Claiming that the post-ND games have the stigma of bad smell to them is not preference. Whenever the topic of Crash comes up and those games are mentioned, there's a good chance a follow-up comment will appear talking about how those games suck (there's even a video on YouTube with 1.5m views talking about "Bad Crash Bandicoot games", that's been relatively poorly challenged if we go by the Like bar and docile comments). Critical commentary was equally harsh, with not a single game reaching an 80 on Metacritic at a time when reviewers were not as stringent as they are now. Finally, Crash faced declining sales post-ND to the point where, as you said, Twinsanity (one of the better games) struggled to reach 1m. As far as I'm concerned, that legacy should be kept to a minimum, certainly during a time while the series is starting to find its feet again.
Indeed, we only need to look at the reception to the NST to see where the nostalgia really lies: over 10m sales for a character in his prime three games. I think it's clear that people have fonder memories of Polar than Crunch, and Dingodile than Velo.
Also, you made the assumption that I disliked the post-ND games without any evidence. This is incorrect. I actually like the GBA duo and N. Trance is one of my favourite characters, while I view WoC and Twinsanity as decent games that don't do too much exciting, with the former in particular just being a poorer version of Crash 3. Anything post-Twinsanity is not really worth playing, and I say all this as a Crash fan, one of the few who were dedicated enough to the series to purchase Boom Bang when it released. However, if we're to objectively have a look at how Crash should move forward, we need to consider that it might be for the best that the post-ND, pre-NST epoch of Crash is left largely dormant for the time being, with them slowly reintroducing characters/tracks with updated designs in better games over a longer period. To clarify: this would mean someone could play the NST and then step into a "Crash 4" without having felt they missed something.
In response to your second point, I think we both agree on the general direction on that characters should be reintroduced and given a chance to shine in better games, but we differ on how to go about that. I'm more in favour of harder reset, whereas you seem to be more in favour of a softer reset. Perhaps that's because you have personal connections to the devs who worked on Crash post-ND and having someone suggest that their work be thrown out seems harsh, which is perfectly understandable. I think both viewpoints are acceptable, and it's interesting to see how they'll move forward. I simply don't want to see Crash fall into disarray again and become what Sonic is now - largely a joke amongst the wider community due to middling games and odd character designs. I doubt history will repeat itself because the money, talent and time seems to be there this time around, but you never know.
And OK, I accept that the merger played a major role in the hiatus, but what I said regarding Crash's fall from grace during that almost 20-year time period still stands.
