Oro,
Remember, "carry for self-defense" wasn't an element of Nordyke at all, it was solely about the ability to hold a commercial function, involving guns, on county property. To look for the ruling on this limited a case to do more than incorporate was hoping for a lot. Even Heller only focussed on possession and carry in the home.
The sensitive places portion of the ruling was left formally undefined, just vague verbiage about "large numbers of people maybe being an okay reason", as opposed to a hard test or standard being created.
So, that portion of the ruling wasn't "ignored" by most of us, it was simply recognized as requiring further court action to define what "sensitive places" were.
I believe the panel erred in that particular part of the ruling but, since they went far beyond Scalia's language in the Heller ruling on "sensitive places" I can see that being easily challenged with a later suit.
I guess my point is, it was huge win as it sets up a Circuit controversy on incorporation for SCOTUS to deal with sooner rather than later. It also provided the basis for SAF and the others to immediately file their planned suits against "may-issue" AND the handgun safety list. I'm betting an AWB case will be filed shortly as well (if it hasn't).
None of that would have happened without Nordyke. Once SAF wins the "may issue" case, that will provide the basis for defining "reasonable restrictions" on where that "shall-issue" carry can occur. That is, if SCOTUS doesn't do it first.
There isn't a "downside" to the ruling, as no one should have expected to get everything cleared up by that case, given the limited circumstance it actually addressed.