Jeff -
Jones and MacK viewed themselves as doing something very special, even pioneering, at AGNC. Their design was a culmination of a friendship that started in 1926. They had become allies in the support of strategic golf design (vs. penal designs) from that date. (Originally it had to do with defending TOC against attacks that it was obsolete.) ANGC was the apotheosis of their shared views, in many respects. It was a design they had thought a lot about.
So, as with MacD at NGLA, their original design at ANGC was important to them at a number of different levels. They had a stake in it. It was a statememt of their design philosophy.
For that reason, absent the pressures of hosting a major championship, I think that the architectural fate of ANGC would have been much like the fate of NGLA. It wouldn't have changed much. ANGC would be much closer to the course at the time of MacK's death.
One of the things often forgotten about ANGC is that it had money problems from the beginning. It had few local members and for decades had trouble making ends meet. It didn't help matters that the opening of ANGC and the on-set of the worse of The Great Depression both occurred in the same month.
The Masters franchise was one they could not afford to lose. It may have started out as a nice little invitational for Bobby and his friends. But once they understood the national appeal of the tournament, it became the cash cow that supported things.
Thus, changing the course to better suit an annual major championship venue was forced on them. I suspect Jones (and, of course Roberts, who had no reservations whatsoever about making even the wackiest changes) felt he had no choice in many instances.
Nonetheless, I think it is a shame that so many changes were made. A truly bold, pioneering course was lost. I can't think of any course built since that is as daring and takes as many chances as ANGC's original design did.
Sorry, didn't mean to carry on so long. Are you back on LI?
Bob