I try not to complain about courses...at least publicly. It's really hard work to put on a CX race and I appreciate those who can and are willing to do so. Certain tracks suit certain people better so people will always complain when the odds aren't in their favor.
Grass crits can be fun but I'm definitely of the mindset that cx courses should be challenging. Difficult elements make for better racing and can separate those with technical abilities from those who just have a lot of power. Good courses all seem to have a lot of the same ingredients: well thought out turns that flow but are deceptively tricky at race speed, elements of risk/reward (i.e. take the safe slow line or the risky fast line), climbing that is well distributed throughout the lap (rather than just up and just down), and some "signature" features (not to be read as whirlybird/death spiral/pinwheel). The bubble course ticks off all those criteria for me.
A great venue like Providence or Gloucester makes it much easier to create a great track. But one can do a lot even in a sub-par venue like a lot of the ones we are stuck with in NJ. Mill Creek was a great example of a very marginal venue--essentially pancake flat park with one dirt mound--but the promoters were able to build a fun and challenging track because it was clear they thought it out and probably spent the time to dial in the lines.
Bubble venue has so much great terrain to work with. I think it could easily support 2 very different courses in the same weekend without just running it backwards. Easy for us to say that it should be a double but the truth is it's a lot of extra work for the promoters.