If I thought that TMac was earnest with this thread I would have responded earlier and more fully. The subject has been discussed on this site a few times previously, generally in the context of the paradox: why are there so many good golfers from Texas and so few good courses?
I've argued earlier that there are many, many excellent courses throughout Texas, many which can be played at bargain prices. Access is not as big of a problem down here, and there are plenty of quality practice facilities and teachers as well.
When I first moved from Columbus to D/FW, I too was very disappointed with the quality and number of courses in the area. No doubt that soil conditions, smaller trees, and the use of flood plains for golf sites had a bit to do with it. Let's face it, compared to many parts of the north and both coasts, this is not a very scenic place.
The weather is also a factor. It can be very dry and hot for four to five months a year, and quite cold for parts of Dec. through Feb. When it rains, it seems to come in buckets, and then we may not see any precipitation for a couple of months during the summer and in the early winter. Since we also get nearly no snow cover, some ice, and strong winds, the turf has to adjust frequently and to great extents.
In terms of the classical period courses, the state just didn't have the population centers and the wealth during this period that places like NY, Chicago, and SF had. Oil made new money for a lot of people, but I doubt that many of these had a strong interest in the game developed from their travels to nearby counties and the contiguous states (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma). What I am implying is that the state didn't have the old money, culture, sophistication, education, and means to travel like a small but still sizable number in the northeast.
It was also a pain in the ass (literaly and figuratively) to travel down here. It was not very safe, and, prior to the era of air-conditioning, no one traveled here because of the weather (as northeasteners travelled as far down the coast to FL and places like Bermuda).
I don't know what Tillie was paid for Brook Hollow and Cedar Crest, but I would bet that it didn't compare to his NY commissions and it was certainly in a much less genteel environment than what he had become accustomed to.
While there may not be any "top 10" courses in the state, there are a fair number in the next 90. I personally prefer Dallas National and maybe even Colonial to Vaquero, the #1 Texas course according to the Dallas Morning News. I also have Brook Hollow well in my top 10, though I am much less impressed with Champions- Cypress Creek.
I haven't played Austin GC (it has not received high marks from the several people I know who've played ther course), but think very highly of Spanish Oaks, Carlton Woods, Rawls, Cimmarron Crossing (sp), Whispering Pines, Pine Dunes, Crown Colony, the Player (Gary) course at The Woodlands, Tierra Verde, and the Lakes Course at Squaw Valley.
I would put the combined work of Jeff Brauer in the Metroplex against most anyone's portfolio in the modern era in a geographic area. His courses are generally built on a large scale, look harder than they are, are fun to play, and are built well. To the best of my knowledge, they also do very well financially.
So, Texas many not have any of the very, very best, but it does have much more than its share of great golf courses. Perhaps it is the relatively easy access, low cost, and the difficult climate, weather and soil conditions which account for the large number of great golfers who live here. No doubt that a great airport and low taxes (none on income) have a little to do with it as well.