I think the problem with this thread is the word "ideal". Different people have different ideals.
Replace it with the word "practical" and you have a better discussion.
And once you insert the word "practical" as has been done, you have to consider the cost of irrigating, mowing, and managing all those acres of fairway vs. more acres of rough. We are in a turf reduction world, so even if the idea was unanimously agreed as "perfect" it probably wouldn't happen.
Jeff:
I meant to introduce the word "practical" as a matter of getting golfers around the course. Notice that I didn't say anything about how much of the area would be mowed as fairway vs. rough; width is width, which is why the Rules only talk about "through the green".
It's up to us to figure out how to make an idea that's practical for golfers, also practical for our clients. But a lot of your pushback is about the better players not liking it on the grounds of shot values, rather than practicality.