A lot of the posts on this thread seem imply that I am advocating ignoring the requirement to be proficient in handling a PFL. If that message came across from what I have written than it was not my intent.
Instead I would like to re-emphasize that I believe dealing with an engine failure starts with taking objective measures to minimize the risk of the engine failing in the first place, as actions or inactions of the pilot is cause of the majority of engine failures.
Following that is thinking of and practicing the vital actions drills that will restore power, if practicable and obviously not applicable to a EFATO, and then yes practicing the power off glide path judgement that is obviously vital to a successful arrival after an engine failure. Of note you don't have to do a PFL to do that, simply when traffic and local airport procedures allows, make your landings start with closing the throttle at various points in the circuit.
Finally a safe pilot has to be proficient at every part of flying, not just doing PFL's. The accident record clearly shows that the majority of bent metal are landing and takeoff accidents that are a result of a lack of skill on the part of the pilot.
I think the whole engine failure thing feeds the secret hero pilot fantasy lurking in almost everyone. "There I was minding my own business when BAMM the engine blew up. But I did not panic and side slipped the little sucker into that postage stamp field rolling to a stop with no damage to the airplane ! "
The "my vigilance at doing a comprehensive pre flight check caught the build up of carb ice as I was waiting to takeoff and thus prevented the EFATO" is a lot less sexy, but ultimately represents a narrative just as important, if not more important, as the first one....