Carl asks:
" Instead, I'm questioning whether those [high-profile] changes are sufficient to bump ANGC out of the top 10 courses in the country as it currently exists (and as all of the other courses currently exist)."
For the reasons I give above, the changes are easily sufficient to knock ANGC down the ladder. The narrowing of the playing corridors directly contravene the express design goals of MacK and Jones. Whose views, I would think, ought to be given some weight.
But even if you don't care about MacK's and Jones' views, the course's current narrowness commits two cardinal design sins. It makes ANGC less interesting to play and less interesting as a venue for what is supposed to be the most dramatic championship in golf.
For such changes, ANGC should pay a price. I figure that Brad Klein got it about right.
Bob