I like the discussion idea. CBM proposed not only ideal yardages, but what sequence they ought to be in, if possible. I believe it pays to have some idea of the general length of course you want before jumping into design. Only on really dramatic properties might it be hard to shift stuff slightly to modify any holes yardage to a desirable length.
For what its worth, my mentors always allowed for 2 over 400 yard par 4 holes (back tee length) one right at 400 and two under on each nine. As an ideal, and as noted, all things being equal, which they seldom are, I still use it, although I might move the mid point up to 410-420, so its really 3 over 400 and 2 under. But, probably only two per nine over 450.
But, with yardage differences I have started to move away from the 25-30 yard standard split model, in favor of proportional yardages. If you put tees at 90, 80, 70 and 60% of back tee length, with good shots, they should play about the same for all. (based on "typical tee shot yardages" of 290 back, then 260, 230, 200, 170 and 140, etc. This makes tee splits on long 4's and 5's greater, par 3 and short par 4 less. (example, 30 yard tee differences would be 470-440-410-380-350-320 based on 30 yard splits, whereas proportional tee differences would be 470-423-381-343-308-277. Generally, that puts all players hitting comfortable clubs, if you use six tees. Most combine somewhere along the way, but its futile to get exact yardage balance.
Just yesterday, I came back from a remodel where we added a back tee to the 18th to create a 485 finisher, but kept all the other tees in the same spot (but added a forward tee way up at 320 yards)
Like some others here, I think its time to forget the 7200 yard yardage on most courses. Too much invested in so few golfers, and we have enough long courses to challenge those guys already, but do need to focus all future efforts on the real golfers who play. Can't always get it by the marketing guys though, at least not yet.