The interesting thing that I've been thinking about is the effect of lateral motion of the bar - how it's induced, and more importantly, it's implications. Short version: not so bad at the bottom of a lift, and it's going to be a handful at the top. The heavier the weight is in relation to the athlete, the more true this will be, and the more damning the implications.
BJB82 doesn't mean it in the sense that it sounds, I think he's commenting that the religious who've drank the Kool-aide at USAW will not be convinced unless / until you produce said athlete. He (BJB82) is, of course, wrong, but only in magnitude. The Powers that be will not be convinced until you eliminate them from competition entirely. This argument ("Produce an Athlete!" - which I think BJB82 is merely observing, not engaging in) is specious at best because it totally ignores the chances (vanishingly small) that you will have in your possession an athlete who is not only willing to train, and is dedicated, but is also genetically predisposed in the first place. This of course sets aside that your goal is to teach beginners to lift, not produce world-class athletes.
Why, those guys! You know - THEM.
I think what Rip would recommend is proper basic pulling mechanics, and in the 3rd edition, I have the feeling that a lot of discussion about proper pulling mechanics will talk about the expression of those mechanics being a nearly vertical bar path, because of the consequences of failure to maintain one. So, if I can step in for Rip for a bit, I'd say to get the basics nailed down, and then get strong. And once you are good and strong and are ready to focus on the O-lifts, you're going to start to figure out what works for you to get the weight to your shoulders / hands. What Rip is saying here is that the preponderance of the evidence is that is going to happen from the standard pulling position eventually, along with a (relatively) vertical bar path, so you might as well get that nailed down now.