I think the main "backlash" is from the VP pushing part of our community. This may sound obvious, but let me explain some obvious stuff that leads to a conclusion.
So after you max out your base, you have 3 ways of "pushing" (otherwise you are here casually, which is ok, but minute details dont affect you as much). These are VP pushing, TF LB Pushing, and Crab Pushing. Each kind has its own unique properties, but what is unique about VP pushing is it requires defenses care. Even if I forgo defense (statues, ptps, and layout quality) on the other 2, I theoretically have the ability to make LBs no problem. The only possible factor being some diamonds and intel, but I will say it until the day I die, use Sol's trap base for excellent/best results.
I have a Tf LB setup on statues (GBE and TD only). The entire point of blue statues is to defend, while being able to attack via maxing out your skill. Skill on attacking is per person, but there is only so much a base can do to defend you. I have often stated that without SGs, I am confident in my ability to take out these bases via smokey attacks. WITH SGS, these players at the top can still beat each other, and as you lower defensive power to fight off combos, lower skilled and lower powered players gain the ability to beat these bases as well. If you take away Sgs, you temporarily nullify the use of ICE. SIMOS, Microwavers, and SSs can help, but they just dont hold the weight of the SG.
All this said, LB and Crab players aren't negatively affected by this gain of intel, while VP players indeed benefit. I suspect (from my first sentence) since non-VP players dont care as much, there was little positive feedback when compared to the negative VP pusher's feedback, thus the "votes" are anti-take away Sgs without warning. When you consider it from this point of view, it becomes clear that SC made the right move warning about no SGs.
Now, to the argument of wanting to make players vary strategies, fair enough, BUT you will often notice SC takes away Sgs for 2 week periods (14 days), meaning that at least one SG will be lost. The math being I can buy 2 SGs last second (via diamonds) and make one for later. This means after 9 days you will lose both, but can replace 1. Thus a player will lose 1 SG for at least 5 days, which IMHO is very fair to these players.
Now I should address Lloopy's point and say, while you are right, having or lacking a or a few ptps dosent break the game for your LB push. WORST CASE is you gain less intel/diamonds from defends, but I can say with NO ptps and no ice, I can easily pass 100 intel per week, so this is why other defenses arnt necessarily as important as the SG. Now would I oppose seeing in advance the entire cycle? I wouldn't mind, but that is another topic and another decision that SC seems to be considering.