Generally, I'm not too concerned with the sport's national exposure as I'm more interested in disc golf as a fun, affordable, accessible outdoor recreation asset for a community, but for the purposes of this thread...
I think course quality is a major issue. Both the art (landscape aesthetics) and science (Chuck Kennedy stuff) need to advance and multiply so that a higher percentage of the population is exposed to courses that better exhibit the sport's potential beauty in the way it relates to nature and offer an engaging golf challenge. Once there's a little sense of awe surrounding the courses, the sport becomes a lot more engaging and watching really good players becomes a lot more interesting.
I think course quality is a major issue. Both the art (landscape aesthetics) and science (Chuck Kennedy stuff) need to advance and multiply so that a higher percentage of the population is exposed to courses that better exhibit the sport's potential beauty in the way it relates to nature and offer an engaging golf challenge. Once there's a little sense of awe surrounding the courses, the sport becomes a lot more engaging and watching really good players becomes a lot more interesting.