That is simply irrelevant. That is a prefatory poem by Jonson (or at least ‘B. I.’) to Cinthias Revenge by ‘I. S.’, who is usually thought to be John Stephens. There is no reason at all to think that Jonson’s comments have anything whatsoever to do with Shakespeare.
How many sonnets by other Elizabethan poets have you read? Because, far from them merely agreeing that there are ‘some puzzles’ in Shakespeare’s sonnets, all literary scholars revel in the fact that those sonnets - and most of those of his contemporaries as well - are crammed with them. Sonnets were supposed to be cryptic, obscure, playful, ambiguous, surprising and, yes, bizarre. Which means that this is not exactly the strongest grounds on which to question Shakespeare’s authorship.
Er, actually hundreds of writers, most of them lawyers, have argued that Shakespeare must have had some legal experience. Daniel Kornstein’s Kill all the lawyers? has a good - and suitably sceptical - discussion of that whole Shakespeare-as-scrivener tradition.
A point which is the central theme of James Shapiro’s brand-new Contested Will. Although it is specifically Edmond Malone whom he blames.
And, while Shapiro is superb on why the case against Shakespeare-as-Shakespeare is very obviously complete bollocks, he is fully aware that this is as much a challenge to many of the conventional biographers as well. So much so that the Shakespeare Oxford Society has given him a positive review!!