An easy way to skip 17 because the transition sucks and the hole is overbearing smells a bit like a failure. However, I haven't played the hole so I don't know how harsh it is. I will reserve judgement on difficulty level, but not on the transition. The hole has to be something very special to justify the routing muckup. I have played many, many holes I think are harsh. For instance, where is the bailout on the Postage Stamp? I accept that the hole is on championship course and that my skills aren't up to the task much of the time. I wouldn't dream of changing the hole. I accept that all holes can't be for all players and that I may not like some holes.
I do understand that reversing the hole offered a tee much further back for Open 18 and that aspect of the change works well, for the Open. It becomes a question of does all this work around Open 17 & 18 need to solely support the Open or is a compromise more appropriate. It seems to me once a decision was taken to create a terrible transition, going all in was the obvious way to go as it "justifies" the awkward walk. If 17 is dumbed down to help the members, now we are left with a fairly simple Open par 3, but a more compelling Open 18.
I wonder if making Open 18 a par 4 was ever considered? Could have made a drama hole of Open 17 playing in the original direction and simply made 18 a par 4. There wasn't anything inherently wrong with Open 18 previously. It was just an easy birdie hole. Call it a par 4 and the "problem" is solved. Was the Open "problem" a bit of overthinking?
Ciao