Anybody played it recently? I drove by it the other day and it looked awful. It's been less than 15 years since the renovation.

We should just pin this to the top of the golf board until the situation gets better:

https://texags.com/forums/60/topics/3557120/2#discussion

TheDecadeSapling said:

---

Anybody played it recently? I drove by it the other day and it looked awful. It's been less than 15 years since the renovation.

---

Played it last week, greens are rolling good even with the high traffic and the freeze. They did put tarps over the greens to protect them. With hundreds of rounds per day and carts driving all over places where they shouldn't go, it's still a good price for the condition it's in. Hopefully, we will get ample rain this spring for a quick green up.

It's kind of sad because they host a lot of fun junior tournaments here and it's a great excuse to come to College Station. It's just hard to justify paying for tournament fees, hotel, etc. to play that track though. I don't think we will do it again until it gets fixed. Too many inconsistent lies off well placed shots.

I do agree - greens are usually pretty good.

Travelling down at the end of May for a TJGT event my son is playing in. His first trip to College Station. Full circle moment getting to watch him play on the course I worked at on the maintenance team when I was in school, spent the last year at Traditions on the staff. A ton has changed at each property since I last played/worked at each. Looking forward to showing him around.

SkierAg said:

---

Travelling down at the end of May for a TJGT event my son is playing in. His first trip to College Station. Full circle moment getting to watch him play on the course I worked at on the maintenance team when I was in school, spent the last year at Traditions on the staff. A ton has changed at each property since I last played/worked at each. Looking forward to showing him around.

---

it's a lot of fun getting pics of them playing with Kyle field in the background and the weekend overall is great for a golf tournament. My frustration came from just basic upkeep stuff, bunkers not being raked etc. I believe the issues are management - not a lack of $$$. Could be wrong, but when I see a bunkers that haven't been touched in a long time, I know it's someone being lazy. I can rake every bunker on that course in 6 hours (quickly). Do that once a week and it's fine.

My 12yo daughter played an STPGA tourney there Sunday, wasn't great and what bothers me is that I have complained several times about the fire ants there and to date nothing has been done.

Agree. Something shifted in the last 5 years and I believe you are starting to see course redesigns taking bunkers out for everyday courses. Seemed like the upgrade 15-20 years ago was adding a bunch of unique bunker complexes. It's like building a 5,000 sq ft house. Someone has to take care of it.

1. Sterling Management is terrible and the university should have terminated that relationship yesterday.

2. Fire ants out there are terrible.

3. Course has gone downhill since before the big freeze in 21. It's fine but way overpriced.

4. Unless they are there for a reason, bunkers are a waste of $. Having a bunker strictly for cosmetic reasons is throwing $ away

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Public courses like this should have far fewer bunkers. A few strategic bunkers per side, otherwise just have depressions where the grass grows up a bit. Cheaper maintenance and faster play, more resources to keep greens and sod in better shape. No one has ever complained that a course didn't have enough bunkers

---

Agree with this too. My regular course has exactly 0. Took them out in a reno 12-15 years ago. Cuts maintenance costs markedly. And grass bunkers can be brutal in July.

For the uneducated, what role does Sterling play in this? Why do they suck?

Who makes the decisions on these types of contracts?

This town needs more tee times. The campus course can't suck.

I've long since moved far away but lived near Sterling CC in the past and it wasn't nice

cef88 said:

---

Cof15Ag said:

---

For the uneducated, what role does Sterling play in this? Why do they suck?

Who makes the decisions on these types of contracts?

This town needs more tee times. The campus course can't suck.

---

I don't know but it's insane to me that somebody with influence in the University looked at our AG school and said, instead of creating/expanding a Turfgrass degree with a full golf course on property to be used as a laboratory, let's hire the most mediocre of golf course management companies to run it.

---

Back in the day (1992-2000), it was loosely student maintained. Course would be in great shape and fun to play until around May, when it would go goat track until September. So basically 1/3 of the year it sucked.

Then, somewhere around 96-97 Maggert said publicly that "the course sucked so bad the team had to travel to Pebble Creek to practice, when the best turfgrass management program in the world was @ A&M", and business picked up. Traditions and Miramont were built and Campus Course was redesigned. It's a shame it has got to the point it has, CC should be beautiful. Once again in TAMU's zeal to outsource something in order to save 50 cents (on paper) they have ruined a valuable asset and not saved a dime.

Cof15Ag said:

---

For the uneducated, what role does Sterling play in this? Why do they suck?

Who makes the decisions on these types of contracts?

This town needs more tee times. The campus course can't suck.

---

Sterling was chosen to oversee the renovation and manage the course because Robert Steele, founder & President of Sterling, is an Ag (Class of '76). It's the Aggie way. It certainly wasn't Sterling's operational track record; they had none.

And I'm guessing that Sterling was also towards the low end of management fee, since $ is what drove every A&M decision on the renovation - price and/or willingness to sponsor some aspect of the course.

Played the Campus Course a couple of weeks ago. Had an issue with the GPS on the cart getting jacked up and would not move. One of the guys on staff came out and reset it. Took the opportunity to visit with him and he mentioned a new Supt. had come on board with an Aggie background. He seemed excited about it, and said it may take a bit, but they had plans to start getting grass into areas that had fallen into the dirt/rock condition. The greens were greatly improved from August, as some of the greens mowers were creating issues back then. I know it will change, but the "native areas" had been cut down/back some and you could actually find balls a few feet in. Yes, some areas were crispy. Others were not. The only real issue I had was not due to the course, except it was "outdoors" in a 20 + mph wind with gusts 10 mph higher. Only time in my life I stroked a ball taking a divot, only to have the divot and debris hit me in the face blowing back horizontally.

I'd have to be real mad at it to play in that kind of wind again.

Woah there. They did have an operational track record prior to the renovation. They did then and do now manage a large portfolio of courses.

Not taking up for them though, the course needs to be in better shape. Their budget for maintenance is obviously not enough. The school needs to step in and find a way to help that along.

AggieP18 said:

---

Woah there. They did have an operational track record prior to the renovation. They did then and do now manage a large portfolio of courses.

Not taking up for them though, the course needs to be in better shape. Their budget for maintenance is obviously not enough. The school needs to step in and find a way to help that along.

---

When they were selected for the A&M course, Sterling Golf managed exactly one property - the 36-hole Houston National/Sterling CC property. They have 9 now. I guess we have different opinions of operational track record and large portfolio of courses.

Unfortunately, $ (price or sponsorship) drove every A&M decision on the golf course. They chose Signature controls and Hunter heads for the irrigation (not Toro or Rain Bird), and my understanding is that they could never get the Signature controls to work and had to replace.

jja79 said:

---

I've long since moved far away but lived near Sterling CC in the past and it wasn't nice

---

Sterling is the private course. Houston National is the public. Sterling (the course) is okay by private course standards. Houston National is a goat track as they don't currently have a water rights agreement for it. So they basically only mow it. Bunkers are left unkept and unplayable.

Both share the same grounds / grill and clubhouse. Essentially what you would expect from a lower middle class neighborhood club. Probably above average when built, but drastically in need of an update today to be relevant. I don't see that happening with the current membership.

Sterling Management is a different entity by the same people. Just a management company similar to Club Corp, but no perks. They lost East River 9 I'm pretty sure recently.

AggieP18 said:

---

Woah there. They did have an operational track record prior to the renovation. They did then and do now manage a large portfolio of courses.

Not taking up for them though, the course needs to be in better shape. Their budget for maintenance is obviously not enough. The school needs to step in and find a way to help that along.

---

I've played several of the public courses managed by Sterling and they're all average at best.

Mind you, I play Sharpstown in Houston every other week so I'm no golf snob.

They should hire Foresight to take over. The Bandit, Plum Creek, and The Buckhorn are all in great shape. They turned Lozano into a playable course as well and it will probably only get better. RIP to The Republic, that was a great course until the land got sold for development.

I've never played Cypresswood, so I can't speak to it's conditions, but I would assume they keep it in good shape like the rest of their portfolio.

Was told the budget is on the low side. Redo and maintenance both.

Golfcrest is in great shape. The greens have always been great there and they replaced them all last year for some reason. Brenham looking good but they've only had it a year or two. They got a big budget for Cypress Bend in LA. Played it last year while still dormant but greens were nice. Locals all had positive remarks on how they'd turned it around. I haven't played Mallard but been told that it's also in good shape.

So they have some success.

Played today

Greens good running about 10
fairway grass starting to get decent
tee boxes are average for this time of year

Bare areas still remain everywhere - what is the deal with this ?

Anybody know why the campus course has so many bare areas with exposed gravel ?
Easy to just say lack of money but it is not that expensive to grow grass.

GDP said:

---

Anybody know why the campus course has so many bare areas with exposed gravel ?
Easy to just say lack of money but it is not that expensive to grow grass.

---

You ever tried growing grass on gravel?

It's expensive as hell to grow grass when you factor in ****ty soil, ****ty water or a lack of sufficient water, constant cart & golfer traffic, all types of pathogens and unrealistic expectations. Maintaining a golf course ain't cheap.

Golf carts for handicap and golfers 50+, maybe that will keep the golf carts off the grass, but I have seen older golfers drive right up to the green and tee boxes, lots of carts going super slow in reverse Then they complain about the carts, go figure. Same ones don't fix their divots and ball marks on the greens.
Thanks to all those who fix a few extra when they are on a green

Yes, super difficult to get thick, plush grass with salty H2O & crusty gravel just underneath the surface. All the topsoil blows away after awhile with all the wind atop those hills out there.
Maybe some big time donors that play golf will help out with some maintenance? I can donate a load of mushroom compost from the mushroom factory over in Madisonville if that helps.

Hate to see it being mistreated from all parties.

A&M has done a really poor job integrating the maintenance of the course and it's turf management degree program. It seems to me that lab classes should be used to help with upkeep and general course issues. That's what greenskeepers do, that's what their education is supposed to prepare them for.
Give each lab class 2 holes and let them battle it out for a free grant at the end of each semester. It doesn't seem like a real big reach

But A&M isn't managing the course.

jja79 said:

---

But A&M isn't managing the course.

---

and therein lies the problem. The dreaded "outsourcing", it's the Indian call center of golf courses

jja79 said:

---

But A&M isn't managing the course.

---

But, A&M signed a contract with the management company that could/should have included something for an apprentice program. Summer internship ? Whatever

they signed the worst concessions contract in the history of the world. You think they thought about or cared about the condition of the golf course?

I just don't get how people in this industry haven't figured out if your have a consistently good golf course, hell even just half way decent, people will come play it. But time and time again, you see companies and owners just neglect the course and focus on the club house, or try to save a few bucks here and there in the short term by cutting maintenance costs only to pay for it 10x over later on. No golf course has ever cut its way in to success. Once you start cutting capital & operating costs from the maintenance, it never gets corrected and it's only a matter of time until the course is absolute trash.