Gary Baines in the Daily Camera (!?) covered a recent address by David Fay and offered these sound bites from the USGA Executive Director.
"I understand people like Nicklaus, (Arnold) Palmer and (Greg) Norman want to do something about the ball, and I respect that," Fay said. "But who are we governing for — the elite players or the people like the ones at the Golf Expo? I'd say for the latter. ...So this begs the question, why does the USGA regulate equipment at all? Equipment rules are by and large for "elite players."
If someone established the "American Association of Elite Players" and it was created to handle equipment regulation, amateur status and run the USGA championships, what would be the role of the USGA that governs the game for the folks at Golf Expo?
They'd do some handicapping. Green section would still be around. The museum and library would be important. Anything else?
It would seen that the USGA, divorced of the elite player, probably wouldn't need a $600,000 a year Executive Director.
On the state of golf in general: "As a participatory sport things are pretty good for golf," Fay said. There are courses that "fit all sorts of income levels. All participatory sports are relatively flat right now. There are so many more things people can participate in these days.
"We're concerned (about the game's growth). But should golf have 50 million players in the country (rather than the current 25 million)? It we did we'd have a lot more slow play. A lot of the growth in golf is as a spectator sport. It's a hard game, it can be costly and it takes time to play. Those factors can eliminate some people (from participating)."
There would be a lot more slow play if the game grows.
Orwellian I tell you.