Golf is dying: "lost 5 million players in the last decade... another 5 million will quit in the next

[WVP]

[quote name='borker' timestamp='1403245075' post='9537587']
Golf is in trouble because the middle class is in trouble. Just as someone above pointed to, work hours are up, less free time is down. Not to mention golf is a disposable income type sport. It is for those that have time and extra money, but of which the middle class seems to be having less of. And not just time, but time during the DAY only. No joining a 7pm basketball league type escape. Golf requires time away from family, kid(s), work etc during prime hours. And the recession just makes it harder to rationalize that time away for 5+ hours during the day while wandering around in nice outdoors playing a game. A game that is SO hard and frustrating it needs constant attention/practice just to avoid wanting to quit.
[/quote]

The time is the biggest thing for me which is why I am usually trying to play 9 a few times a month. With 2 young boys (2 and 3) it is tough - 18 rarely happens. My playing partners stop asking me to play around this time each year since I've declined so many times by this point. However I do see in 3-4 years getting pushed out the door by my wife to take the kids golfing for 5 hours. That's what I am hedging my bets on at least...hahaha.

Money isn't a problem for me but I've done well for myself. Take a chuck out of each paycheck though and I could see 3-4 rounds a month + practice being a financial issue.

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
If golf wants to appeal to more users, you have to broadcast to those users.

Do you really think the current NBC crew entices the 18-34 year old demographic? [b]Why the hell do the announcers whisper in the booth? Why not seal the booth so you can broadcast with some freaking enthusiasm. [/b]Get people excited about golf!

Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

Golf is losing players because they only appeal to a dying (literally dying) demographic. You can't identify with a larger, younger demographic by a broadcast that caters to an older, less relevant demographic.
[/quote]

Now there's an interesting idea. They whisper, because "the booth" is usually behind the 18th green and open (just a screen)

[Yellow Jacket]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Do you really think the current NBC crew entices the 18-34 year old demographic? Why the hell do the announcers whisper in the booth? Why not seal the booth so you can broadcast with some freaking enthusiasm. Get people excited about golf!
[/quote]
I'm 18-34 and when Chris Berman and Sean McDonough are in the booth, it sounds awful.

[PostandGhost]

Here is the real issue that regulates participation in golf, it's an elite/exclusive sport like horse racing. 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own a thoroughbred race horse just like the fact that 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own golf clubs. Golf is going to be just fine.

[theothertomjones]

[quote name='From_Parts_Unknown' timestamp='1403289806' post='9540963']
Here is the real issue that regulates participation in golf, it's an elite/exclusive sport like horse racing. 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own a thoroughbred race horse just like the fact that 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own golf clubs. Golf is going to be just fine.
[/quote]

Ah, an advocate for the status quo!

[mr_divots]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403290161' post='9541013']
[quote name='From_Parts_Unknown' timestamp='1403289806' post='9540963']
Here is the real issue that regulates participation in golf, it's an elite/exclusive sport like horse racing. 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own a thoroughbred race horse just like the fact that 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own golf clubs. Golf is going to be just fine.
[/quote]

Ah, an advocate for the status quo!
[/quote]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
If golf wants to appeal to more users, you have to broadcast to those users.

Do you really think the current NBC crew entices the 18-34 year old demographic? Why the hell do the announcers whisper in the booth? Why not seal the booth so you can broadcast with some freaking enthusiasm. Get people excited about golf!

Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

Golf is losing players because they only appeal to a dying (literally dying) demographic. You can't identify with a larger, younger demographic by a broadcast that caters to an older, less relevant demographic.
[/quote]
Soon as you have the plan to get young people into liveable middle class wages, we'll be saved. You can't pander to those without the means to do something.
(And ironically, you got all salty about your fathers day on course experience when you didn't even pay for your kid) Entitlement? Yes.

And if you don't care about a Donald Ross course....well.....why were certain artists famous? Or architects of buildings? Or.... they are generally considered the finest tests of golf around and designed well before any of the modern earth equipment. They're masterpieces of engineering and artistry.
But eff it, Happy Gilmore everything. Nuance and history are for squares.
#instantgratificationgeneration

[theothertomjones]

[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1403291618' post='9541165']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403290161' post='9541013']
[quote name='From_Parts_Unknown' timestamp='1403289806' post='9540963']
Here is the real issue that regulates participation in golf, it's an elite/exclusive sport like horse racing. 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own a thoroughbred race horse just like the fact that 40 million people in the USA shouldn't own golf clubs. Golf is going to be just fine.
[/quote]

Ah, an advocate for the status quo!
[/quote]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
If golf wants to appeal to more users, you have to broadcast to those users.

Do you really think the current NBC crew entices the 18-34 year old demographic? Why the hell do the announcers whisper in the booth? Why not seal the booth so you can broadcast with some freaking enthusiasm. Get people excited about golf!

Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

Golf is losing players because they only appeal to a dying (literally dying) demographic. You can't identify with a larger, younger demographic by a broadcast that caters to an older, less relevant demographic.
[/quote]
Soon as you have the plan to get young people into liveable middle class wages, we'll be saved. You can't pander to those without the means to do something.
(And ironically, you got all salty about your fathers day on course experience when you didn't even pay for your kid) Entitlement? Yes.

And if you don't care about a Donald Ross course....well.....why were certain artists famous? Or architects of buildings? Or.... they are generally considered the finest tests of golf around and designed well before any of the modern earth equipment. They're masterpieces of engineering and artistry.
But eff it, Happy Gilmore everything. Nuance and history are for squares.
#instantgratificationgeneration
[/quote]


So lets clear things up.

1. It wasn't my son; it was my best friends son. The course didnt ask us to pay for a 5 year old, if they did I would have gladly paid.

2. I grew up with little more than nothing. I spent 6 years in the military, have 10 years of federal service, worked for 4 fortune 100's, 2 federal agencies, and one of the top public universities in this country all while earning my BS and MS degrees from some of the top universities in this country, not bs diploma mills. I also own my own consulting firm, I have a 2nd degree black belt and teach martial arts in my volunteer time, have 6 IT certifications, 2 security clearances, and am starting law school this fall. I'm in my 30's and can barely remember my 20's, much less high school. My success has come at an extraordinary cost, and not just the $70K in student loans I have.

Let me be very clear. I am not entitled to a damn thing. Ive earned everything I have and enjoy.

If you read carefully, Im actually agreeing with your points. Yes, the middle class is devastated and shrinking, as such so are what used to be the largest demographics golf vendors and golf courses had. I hate the status quo.

For some reason golf likes to align itself with exclusivity and wealth, as if that somehow entitles the rich to dictate the culture of the game, and perhaps it has but look where that has led...

As someone who has been looked down upon his whole life, even told that "you dont have what it takes to [insert dream here]" I categorically reject this premise. Ive been proving people wrong my entire life, and I damn well have earned both the right and the voice to say F off to anyone who dares label me as entitled.

And in my experience I also understand that sometimes people misread and make mistakes, myself included, and for that I forgive you.


[drops mic and exits stage left]

[ctmason_98]

I'd say this thread "turned" but....it sort of started out this way.

[theothertomjones]

Eh, it seems a lot of people care about golf, just in different ways I suppose.

[duffer987]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']

Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.

[theothertomjones]

[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403297016' post='9541975']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.
[/quote]

No, this is the problem.

Oh Pinehurst #2. OoOOoOOooo am I supposed to bow down to a statue before I enter? Do I need to wear a sacred glove while I play?

The only thing you are doing is trumping up prestige by blowing smoke up someones a**. And with that prestige that YOU are creating by getting all googlie-eyed over a guy who built a golf course, and by extension the golf course itself, you're actually CREATING the market value for the owners of the course. Consequently, this leads to $400/round prices. Congrats for shooting yourself in the foot.

Is Lambeau Field special? Sure. Is Fenway Park iconic? Yes.

Is it because of the person who built it? Nope.

Telling me that Nicklaus built a course doesn't entice me to play it. The courses amenities are. Its staff is. Its community will. Its culture helps. Its cost is a factor. Not its architect.

[ctmason_98]

[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403297016' post='9541975']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.
[/quote]

I had to look up what Anfield was...LOL!

I don't think it's fair to say it diminishes what someone says about the rest of the game...because would we not agree that to the majority of the golfing public, the course designer doesn't matter?

[duffer987]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403297846' post='9542109']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403297016' post='9541975']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.
[/quote]

No, this is the problem.

Oh Pinehurst #2. OoOOoOOooo am I supposed to bow down to a statue before I enter? Do I need to wear a sacred glove while I play?

The only thing you are doing is trumping up prestige by blowing smoke up someones a**. And with that prestige that YOU are creating by getting all googlie-eyed over a guy who built a golf course, and by extension the golf course itself, you're actually CREATING the market value for the owners of the course. Consequently, this leads to $400/round prices. Congrats for shooting yourself in the foot.

Is Lambeau Field special? Sure. Is Fenway Park iconic? Yes.

Is it because of the person who built it? Nope.

Telling me that Nicklaus built a course doesn't entice me to play it. The courses amenities are. Its staff is. Its community will. Its culture helps. Its cost is a factor. Not its architect.
[/quote]

Well sure a Nicklaus course doesn't instill much whoop-de-doo in me either. I certainly wasn't putting down X pounds to play his course at Gleneagles or that keen anywhere else. And I can quite simply get my Donald Ross kick for $20 instead of $400.

Anyways I don't understand the hostility towards what is recognized as one of America's great golf courses? Just because the broadcasters made mention of it? Do you like art? Architecture? Music? Sure the people who create these things are just people like you or me, but the good ones create these neat objects that have a certain style or feeling that admirers who appreciate what they have created, seek out. A golf course can be the same as those things. Does it have to be to everyone? Certainly not, but I do not see how dismissing it outright helps the game.

Pinehurst has created a certain USP around Ross, Stewart, and the traditions of the game, so it makes sense they were promoting that. I am sure when the US Open goes to Chambers Bay and Erin Hills, they will emphasize something else.

[quote name='ctmason_98']
I had to look up what Anfield was...LOL!

I don't think it's fair to say it diminishes what someone says about the rest of the game...because would we not agree that to the majority of the golfing public, the course designer doesn't matter?
[/quote]

In as much as the poster was being deliberately obtuse, or missing the mark in equating a golf course architect with a multinational naming a stadium, it does.
Agreed, as I said in my post, I do concur that who built a course is not going to be the #1 thing the golfing public thinks of.

[theothertomjones]

[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403304708' post='9542853']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403297846' post='9542109']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403297016' post='9541975']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.
[/quote]

No, this is the problem.

Oh Pinehurst #2. OoOOoOOooo am I supposed to bow down to a statue before I enter? Do I need to wear a sacred glove while I play?

The only thing you are doing is trumping up prestige by blowing smoke up someones a**. And with that prestige that YOU are creating by getting all googlie-eyed over a guy who built a golf course, and by extension the golf course itself, you're actually CREATING the market value for the owners of the course. Consequently, this leads to $400/round prices. Congrats for shooting yourself in the foot.

Is Lambeau Field special? Sure. Is Fenway Park iconic? Yes.

Is it because of the person who built it? Nope.

Telling me that Nicklaus built a course doesn't entice me to play it. The courses amenities are. Its staff is. Its community will. Its culture helps. Its cost is a factor. Not its architect.
[/quote]

Well sure a Nicklaus course doesn't instill much whoop-de-doo in me either. I certainly wasn't putting down X pounds to play his course at Gleneagles or that keen anywhere else. And I can quite simply get my Donald Ross kick for $20 instead of $400.

Anyways I don't understand the hostility towards what is recognized as one of America's great golf courses? Just because the broadcasters made mention of it? Do you like art? Architecture? Music? Sure the people who create these things are just people like you or me, but the good ones create these neat objects that have a certain style or feeling that admirers who appreciate what they have created, seek out. A golf course can be the same as those things. Does it have to be to everyone? Certainly not, but I do not see how dismissing it outright helps the game.

Pinehurst has created a certain USP around Ross, Stewart, and the traditions of the game, so it makes sense they were promoting that. I am sure when the US Open goes to Chambers Bay and Erin Hills, they will emphasize something else.

[quote name='ctmason_98']
I had to look up what Anfield was...LOL!

I don't think it's fair to say it diminishes what someone says about the rest of the game...because would we not agree that to the majority of the golfing public, the course designer doesn't matter?
[/quote]

In as much as the poster was being deliberately obtuse, or missing the mark in equating a golf course architect with a multinational naming a stadium, it does.
Agreed, as I said in my post, I do concur that who built a course is not going to be the #1 thing the golfing public thinks of.
[/quote]

I'm from the area (NC). The Sandhills just aren't as special as people make them out to be.

[curitiba]

I respect the architect but couldnt care less in terms of playing golf. Every golf course should have 1-3 signature holes and the course should be enjoyable.

That Pinehurst crap I saw on tv was great for the PROS, but terrible for amateur golfers.

Here in Brazil we have an architect who has built nearly 10 golf courses. Like a Craft Show, seen one, seen them all! In other words, same s***, different Pile!

The Jack Nicklaus course in Argentina was similar to Glen Abbey in Canada.

In all honesty, the only courses that I would feel the mystic are St Andrews, Pebble Beach, Sawgrass and Augusta.

[gtnike]

While I certainly don't get caught up in a courses pedigree, to compare golf courses and other sports fields is laughable.

Is the field in Miami shorter than the one in green bay? Is there a dog leg left to the end zone in Denver? Even baseball which has some latitude in outfield dimensions still has 90 ft base paths.

Golf is unique, no 2 holes play exactly the same. Even if you had 2 identical holes you could have different pin placements. Could you imagine if the NBA changed the goal height between qaurters?

[marmooskapaul]

I don't know who built any of the courses I play??? lol
Paul

[WVP]

[quote name='curitiba' timestamp='1403361938' post='9545817']
I respect the architect but couldnt care less in terms of playing golf. Every golf course should have 1-3 signature holes and the course should be enjoyable.

That Pinehurst crap I saw on tv was great for the PROS, but terrible for amateur golfers.

Here in Brazil we have an architect who has built nearly 10 golf courses. Like a Craft Show, seen one, seen them all! In other words, same s***, different Pile!

The Jack Nicklaus course in Argentina was similar to Glen Abbey in Canada.

[b]In all honesty, the only courses that I would feel the mystic are St Andrews, Pebble Beach, Sawgrass and Augusta.[/b]
[/quote]

Maybe some more but I agree with the sentiment. Just played a Donald Ross course this week and it was a nice course but nothing that made me stop and admire the course design.

[TJCDAS]

For slow players the pace of play on a golf course is perfect, so the people leaving will players that play ready golf, don't move slowly when walking, don't mark every time putting......................play will be slower.

[Startzel]

[quote name='Auditor_Kevin' timestamp='1402947879' post='9508305']
A couple infographics that help detail why guys play less golf these days.

Average hours 'worked' (working, chores and child care) has risen 5.5 hours per week, which coincidentally is probably close to the median number of hours it takes to play a weekend round of golf after factoring in getting ready, arriving a few minutes early to practice, playing the round and occasionally visiting the 19th hole for a round to settle up, then head home. That's an 11% reduction in free time per week and something has to get cut to make room for it because they haven't added more hours to a day.
[/quote]

This is a great point, but I believe one of the biggest issues is the American work week. Most adults who play golf work the 9-5 Monday through Friday type jobs. That means around 70% of the available time to play golf is taken up by work.

Only during DST can you play after work so most golfers free time is in hours where golf isn't even available.

[Startzel]

[quote name='Auditor_Kevin' timestamp='1402947879' post='9508305']
A couple infographics that help detail why guys play less golf these days.

Average hours 'worked' (working, chores and child care) has risen 5.5 hours per week, which coincidentally is probably close to the median number of hours it takes to play a weekend round of golf after factoring in getting ready, arriving a few minutes early to practice, playing the round and occasionally visiting the 19th hole for a round to settle up, then head home. That's an 11% reduction in free time per week and something has to get cut to make room for it because they haven't added more hours to a day.
[/quote]

This is a great point, but I believe one of the biggest issues is the American work week. Most adults who play golf work the 9-5 Monday through Friday type jobs. That means around 70% of the available time to play golf is taken up by work.

Only during DST can you play after work so most golfers free time is in hours where golf isn't even available.

[curitiba]

Slow play: Once the PGA plays faster, so will amateurs. In a PGA tournament, Pros play in a twosome on Saturday and Sunday. They roughly shoot a combined 140-150 shots. Please explain to me why 2 pros take 4-4.25 hours to play a round.

Wasnt it last year where Rory and Tiger played 36 holes for fun in something like 4 hours?

[Startzel]

[quote name='curitiba' timestamp='1403405632' post='9549171']
Slow play: Once the PGA plays faster, so will amateurs. In a PGA tournament, Pros play in a twosome on Saturday and Sunday. They roughly shoot a combined 140-150 shots. Please explain to me why 2 pros take 4-4.25 hours to play a round.

Wasnt it last year where Rory and Tiger played 36 holes for fun in something like 4 hours?
[/quote]

Because they're actually good enough to where they need to know if the yardage is 186 or 187 yards. It's a completely different game at their level than you and your friends playing.

[skullshot]

Figuring the yardage is simple. They take so long because there's two of them (golfer and caddie) dissecting every variable of the shot--What's the slope of the green? Do we want to land it 3 yards left and let the slope take it? What's the wind doing? What's the lie--is it a flyer? Where don't we want to hit it? Wait! The wind just shifted. Put the 7 back and take the 8. No, wait. The wind just shifted again. Let's go with a choke-down 7. No, wait . . .

[Dpavs]

The pro's do a lot of thing that take extra time. How many amateurs walk up 65 yards to look at the breaks in the green before firing the shot? (how many need to for that matter, but that's a different subject..lol) or walk around the entire green and look at the breaks from several angles before putting or discuss which club to use with their golfing partners, etc. etc. They play differently at their level and it takes more time.. in part this is because they are good enough to consider these things. That said it's getting out of hand as far as how much time is being taken and a 15 minute per hole average for a group of two or three is just not called for at any level.

I don't agree that if the pro's played faster so would amateurs... most amateurs take too much time because they simply do not know how to play ready golf, doddle after finishing a hole instead of getting to the next tee, spend too much time looking for stray balls, have 20+ handicaps yet feel they need to play the pro tees and several other habits that can make one crazy when you get behind them.

[francis89]

Honestly think a lot of it is due to Tiger not being as relevant anymore. When Tiger was dominating, all of my friends were watching golf which in return made them want to go play. I rarely hear those same friends talk about golf now.


Cost is obviously a huge factor as well, younger generation right now is coming out of college in huge amounts of debt, low paying wages, and cuts in benefits. $50 for 3 1/2 hours can be hard to justify in many cases.


I've noticed the more mid-tier country clubs in my area are also really struggling right now. The top-tier country clubs seem to be doing fine, but I think the shrinking of the middle class in general is hurting golf.

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403297846' post='9542109']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403297016' post='9541975']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.
[/quote]

No, this is the problem.

Oh Pinehurst #2. OoOOoOOooo am I supposed to bow down to a statue before I enter? Do I need to wear a sacred glove while I play?

The only thing you are doing is trumping up prestige by blowing smoke up someones a**. And with that prestige that YOU are creating by getting all googlie-eyed over a guy who built a golf course, and by extension the golf course itself, you're actually CREATING the market value for the owners of the course. Consequently, this leads to $400/round prices. Congrats for shooting yourself in the foot.

Is Lambeau Field special? Sure. Is Fenway Park iconic? Yes.

Is it because of the person who built it? Nope.

Telling me that Nicklaus built a course doesn't entice me to play it. The courses amenities are. Its staff is. Its community will. Its culture helps. Its cost is a factor. Not its architect.
[/quote]

I see it a bit differently. I've never disliked a Donald Ross course I've played. Why? Because they're "right in front of you" (blind shots and hidden hazards are rare on Ross courses), playable for golfers of every level (from appropriate tees) but are still challenging (while fair). He incorporates good risk/reward holes, a good mix of long and short par 4's (requires using the full bag of clubs) and left and right doglegs, and still has bailout areas on most holes and well thought out bunkering (including cross bunkering). He also uses a bit of visual trickery on some holes (like bunkers 30-40 yards short of greens) but no stupid modern design "features" like waterfalls, railroad ties and island greens. lol
Pinehurst #2 is considered one of his "masterpieces" much like a renowned artist. Ross is also admired because he played a huge role in popularizing golf in the US, as he designed and built over 400 golf courses in his career. IOW, he built quite a few "Fenway parks" - Seminole, Oak Hill, Inverness and Oakland Hills amongst them. The list of great courses he built is very long. The most significant American (born Scottish) golf course designer of all time. I found one source that says that over 100 US national championships have been played on Ross courses. I love Ross courses, and apparently, just about every pro interviewed for this US Open had high praise for the course.

[njlam]

I like all the Tom Doak designed courses I have played. He has a distinctive style and I do care who the architect is, in the same way I care about who the composer is for classical music.

[theothertomjones]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1403476811' post='9553247']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403297846' post='9542109']
[quote name='duffer987' timestamp='1403297016' post='9541975']
[quote name='theothertomjones' timestamp='1403286400' post='9540511']
Also, why in the WORLD do I give two cents about who built the golf course? Oh its a Nicklaus course, oh this was a Donald Ross redesign, WHO CARES?!!?! Do you think I really give a s*** who built the course? Do you see NFL broadcasters interviewing executive CEO's with naming rights to a stadium? Don't nobody care about that.

[/quote]

That you equate Pinehurst #2 and it's pedigree to the choice of which Multinational Corp will grace the name of an NFL stadium, largely diminishes anything else you have to say about the game of golf IMHO.

The lore of Fenway, Anfield, MGC attracts fans of those sports from around the world, as does the history of some of golfs greatest tracks help bring in the punters. It doesn't need to be the leading edge of bringing people to the game, but dismissing it will only hasten the 'death of golf' as opposed to help it.
[/quote]

No, this is the problem.

Oh Pinehurst #2. OoOOoOOooo am I supposed to bow down to a statue before I enter? Do I need to wear a sacred glove while I play?

The only thing you are doing is trumping up prestige by blowing smoke up someones a**. And with that prestige that YOU are creating by getting all googlie-eyed over a guy who built a golf course, and by extension the golf course itself, you're actually CREATING the market value for the owners of the course. Consequently, this leads to $400/round prices. Congrats for shooting yourself in the foot.

Is Lambeau Field special? Sure. Is Fenway Park iconic? Yes.

Is it because of the person who built it? Nope.

Telling me that Nicklaus built a course doesn't entice me to play it. The courses amenities are. Its staff is. Its community will. Its culture helps. Its cost is a factor. Not its architect.
[/quote]

I see it a bit differently. I've never disliked a Donald Ross course I've played. Why? Because they're "right in front of you" (blind shots and hidden hazards are rare on Ross courses), playable for golfers of every level (from appropriate tees) but are still challenging (while fair). He incorporates good risk/reward holes, a good mix of long and short par 4's (requires using the full bag of clubs) and left and right doglegs, and still has bailout areas on most holes and well thought out bunkering (including cross bunkering). He also uses a bit of visual trickery on some holes (like bunkers 30-40 yards short of greens) but no stupid modern design "features" like waterfalls, railroad ties and island greens. lol
Pinehurst #2 is considered one of his "masterpieces" much like a renowned artist. Ross is also admired because he played a huge role in popularizing golf in the US, as he designed and built over 400 golf courses in his career. IOW, he built quite a few "Fenway parks" - Seminole, Oak Hill, Inverness and Oakland Hills amongst them. The list of great courses he built is very long. The most significant American (born Scottish) golf course designer of all time. I found one source that says that over 100 US national championships have been played on Ross courses. I love Ross courses, and apparently, just about every pro interviewed for this US Open had high praise for the course.
[/quote]

That makes more sense. Thank you.

[Bonneville85308]

[quote name='Startzel' timestamp='1403383827' post='9547215']
This is a great point, but I believe one of the biggest issues is the American work week. Most adults who play golf work the 9-5 Monday through Friday type jobs. That means around 70% of the available time to play golf is taken up by work.

Only during DST can you play after work so most golfers free time is in hours where golf isn't even available.
[/quote]

It should also be noted that the days of salaried workers with well paying jobs leaving at 5pm on the dot and working 40 hours tops are pretty much toast for office workers. At my employer, most people who are paid based on a 40-hour/week salary end up working more like 45-60 hours per week. It's much worse than it was 5-10 years ago. A lot of guys are leaving the office between 6 and 7 due to workload, and taking work home. I'm probably one of the only people in an office of 150+ that plays golf regularly after work during the week, and it's only because I start earlier in the morning than most.

We used to have a weekly company golf league but it went away because nobody could get there in time anymore, or couldn't break away from their families for 3 hours once per week (?!).