I'm not really sure what the point of this thread is, but --
I've traveled with Jeff Williams & played with him, in fact he hired me for my first newspaper job. He plays a lot of golf, but, and I don't think he'd disagree, he's a travel writer with something to say about the playability of golf courses, not an architecture critic.
There aren't really any architecture critics, per se, some good architectural writers and historians. Critics? maybe GS and arguably Ron Whitten, who sometimes seems to like to take somewhat contrarian positions, but I'm not sure his heart is really into it. Otherwise it tends to be a rather pointless and irrelevant exercise in pedantry and name-dropping and/or spitting into the wind. All of RW's criticism of Tom Fazio has had absolutely no effect on the demand for Fazio courses (not that I think RW had that in mind). The architects have all the power! (Partly because the damned architects use that proven tack of themselves writing, the smarter ones anyway -- one reason I'm all for RW designing, it's about time we writers got even).
The economics of the game aren't really conducive to "architecture criticism." To take another example out of millions: one guy I know used to love railing against this or that trend in architecture but since he got hired to run the travel section he hasn't seen a Greg Norman design he hasn't liked. Fair enough, in fact it's probably a better use of his talents since his scolding was pedantic and somewhat tiresome.
I suppose it could be done. I never thought there could be a golf fashion critic, apparently because I never imagined a Marty Hackel. Maybe I should try to be that high-profile-architecture-critic-guy -- I actually have some bow ties, there's step one. Next step is to learn to bloviate a la Bud Collins. The easy part is, you guessed it, arguing that Roger Rulewich was really the designer of NGLA.