Golf is a strange sport, and attaching a good or bad label to a golf course is even more bizarre of an endeavor.
The golf courses within the portfolio of Jack Nicklaus are all extremely high-quality. Jack doesn't do too many mom and pops courses, and most of his designs benefit from a healthy budget.
A healthy budget allows for design freedom....and design security. It usually means an ample parcel of real estate to route the course through. It usually means problem or troubled areas of a property can be bulldozed into submission. It means only the finest irrigation system, grass seed and maintenance crews will be used in the final product.
In many golfing circles, the issue of maintenance is one of the driving factors between a "good" course and a bad one. From this perspective, Jack Nicklaus has been plucking the low hanging fruit, as the saying goes.
His courses are sound and functional, even brilliant at times, but in my opinion, most are somewhat lacking in the "it" factor that separate the wheat from the chaff.
I suspect his legacy will be like that of Robert Trent Jones Sr, a wildly successful designer that served a historical role in the history of golf and golf course architecture, but not a true maestro of the art form.