I think a lot of people have an unfair level of expectations to the sport of cycling. Obviously, it hasn't been the greatest Tour, but you have to say that the stage Rolland won was one of the better stages I've seen. Stages 16 and 17 is also really hard and will probably be exciting. Especially stage 16 should be an instant classic, and if Nibali and/or Evans has a good day and have a gap on the top of the last climb, they could take minutes on that last decent.
Now, the only real problem I see is ASO's sudden desire to make "medium" mountain stages with HC and cat 1 climbs. IMO there should be 5 really hard mountain stages in every Tour. This year, we only have 4, counting La Planche Belle Filles, and that's one short. In addition to this, there should be a handful of stages like the one Pinot won, which was great. Short, steep climbs, enabling the GC guys, the puncheurs and the climbers a shot at the stage win. When you make stages like the one yesterday, it will just neutralize everything. No one will attack as there is to far to go, a break will get 20 mins and it will all be pretty boring.
I think that is the biggest problem with the Tour the last years, the misuse of the great climbs. To see the map of yesterdays stage, and see that 13 k loop they did in the end, was just depressing. That climb could have been legendary, yet ASO made a blunder and neutralized the race. Give us 4-6 mountain stages, obviously with variation, then 4-6 medium stages where it is possible to gain time if desired, like stage 8 this year or the finish in Mende. Then fill that out with 2-3 TTs, maybe a TTT and 7-9 sort of flat ones, and you have a Tour. Its not that hard, and the ASO generally does a good job finding new variations to the Tour. They just have to stop misusing the great climbs, like the last one yesterday or the Grand Colombier.