Sean,
I have been trying to apply the shortest walk theory, but of course, not enough new designs to do it. If given the opportunity, and the next hole plays 90 deg. to the previous one, there is a chance to route the path and locate the previous green so the shortest travel distance is to the middle tees, not the back tee. So few play back there, that I try to establish the shortest route for the 6-6300 yard players who make up 50+% of players. Harder on a back and forth routing.
Aligning holes and designing holes from the back tees forward is just another manifestation of our fascination with pros who will never show up at our courses.....
But as in TD's "How short is too short for a top 100?" thread, as long as the local muni thinks in those terms, it won't forgo the 7200 yard tees. In reality, 6850 back tees is long enough for any muni and most clubs. It only decreases the play experience for 1% of golfers. Just as I think the real option on Tour is a limited rotation of really long courses, I think we need to find some label other than championship course for good courses of rational length that wouldn't send potential customers away before even trying the course.
Andy,
As I was recently told, sticking with tradition is also a way of saying "refuses to change with the times." On the national level, we are discussing statues of Confederates, KKK, and other things where proponents say tradition demands something or other. Not that forward tees are anything as severe as that, but it makes the point.
The funny thing is, the restoration movement celebrates the courses of the 1920's, many of which (Northland, SFGC to name two) were renovated to oblivion by the architects now famous. Those guys knew the early courses weren't suitable and had no trouble blowing it up, designing for future needs. Yes, I am getting far afield, but I think design is always more sincere, if you will, if form follows function, looks forward, not back, etc.