A good logo is not only about the "inside scoop" or the controversy. A good logo is one that has good recognition, a linkage to the product. I don't really care about any controversy or even being able to remember the elements that that make it up.

The cracker barrel thing is a case in point, they changed not only the company logo, but the company image. Just like the locations lost the comfortable image the logo became flat and corporate THAT is why people cared.

Designing a new logo for a new product is much simpler to do, you follow common, modern rules of compositions, the image the brand wants to convey, etc and it will be accepted. A logo redesign on the other hand, is much more involved. It has tradition, it has recognition, it has a certain design style that people grew up with. Very few radical redesigns work, at best they are ignored (and probably picked up by new generations at the expense of the old). That does not mean a few redesign is an automatic failure.

Coke is a good example. The current, cursive, logo started in the 40s and while has been refined over the years, elements added or taken away, it has retained that flowing style. That is not to say they have not tried, the blocky design that started with new coke in 85 has become almost as iconic, although I believe it is mostly used in the diet line.

Companies also try out new elements to set off special editions, Holliday's, seasons, or recognizing events/people/etc. the good ones that people remember usually still contain the base elements. Coke changes focus to larger Santa, Pepsi includes Holliday elements like trees or ornaments , etc, but the base element is still there even if you need to look for it.