioning all day long, so I won't get into that too much, but the bottom line I was making is that we as an industry have put too much emphasis on perfect conditioning. That costs money and the costs are passed on to the golfer.
"Reason #3: Strategy, Not Aesthetics"
If courses can't get built, I don't quite understand how strategic courses can get built.
At some point more courses will get built, but courses will always be renovated. Nonetheless, the point I am making is that there are too many waterfalls, stone walls, massive bunkers, and wall-to-wall irrigation systems in an effort to create a pretty picture. Again, that costs money and drives up costs for all. If we just focus on the elements that make the game fun, not only will the game be more fun and strategic, but also more affordable.
"Reason #4: Allow Golf to be the Driving Force in a Golf Course"
This has been all over the place in the past, I don't see how it will be terribly different in the future. There will probably just be less of every type of course built (muni, stand-alone, resort, housing etc.) in roughly equal proportions with housing possibly taking the biggest hit.
Again, not to be an ass (there is much to be said for each point in its favor) but I think it's worthwhile to question the given points especially considering the severity of the economic problems.
Charlie
Charlie: This must be different in the future or we will repeat the same mistakes we have made in the most recent past. I can't tell you if, but hopefully that will happen.
I think if everyone goes back and reads the whole blog, they will see that the focus is on golf and not on people losing their jobs being a good thing.