Mike and Andy,
In 1910, building architecture and other fields had been clearly established along with professional standards. In contrast, golf had usually be designed and built by the clubs themselves, perhaps, dating back to Old Tom Morris, with a pro or the best golfer in the club laying it out and even constructing it. In America, golf had only started 20-25 years earlier and most courses were pretty rudimentary. I don’t think the sophisticated business model had developed for golf course architecture yet.
My take is that MCC probably candidly discussed the Barker (professional) Model and the CBM (sportsman) model before deciding. It certainly wasn't taken lightly. We don't know who thought what, but I still believe that then as now, relationships get the job. CBM came in as a friend of Griscom, and Barker came in “on the account” of Connell, who was not a MCC guy, he was the developer. I always thought that MCC going out of its way to mention “on the account of Connell” was a hint that they didn’t ever plan on using him – he just wasn’t their guy and they obviously DID have some kind of problem with him, or more accurately, just liked CBM better. Even with well qualified golf course architects today, Fazio loses to Nicklaus, etc. And, right now, Brauer has the only job in America despite a bazillion guys wanting it, etc., etc. clearly demonstrating that in some cases, gca selections go beyond rational explanation, at least from the outside!
And I am not speculating about this. That is what they did. They brought in CBM because of Griscom and his reputation and stayed with him. Not only do MCC records confirm this, but CBM, Whigham, Far and Sure, and others said it.
If they were going to use the best, according to the theory of some, then it makes sense that they used CBM as a guide and one of their best men on site day to day.
It seems to me that they were smart enough to cover themselves all along the way with quality people for golf, development, construction, etc and DID use the best in CBM – the father of American golf course architecture, the designer of what has been publicized as the greatest course in America, and friends to the rich and famous of MCC – was clearly the best they had to choose from. While Barker did have some work under his belt, CBM was clearly the crème de la crème in golf course architecture at the time. And, in hiring Pickering for Construction, they continued the “use the best” trend.
In essence the selection of Hugh Wilson would:
• Emulate the CBM/NGLA model, which was THE trend/influence at the time, and even if it wasn't, was probably suggested by CBM who was Griscom's friend – vs using a professional designer. Now, this IS speculation, but if the pros were first allowed in the clubhouse for the US Open in 1920, the idea of using an amateur vs. a pro might have been more appealing in those times.
• Use the “Father of American Golf Course Architecture” – the best reputation in America for design (among a few others attempting it - Barker and Travis to name two)
• Use CBM on as needed basis to steer them the right direction.
• Use Pickering, turf guys, etc. throughout construction to avoid mistakes.
The most important point to remember is that most gca's of the time DID route a course in a day and mabye provide a bunkering plan and then make one or two site visits. Look at the record!
CBM’s services consisted of a day on site in June, A two day meeting in March, and another follow up day in April after they have routed and incorporated his suggestions. In essence, they got about the same service from CBM as they would from Barker or ANY OTHER professional golf course architect of the time.
IMHO, MCC did decide to use the best, and they followed a pattern that was established at that time for building a quality golf cousre.