"Most of the problems with systemd stem from not knowing or not caring about how to use it. I don't have issues with the amount of information I can get from journalctl. I haven't not been able to debug any issues with systemd. In fact, it's been a lot easier, because I only have to look in one place, and I get relevant targeted information."
I find it hilarious that people are downvoting you to hell when you are completely right. Redhat wouldn't have done this if there wasn't an identified need and desire.
I can't yet use systemd as fluidly as I can init scripts, but as you said, that's just due to lack of familiarity. As a concept, I consider systemd to be infinitely simpler and cleaner than a cacophony of init scripts, that need to be manually debugged when something strange goes on.
Other people claim to have run into problems getting systemd to handle logging 'n whatnot. I dunno what they're doing, but I have so far moved the majority of our linux servers to systemd based distros, and I haven't had a single problem yet.
Individual daemons should not be responsible for maintaining their own security contexts. That's why things like SELinux exists (although the vast majority of people find it "too hard" and just shut it off). Yet daemon-provided init scripts have to manage things like making sure the daemon runs as a non-privileged user. With systemd, this kind of management is now a core part of the OS, like it should have been to begin with.