Because Druckmann is now so hated - let's be honest, because of TLoU2 's story NOT the crunch he was likely partially responsible for - that he retroactively never made anything good apparently. I've heard people I actually like and respect make these claims. And I'll reiterate that I think Druckmann is a pretentious writer with his head up his ass, but a bunch of people are resorting to flat-out lies just to feed the gaming community's collective hate boner for the guy. Like how he mo-capped the sex scene with Laura Bailey in TLoU2, because of a crush he had on her, which totally didn't happen.
Can't you make this argument the other way? That people who are arguing about crunch are actually NOT mad about it but about something else (like the voice thing in cyberpunk) but are using crunch as an excuse to attack someone they'd want to attack even if they didn't do crunch, but would not seem legitimate in doing so.
A lot of people who are like "wow, this game has crunch, now I am not getting it" were people who'd not get it anyways, who were just looking for an excuse to make themselves seem virtuous and to justify what they were gonna do even before that justification presented itself.
And the thing is that it is those people who bring up crunch as an issue initially. If you don't care about this, when you are supposed to as the one bringing up this subject, don't expect others to care about it more than you. If people see you being an opportunist and use crunch as a means to your end of justifying your hatred for a good game and not seeming like a non-gamer ideologue, then others are no more obligated than you to protect the sanctity of caring about YOUR pet issue.