Sorry I have been slow to respond to this thread. I am on the road atm and havent had internet access other than on my phone.
All of the great movement in the fairways was not the result of one specific flood but rather yearly flooding that occurred in the area until a large dam was built sometime in the 50's. Before then the course was actually flooded over and unplayable for most of the winter and beginning of spring. The story is that Jones originally planned to flatten all of the fairways and remove all of the great movement but changed his mind after a trip to the UK and a tour of all the great links. Regardless you will not find another RTJ course with fairways like this. It is one of my favorite parts of the course and the main thing imo that gives the course its old world feel.
I would disagree with anyone that would characterize the conditions as soft in any way. During the rainy season yes but in the summer the course gets very hard and very fast, a testament to Chris Gaughan the head greens keeper who imo does as good a job as anyone in the country with a course that is very challenging to maintain. There are legit areas to run the ball up onto the green on about half the holes and in the summer this play is always an option.
There are no "lakes" or "ponds" on the entire golf course. There is a natural creek that is quite wide in parts that runs through the North and Northwest part of the course. The rest of the course has no water at all. The creek was enlarged and the routing of it slightly changed by RTJ in a few spots around holes #6, #7 and #11 and #12 but the flow of the creek is very natural to how it has always been and it was not changed at all on #5. Egan's course had a tee where the green is now with the creek running in front of the tee instead of in front of the green like it is on RTJs routing. It is not really any kind of island green with water only short and a somewhat right. #6 has water short, right and left. IMO #6 is a great hole and imo has alot of attributes of a Raynor's Prize Dogleg with the gate of fairway bunkers off the tee before the hard right turn and risk/reward decision to be made after a good drive with the water up by the green. The layup area is pretty flat so if you layup you will generally have a 75y - 100y wedge shot over the water to a pretty big green.
I have also never heard the criticism that the bunkers are too shallow or shallow at all. There are quite a few spots where the bunkers are quite deep. There really are not many fairway bunkers at all. In fact there are only 14 in total by my count. The ones on #3 and #4 are quite deep. I have quite a bit of trouble getting out over the lips and onto the green and I am a low handicap player who is pretty good out of fairway bunkers. There are plenty of deep greenside bunkers also specifically on #2, #3, #4, #8, #10, #13, #14, #15, #16 and #18. There are no 10 foot pits like you would find on a MacDonald or Raynor course but the bunkers are definitely not shallow in most places. The only bunkers which really strike me as shallow are some of the framing bunkers behind the greens on holes like #5, #6, #7.
I agree that #5 and #7 are too similar a shot with a similar yardage. #5 is 192 and downhill but always into the wind while #7 is slightly uphill and a full 200 yards and usually crosswind. That is why I usually play one of those holes from the up tee (155 - 140) to mix it up. The old 180 yard tee on #5 before the new tee was put in on #3 was over to the right and made the angle different and it was a better hole. I also sometimes tee it up over there on the front of the old tee box when the lies are not too thick (@170y) #2 is a spectacular hard long par 3 with no water and the water on #12 (180y to a great uphill plateau green) is a good 30+y short of the green and not really in play unless you hit a really bad shot. That shot is also very different from #5 and #7. I strongly dislike water as a major feature of a golf hole and I love this hole.
The course is definitely tight off the tee but it is not as bad as some others and there are no tee shots that are just stupid tight. I do believe that I could make it a much better course in a few spots with a chainsaw and a license to do whatever I wanted but all in all the trees are not really in your way in most areas. It looks very tight visually almost everywhere because of the extreme height of the trees. Some of the old growth redwood firs are 250+ feet tall.
One of the main things in playing Eugene is you really have to work the ball in both directions and high/low to be successful. Playing there has forced me to learn a whole arsenal of shots and I am a MUCH better player for it. It might not be my favorite style of golf course but I do feel very lucky to be able to play there on a regular basis.
If anyone has any more specific questions or anything that I missed I would be happy to answer them for you. I am also always up for a round if anyone will be in the Eugene area and wants to see the course for themselves.