I know courses are supposed to be rated consistently based on fixed criteria, however I question if the criteria is still correct criteria. If a course rating is based off a scratch golfer hitting the ball 250 yards, it may skew toward a very straight ball-striker, because with modern technology, I know very few scratch players (not just sub-5's, but scratch) that don't hit the ball further than 250.
It has always seemed to me like course ratings haven't taken enough into account tightness, in favor of length for the low handicap/scratch. In addition, I feel like courses with wider fairways but extreme crap off them don't have high enough ratings, while narrower fairways with standard bunkering or rough that can be recovered from have too low rating.