The greatest portion of the objection to the golf ball's current state of technological advancement seems to stem from an objection to perceived unstoppably plunging scores on Tour. So if more PGA Tour events were held on courses that didn't reward the longest hitters disproportionately, would this discussion be as vigorous? I go through the annual PGA Tour schedule and notice that a lot of the longest courses are among the less interesting ones from a GCA perspective. Torrey Pines South, Redstone, TPC Louisiana, Congressional, Firestone.
But we have the likes of Riviera, Pebble Beach, PGA National, Harbour Town, TPC Sawgrass, Colonial, TPC River Highlands, Greenbrier, Sedgefield, East Lake that are all under 7,300 yards. And due to land constraints, I don't see many of them growing much longer. Nor do we see mostly bombers prospering on them.
Instead of rolling back the ball--which, as many have shown on this thread, is a huge can of worms--why not take a look at tournament golf course setup and pursue adjustments that shift the advantage away from those who drive the ball too far for the folks who believe in ball rollback? In the end, driving the ball is but one part of the game. Chicks may dig the long ball, but the winners are still the ones who hole the putts.