Terrible idea on several levels.
Avoid jetdirect (9100) port like the plague. Partial files? Errors parsing the postscript? Outputting to the jetdirect port will result in printing every bit of that trash out, no questions asked. Walked up to a printer and found Nearly blank pages with one PCL or Postscript line telling you there's an error? That's jetdirect printing for you, and there's no good reason for it. LPD and IPP have actual protocols signaling start and end of jobs, so nothing comes out if something in the process fails, saving paper, toner and frustration. Yeah, you can't just use netcat, but you can easily use lp: lp -h 192.168.0.30 file.ps
Printing raw to a printer without drivers is also a terrible idea, it happens to work some of the time, but leaves you at the mercy of printer defaults. Printing a US Letter page on a printer which defaults to A4 (or vise versa)? Say goodbye to part of your print job. Now, yeah, you could program the correct command sequences into your postscript document, but why would you want to? Plenty of other things used in documents will cause errors if sent to a printer without being sanitized by CUPS (or filters to lpng, or whatnot).
CUPS isn't great. It makes printing so much harder than it needs to be. I absolutely hate having to remember the exact syntax to select B&W on my color printer: lp -o ColorMode=Monochrome
It's very difficult to track down how it's mangling your print jobs, when there's a problem and you need to do so. Having to do an old apache style allow,deny reverse polish notation logic to configure who you want to access the printer and admin interface is user-hostile to be sure. And more. But it certainly has made it much easier to go from nothing to up and printing quickly, it's certainly got every feature you could need, and it's certainly reliable. I've done it in the old days, and I certainly don't want to go back to configuring printcaps manually with inscrutable invocation of ghostscript and many other print filters.