100% agree Tim. As a causal GCA member I am no expert on golf course architecture but here are my thoughts:
Golf is the thing I love most in the world and I would love to see more mainstream coverage of golf course design and history rather than 24/7 coverage of the PGA Tour and the golf fix crap. I became addicted to golf while caddying at Shinnecock and I love nothing more than classic courses. Yes, the original designers were pioneers and luminaries in the golf world and I think it is truly amazing that more than half of the holes they created still challenge the best of golfers but golf is a completely different game than it was when those courses were built. I heard a story the other day that a U.S. OpenWith that being said, there are some modern courses that I believe would stand up with the best of the old courses if we were to introduce someone who knew no history to the game for 20 years and then ask him/her what the best 100 courses in the world are. Aside from the Oakmont argument, courses were sub 7-8 on the Stimpmeter until the '80's and '90's. Such made possible for greens that you see at NGLA. Now, they have greens with 5-10% total pinnable locations.
What I am getting at is that while some new courses are terrible, others are epic. My gauge of a course is not simply it's architecture but more so the emotions it elicits throughout each and every round. If told I could only play one course for the rest of my life it would be Shinnecock, but if you told me it would be Arcadia Bluffs, I'd be pretty excited.
Playing in 10 hours and can barely sleep. It has only been just over a week but I cannot wait for another crack at Donald Ross tomorrow.