We got a massive petition signed to abolish the new logo, and the outcry when they announced this was overwhelmingly negative on campus. No one liked it, and it seems the administration has realized that.
Yes which as a designer, really annoys me. The thousands of people who berated the logo and team who designed it simply did not understand what was being replaced nor the full context.
I think the new identity is vastly superior to the existing branding. Here is a proper comparison:
http://minesf.com/resources/cca/2012/12/13/why-the-universit...
http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/ic_uc_we...
An identity is more than just a logo it's an entire system. And I think it's far better than what people give it credit for.
It's fair to argue that the design/branding was better or worse. I happen to think the new logo looked insipid. The rest of the branding seems to stand up better.
However I think we all should agree that the communication regarding the branding was a travesty. This doesn't seem to be the designer's fault, but they're catching most of the blame.
What I don't like about the original article is the "your opinion is wrong and here's why" attitude. Telling people that they are wrong up front is another communication failure.