In 1974 I was in transit at Treasure Island in San Fransicko bay, coming off emergency leave, waiting for my ship to come back from Viet Nam. A new sailor, you could tell because his uniform was so clean, sat down next me at dinner. I was scarfing it down while he just pushed his around a little. Finally, he asked me how "I could eat that shit." Guessing he was probably going to a ship, I asked him if that was the case and he proudly affirmed he was. I asked him which one and he said with more pride, "the USS Ranger!" To which I replied I had been on it for two years and compared to the food on the Ranger, this shore food was great. I think I ruined his enlistment.
The point is this has been an ongoing issue for a long time. And the major problem is interpretation of what is good. Actually, I thought the food was pretty good on the Ranger considering they were making some 15,000 meals a day. Being a newbie, I just wanted to welcome the guy. People working port and starboard watches were getting up at all different hours, some coming off a hot flight deck, some from air-conditioned office (At least that was what was claimed. The only time it was truly cold was when the temperature was in the sixties.) The point being it is simply impossible to please everyone all the time. And when surveys given, what will people remember? The average good food or the occasional bad one and we all know that answer. Besides, it's a military tradition to gripe about the food.