There is a big difference between change for the sake of change, and something more deliberate like this. In this instance, Marriott was totally melding three distinct programs that each had their own brand and loyalty. Yes, they could have just said "suck it up - we're the big fish in this food chain, and you're all a part of me". Great for legacy MR folks, but not so much legacy Starwood and Ritz. Instead, they decided to start fresh, with a new name and image that didn't have any legacy baggage but could be equally "owned" by members from any of the constituent parts.

Personally, the program name (somewhat contrived as it is) is almost a don't-care state for me. The benefits are still good, and the IT and operational issues from the merger will eventually be dealt with. I deal with change management all of the time - there is no such thing as a change that will please everyone. Eventually this will become the steady state, and if they do their jobs, it will truly earn loyalty in its own right.