While I am not especially in the mood to defend Ryan, I will say that I have read lots of "critiques" [i.e. complaints] about routings on Golf Club Atlas, and very few of them made any valuable suggestion.
The routing is the most important part of the golf course, if you have a good site to work with. However, most people critique routings based on boilerplate suggestions for how to do an "ideal" routing, where all those ideals trump the actual features of the site. To me, the important thing is to build four great par-3's that all feel and play differently, not to build four reasonable ones that box the compass and have perfectly staggered yardages. I KNOW when I've built three par-3's that play the same direction ... obviously, I wouldn't have done so unless I thought they were the best choices I could make for the par-3's and for the routing as a whole. So, having five guys come on here and tell me the yardages aren't staggered enough or the holes play the same direction is not at all valuable.
To really critique whether I have met my standard of making best use of the features of the property, you don't have to be a professional architect [or associate], but you do have to have a keen eye for picking out what were the best features to use and how else they might have been used. Not many people can do that well -- including, as Mike says, a fair number of people who make their living at golf course architecture.