David M:
You said, "When he has an assignment outside this zone, with the terrain and conditions being seriously different, he brings a different perspective to the work since the same solutions used in the southeast might not apply."
That sounds right but when I view that statement and hold it up against the light of the TF courses I have played in the western locations I don't see much change -- minus a minority of a few courses scattered about.
Take Shadow Creek for example -- it is viewed by nearly all of the key golf publications as the premier TF layout. Really?
Candidly, I have played the place and I have always found that the story on HOW the course was created -- as opposed to the actuality of what is THERE -- is what drives the eyeballs and results in all the fanfare that has ensued since the day it opened.
TF has a few courses -- some of which I have mentioned -- that for whatever reason -- could be location or less overall hype from his PR machine -- that would be much higher if others would simply venture to play them.
Unfortunately, I don't how much "original thought" is applied by TF or any other architect for that matter. Plenty of what comes forward as "original" thought is sometimes nothing more than a cut'n paste version of something already done beforehand.
TF is very good at it -- given the amount of courses loved by his followers -- in masking eye-candy elements in concert with the existing geopgraphical qualities of the unique sites he often handles.
No doubt many architects know this "little secret" but few really want to admit as much. In every new pitch made by a prospective architect -- especially for big time sites with much potential -- you'll likely get all this talk about making the "new" course really different from the others. TF no doubt has done his share of repetitive elements -- so have others in the field. That's why seeing / playing courses that are truly unique and different is not as easy as many might believe -- including myself.