I definitely prefer tight circuits - the tighter the better.
There are two reasons for flying large circuits as far as I can see: noise abatement, and following someone else flying large circuits.
Following others has already been dealth with pretty well by others - I can't think of much to add.
Noise abatement circuits are something I'm pretty familar with, flying from White Waltham. I have to say that I've never had an issue with the circuits there. Yes, they are much bigger than I'd like in an ideal world. But there are plenty of options for putting the aircraft down if the engine quits - maybe not on the airfield, but certainly safely. (In the places where options are limited, this is not due to the tightness of the circuits.) Certainly if a "published noise abatement circuit" took me somewhere unsafe, I would be very unhappy about it, and I'd speak to the CFI about getting it changed - although I'm not aware of anywhere where this is the case. The fact is that, when it comes to NIMBYs, there are more of them than there are of us, and they have a louder voice. We really must do whatever we can to keep them happy, without compromising safety.
<Begin really controversial bit>
I have always been a little baffled by the zealousness with which some people talk about flying tight circuits. For the vast majority of your flight you won't be within gliding distance of an airfield. So what difference if, during the 5 minutes or so that you're in the circuit, you're not within gliding distance? Well, for a start, you're lower than normal, so you have fewer options... ideally, you'd want to ensure that you weren't over a built up area at all, so that you could always land directly below reasonably safely. But that's the whole aim of noise-abatement, so that shouldn't be an issue. Sure, being within gliding distance of the field is always preferable - but I don't view it as being essential.
<End really controversial bit>
Stay safe!
FFF
-------------