Pat, you ignorant slut.
I see you are moving your logic adjacent posts from the history arena to the design arena. Lucky us.
Historically, you tend to forget that its not then and now (and then feeling good about one set of tees) it is THEN until NOW. Somewhere in there, some of the greatest minds in golf found via experience that a whole lot of folks weren't having much fun and were complaining about not reaching greens in regulation, play being too slow, etc. You also have a tendency to believe that no one in older eras ever got things right....
Really, it is very easy to look at what is NOT and complain, almost as easy as "knowing" what someone 100 years ago saw from a train, no?
Also, play grew. We need more tee space anyway, or everyone would be playing out of divots, so building more tee solves a few problems - making the course flexible AND allowing better turf. Granted, it could be one big tee and keep yardage about the same.
Building one tee at too long a length slows play, reduces flexibilty and makes maintenance of tees harder and more expensive.
Building many bunkers increases construction and maintenance costs and makes golf harder and less fun for hacks.
Both also makes golf more expensive.
Is that really a good combo?
Lastly, if anyone were going to build one set of tees, why on earth would you build it for the 1% who play at 6900 yards or more, or even the 16% who play at 6600 yards or more? It would be better to build them at the much preferred 6300 yard length, or as Ian and the Tee It Forward program suggests, about 5800 yards.
BTW, I would think that the tees, however built, would focus on making golf enjoyable for all, not because they affect some numbers for the pencil and card set. If I am having fun, I have met my main objective. Studies show that only a small percentage of players are truly competitive and worry more about handicap than fun.
At 6900 yards, I can pay more, have less fun, play slower. Other than that, it sounds like a perfect proposal to me....