For me, the announcement about S3 brought mixed emotions.
(T)he knowledge that they have been developing/shooting it side-by-side with S2 makes me worried...if S2 feels like a rushed turd, why would I expect anything different on S3?
The answer to this is actually pretty simple, but could be summarized as "For the same reason you weren't expecting a rushed turd after S1." Basically, every season of Picard has had/will have a different showrunner. Season One was helmed by Michael Chabon, who had justifiable reasons for leaving the show, namely that he was getting an original show of his own green–lit and had the opportunity to work with his wife on said new series. This was basically a once in a lifetime career–advancing opportunity and he would have been insane not to take it.
In contrast, Season Two has been helmed by a combination of Akiva Goldsman and Terry Matalas as co–Showrunners. It's important to note however that Terry Matalas effectively left the production of Season Two a little over halfway through in order to serve as the sole showrunner on Season Three. I should note that while I've been following Season Two, I have not personally watched it yet as I refuse to do so on what is effectively a 15 year old TV set with dead pixels and a slew of other issues. (I also refuse to buy a cheap TV knowing that whatever replaces this thing will easily be something I'm staring at for another 15 years. Once I have a decent TV set though, I'm going to be catching up on Picard immediately.) This is, as far as I'm concerned, honestly good news for Season Three and bad news for Season Two. My impression of Akiva Goldsman is that he may be "the problem" on the production crew, or at least a fairly significant part of it.
Go look at Goldsman's credits if you don't believe me, among his "steaming stinkers" to borrow a term Brannon Braga used to describe VGR's Threshold, are 1996's A Time to Kill and 1997's Batman & Robin, both of which won Golden Raspberry Awards for how awful they were. Okay, so maybe he's gotten better over time, right? Well in 2001 he did win some actual awards for A Beautiful Mind, and 2005 he won a BAFTA for Cinderella Man, but his more recent credits are... well let's just say less impressive. He was a writer in 2015 on The Divergent Series: Insurgent, a film that's arguably a weak middle of a fairly strong trilogy, even knowing that Lionsgate botched part two of the two part third film by not releasing it. In 2017, he was credited for the story on Transformers: The Last Knight, which was nominated for, but ultimately didn't "win," you guessed it, another Golden Raspberry Award. Basically, this guy did two really good films and a whole lot of garbage, and that kind of record is typically indicative of someone whose output is usually garbage. (Surround yourself with people significantly better than you are and even a dead weight can look like a genius.)
As for Trek, he has writing credits in DSC on The Vulcan Hello, Will You Take My Hand, and New Eden, and directing credits on Context is for Kings and Will You Take My Hand?, with the only one of those that doesn't rub me the wrong way at some point being New Eden.
Terry Matalas on the other hand is the opposite of Akiva Goldsman. For starters, he got his start on Trek and in TV working on Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise, and wrote two scripts for the latter. He also wrote for Terra Nova, which was one of those "awesome shows that fans knew would only last one season." He basically created the SyFy TV adaptation of 12 Monkeys, (as in he pitched an original story to the production company behind 12 Monkeys, they told him they wanted to do a 12 Monkeys TV series, and the solution was to just "find and replace" the character names to match those from 12 Monkeys, basically the same thing that happened to Caprica) and that ran for four successful seasons. Christopher Lloyd's casting in that show was also his doing. He had a couple other projects between that and Picard, including showrunner of season four of the MacGuyver reboot, but he knows Trek and understands competent storytelling. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if some of the issues with Season Two are the result of him not being involved as a result of having to focus on Season Three, nor would I be surprised if Paramount put him in charge of Season Three specifically so Goldsman wouldn't be. I really hope Matalas gets to do more with Trek if Season Three is what I'm expecting from him.
Knowing that a third season is already in production, I feel like the second season is just a bridge to it. (And in my experience, these bridges can be tedious and not very satisfying).
There's SO much Picard-building (even RE-building) that I'm hopeful it pays off then. At the moment, my daughter and I go from exchanging quizzical glances with furrowed brows to just stopping in the middle of a scene to ask, "WTF just happened?!"
This is basically my viewpoint based on what I know about S2 and about the idea that Picard was always intended to be a three season show; three movie trilogy or three act play, the plan was always three and done, even if they entertained the idea of more seasons.
Personally, I'm really hoping for a Star Trek: Stargazer series featuring the rest of the Picard cast when the show ends. I mean, you basically would get to do what DS9 tried to do and ultimately failed at, and what Picard kind of tried to do with limited success as well, which is to "start in the third season." DS9's producers admitted they didn't pull that off successfully, and while I think it worked for Picard, I know others disagree and feel the characters' relationships seemed "forced" at first because we had just met them. Well now they wouldn't be forced, we'd care about them, and you basically get the benefit of a new show, (complete with another California Tax Credit if you do it right,) and the benefit of a seasoned cast. I mean with everything else that's getting greenlit, this seems like it's too good to pass up, and I would be extremely disappointed if we don't get such a series.