Should the PGA Tour use a uniform ball?

At the Sony Open two weeks ago, Bubba Watson wowed the galleries with his mammoth tee shots, knocking one drive an incredible 398 yards. So what does that mean for the little guys like, say, Fred Funk, who was paired with Watson in the third round and found himself 140 yards farther back of the rookie before his second shot?
There have long been rumors that the USGA -- or, more precisely, the PGA Tour -- might someday call for players to use a uniform ball that conforms to certain standards and won't fly as far as current models. Should this ever happen? ESPN.com's Bob Harig and Golf World's Ron Sirak debate in this week's version of Alternate Shot.
Should the PGA Tour limit players' length by requiring conforming golf balls?
YESThere already have been numerous drives recorded at more than 400 yards this year on the PGA Tour. Players routinely take the entire golf course away with the driver, leaving short irons to play holes meant for much more.
At some point, something has to give. Golf courses cannot contain players who continue to hit the ball farther. And it is a lot easier to fix the golf ball. The average guy wants to play the same equipment the pros play, and there is a romance about the fact that Joe Schmoe can use the same equipment as Tiger Woods.
Most of that is myth. Tiger and all the other pros have clubs and balls specifically suited to their games. We might use the same brand, but we are not using the same stuff. Not really. So what's the big deal if the manufacturers dial back their golf balls 10 percent just for use on the PGA Tour? They could still have the same spin characteristics, the same aspects the players like for putting and chipping and playing in the wind. They just wouldn't go as far.
Instead of a drive going 350 yards, it would go only 315. That's still plenty far. The longest players still would have the advantage. But it would not force golf course architects to stretch venues farther than they already are stretched.
And it might require some players to become adept at other parts of the game.
The long ball is great, and it will continue to be. But there comes a point when it is detrimental to the overall game. Jack Nicklaus has been preaching the need for a reduced-distance golf ball for years. So has Arnold Palmer. If it's good enough for them ...
NOThings seem to be working quite well exactly where they are. One of the most exciting television moments in golf last year was the aerial shot of Tiger Woods' golf ball as he drove the green on the par-4 16th hole at Doral in the Ford Championship.
And that came only a couple of hours after Phil Mickelson drove it 311 yards on No. 8 -- and Woods hit it 41 yards past him. Now that's entertainment.
Among the great things about golf are those risk-reward moments when a player must decide whether to gamble or play it safe. The game is now full of those kinds of decisions. The golf ball clearly goes longer now, but there are ways to defend against it. As we see at the British Open every year, putting a premium on accuracy puts more decision making into the game. Do I hit driver or a 2-iron off the tee on this par-4? Do I go for this par-5 in two or lay up?
The point of the game is still to get the ball into the hole in the fewest strokes. That rarely occurs with a tee shot alone. And remember, not only does the ball go farther now but misses are wilder. That brings into play the most exciting shot in golf -- the recovery shot.
Think about it: The truly memorable shots Woods has hit in his career are mostly recovery shots. Some would argue that the distance the ball goes now has made the game a one-dimensional power game. It has done the exact opposite.
Added length means added decision making. For the fan, that means more fun as a spectator, and for the recreational golfer, it means more fun on the golf course. Let's just leave things alone.