"We’re letting them get excited about birdies instead of just watching people make a bunch of pars.”

I didn't get to see any of the Quail Hollow Championship's opening round, but looking at the leaderboard and reading a couple of accounts about the course setup, it should be interesting to see how the rank and file PGA Tour player views the lower-rough, faster green approach.

Here's what AP's Mike Cranston wrote, quoting tournament director Kym Hougham:

Hougham said they started thinking of tweaking the course after hearing golfers complain of high rough at a number of tournaments in Florida a couple of years ago.

“When the club became comfortable with them shooting 16-under par or 18-under par, that gave us the green light to go out and try this,” Hougham said.

The recession accelerated the move.

“In these economic times, we want this to be entertainment,” Hougham said. “When the people who play their discretionary dollar to come out here, we’re giving them roars and we’re giving them smiles. We’re letting them get excited about birdies instead of just watching people make a bunch of pars.”

See. There are benefits to "these economic times."

But here's what concerns me. Steve Elling posting at CBSSports.com:

Woods hit 5 of 14 fairways in his opening round and shot a 7-under 65, his best round ever at Quail Hollow, to claim the first-round lead while playing alongside Furyk, no less. Mickelson hit 7 of 14 fairways, missing 7 of his last 9, but still shot 67 and is tied for second, two shots back.

Mickelson applauded the firm greens, which required a deft short game, and the short rough, which meant players could attack the greens at their own risk.

"By always having a shot,I think the fans are enjoying seeing the recovery shot, which is the most exciting shot in golf," he said. "But because the greens are firm, those shots are difficult."

I'm guessing it won't be long before we hear some grumbling from short, straight, grinder types that this the low-rough concept is the Commissioner's conspiracy to get Tiger and Phil in contention and to drive up ratings.

Though if you look closely, for every Woods and Mickelson, there were several shorter-knocking grinder types on page one (Maggert, O'Hern and Flesch).

Hopefully it will be remembered that the tour brass and field staff initially resisted the move to setups downplaying the role of rough. (I don't sense they are entirely sold on the idea yet either.) However, let's say it is a grand conspiracy. What is the downside? The PGA Tour is in the entertainment business. Isn't it their job to set up courses in a way that promotes excitement and heroics?