I think you mischaracterize the situation by saying that there is a danger that they might do something based on the recent discussion. They may do something because several seasons of semi-completely ignoring 2-3 has left the game extremely unbalanced.
I obviously believe that Charles is right that under specific circumstances a 2-3 / SB combo is doable even in the current engine. But it's unclear what that means: even if there are circumstances in which SB helps, the other skills seem to be useful in a much larger variety of circumstances.
I think what Charles has to say goes hand-in-hand with the sentiment that today's "behemoth" players are inefficient and should be trained differently, hence the salary penalty. There's an arms race to build the best guards and bigs, but efficient and versatile players for the most part don't exist.
When I saw the title of your post, I thought it was an argument against making changes that had not been announced enough in advance. I would have agreed with that, but I guess I disagree with the reason that motivates you: I don't find that the BB cave in too early to pressure on obvious point, but rather that they usually cave in too late (witness tanking: first they said there wasn't a problem, made up some numbers that you'd ber worse off, and then ended up seeing the light of reason and changing things anyway...)
I still think the salary floors were implemented too hastily, because some teams got screwed in the process for doing nothing but competing and promoting. I'm motivated because I think the BBs would make changes more effectively if the community didn't expect them to be made ASAP. Maybe it took a long time for the salary floors to be implemented, but how much of that was spent trying to tell the managers they weren't needed, instead of exploring solutions? My point is that the dialogue between BBs and community, and the resulting alterations made to the game, could be improved.