It's a matter of two things really. Historically you look at the Rock bands that became popular, like the Beatles, Zeppelin, The Who, Elvis Presley, ZZ Top, Pink Floyd, Van Halen, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Journey, Judas Priest, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Grateful Dead, Black Sabbath, Scorpions and hell since they're from the same country -- Rush. You listen to the aforementioned, and you know their influences when listening to them, but yet at the same time they were very revolutionary and fresh in their time. They may have had some simple or basic songs on the radio, but they weren't afraid to go all out and take chances, like The Who's Quadrophenia or Iron Maiden's Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. Especially Rush.
However you look at Nickelback and see they're our generation's definitive Rock band so to speak, and their songs are so terribly generic. I very much doubt there will be a "Quadrophenia" or "Seventh Son of a Seventh Son" for them.
And the second reason is, since they are so bland and vanilla, you have many music aficionados that would rather listen to something fresh and unique. There are much more better contemporary bands out there, sadly most of them aren't on the radio and are usually from Europe. Let alone the fact you may never see them in the top 40 for more than a week. That's the problem with Nickelback, it's a band that I don't think will inspire this generation or future generations to really take anything from their musicianship.
And that is why they are disliked, they're just a successful band that is much more mediocre and plain than it's predecessors.
![[Kira Must Die]](https://eg-forums-escapist-data-bucket.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/68/68539.jpg?1620622912){kind=avatar}
