Maybe the USGA should first start out by saying what the ideal length of a golf course should be. They haven’t even delved into that process. Haven't mentioned it, talked about it, no indication whatsoever.
I agree, grow the grass and so much more. The USGA is talking about returning the decision process to the game. So, not only grow the grass, but insert pot bunkers as they have in the U.K. How about a meandering creek. It doesn't even need water in it or be very wide, just high banks and stones. How about grass bunkers that never get mowed? How about just one tree strategically placed. If they are worried about costs, how about no grass from the "Championship tee" to say 40 yards in front of the most forward tee. The problem is the USGA and course designers have deemed the only solution is to make the courses longer rather than quit being lazy and actually design a bloody golf course. You can't tell me that you want to play the holes strategically and then add no hazards other than distance. Augusta is threatening to lengthen #13 and yet last year there were a bunch of balls in the little creek that fronts the hole and/or balls to the back or over the green avoiding the creek. All they need is one freaking tall bushy tree 10-20 yards right of the creek at the dogleg, or 2-3 pot bunkers strategically placed, or slant the fairway more towards the creek. If they roll the ball back, how hard are #11 and #12 at Augusta going to get? The US Open setup is another prime example. Does it seem to you the USGA loses their collective panties if the score breaches 10 under? The USGA says a hard and fast course will reveal the best golfer. WHAT? Uh, maybe a wet and sloppy course with long grass and lots of obstacles reveals the best golfer. Just saying. They have caused their own problem. The Brits are so much better. If there is gorgeous weather and the score gets run up, so what? There will be weather next year bubba, count on it.
I can't imagine the run on premium golf balls if they enact a golf ball rule limiting potential. Let me ask this, if they roll the ball back 20% and an amateur hits the ball 220 now, the rollback drive is now 176, what 6000 yard course has tees that would regularly accommodate that driver yardage? It's absurd. Even a 10% rollback would be a problem because every par 4 over 400 yards would virtually require new tees and then the hazards aren’t in the right spot. And instead of citing some British yardage for amateurs that is really suspect, how about digesting the thousands of shots recorded by Shotlink. This doesn’t solve the problem of course conditions and weather although the outliers could be thrown out, but at least holes where less than a driver is hit off the tee would not be counted in driver yardage.
This whole hoopla reminds me of the NRA thing, I’m 67. They can pry my PRO V1 and Epic driver from my cold dead hands and until then, leave me alone. BTW, how much was that MAVRIK?