Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa_lecki
I know this post will be crucified…..
But, if the districts picked ONE executive in each “area” (i.e. north of 466; 466 to 466A; 466a to 44, south of 44) and charged $20 or $25 a round, BUT the courses get an extra level of maintenance, basically, they are awesome courses.
Maybe tee times are spaced out an extra minute or two.
Would you support it? Would you pay to play that course?
You still have the others you pay for the trail fee. They would be maintained as they are now, some good some bad. They may not be the most interesting courses, but the conditions would be REALLY good.
|
"They would be maintained as they are now"? You mean mostly unplayable? Why should we continue to pay at all
for abject failure and continuing decline of our courses? Why should we continue to employ managers who have demonstrated they can't (or won't? ) do the job? What do the big leagues do if the team is not winning? Fire the manager.
And, I am really curious about the origin of this "trial balloon" to see if we all could be tempted to throw money at this to get it fixed. I wouldn't be surprised to find the decline of conditions wasn't allowed to happen as a scheme to make more money, but then I'm a suckered for a good cosiracy.