I’ve been meaning to share my thoughts (which were much more extensive and surgical) but I’ll piggy back on others instead
Quinn Klinefelter! I listened to WDET a good amount when I lived in town so that was a fun surprise.
Re: @SpartanButters and the Wings, I’ll expand on that by saying the salary cap and Ken Holland’s complete inability to manage a roster is what sunk them. (See: Jonathan Ericcson, Justin Abdelkader, and Johanh Franzen deals)
@Tron@Randy This needs to be a part of a future Refuge event
@bordercity I used to think that about Rackham, but with more knowledge and appreciation, 7-18 are great golf holes that need to be restored (along with the first six) to give a real course in the middle of the city that could charge a premium and hopefully be much better regarded in the area.
And Detroit is for sure not a good golf city for public golf.
The problem is that the course lost a significant amount of land due to 696 being built, so I’m not sure if a restoration is even possible. The first 6 holes aren’t good because the course was squeezed and they had to find a way to fit those holes in.
@weirdfishes Take a look at this. It’s Jerry Matthew’s sketch of his changes due to the 696 construction overlaid on the original layout. I don’t know if parts are supposed to be in different colors, but much of it is pretty hard to read (poor resolution). But from what I can tell, most of #1, including the green, were on what is now the 696 service drive. So is original #2. Current #2 green was original #3 green. It’d take some time but I think one could piece it all together.
“He modified only what was necessary, with a deliberate eye to maintaining the character and integrity of the course, in some cases using parts of one hole in the redesign of another. For example, the new hole #2 has most of the original fairway and the original green of Donald Ross’ hole #3. In the end, parts of seven holes were changed to varying degrees but only six tees and greens were reconfigured. For a map of the changes, see the Jerry Matthews’ diagram below.”
I’ve said it elsewhere here but you could keep the back 9 and some of the front to make a 12 or 13 hole full-length course. Turn other areas into a pitch and putt, and use the remaining space for a state of the art practice and teaching center. Driving range (multiple levels?), short game, bunkers, putting greens, etc with indoor/outdoor so it can be used year round. Add in merchandise, club fitting, lessons, etc and I think it’d be a good money maker.
That PDF is a fantastic read for sure. Also, of course it was Jerry Matthews who did the redesign - he’s done literally every course in the state.
I love love love this idea. Shoot, just keep the back 9 and repurpose everything else. Take down the fences surrounding the property and make it more of a park. The clubhouse is an absolutely treasure and could support a whole lot more than it’s currently being used for.
I think in order to do a proper restoration (or modification if that’s the route) and restore the clubhouse into something that can generate revenue, it’d have to be some sort of public/private partnership. It’s going to take a ton of capital. I’m just not sure what it’d take for the city to go for it. Maybe they’d have to throw in a restoration of the Palmer Park 9.
