That's always been my theory.
If you run a reset, you should be looking to clean up continuity and rebuild your brand on a strong foundation that will allow you better access to new readers going forward. After all, new readers are the ones who object to continuity and backstory, and use them as excuses for not buying ongoing series.
So just what the hell is DC doing then?
In the transition between the original DCU and the "New 52" some series have been cancelled and some new ones will be introduced.
For some books the cancellation is made necessary by the nature of a reset. There can hardly be a Batman Inc. if Bruce has only just begun his war as the Dark Knight. Timothy Drake cannot be Red Robin, because (chronologically speaking) he has not yet been Robin. The problem is that there doesn't seem to be any hard and fast rule about what will be continuity and what won't. If Tim Drake isn't around to be Red Robin, how is it that Damien is around to be Robin? New continuity? Are we at the beginning of Batman's career (as suggested by the sneak peak at Justice League #1) or not? If Dick Grayson is already Nightwing, how is it that Green Lantern is stunned to find out that Batman is real?
And no.....I don't think "5 years ago" covers it. Five years isn't nearly enough time to go from Batman, the urban myth, to Batman the legend, with his son as Robin, Dick Grayson all grown up as Nightwing, etc.
Without a deeper dig into the New 52, I cannot possibly hope to explore all of the continuity glitches that are being committed as writers are (obviously) being given free reign at the expense of maintaining a strong universal continuity.
I'm just not sure I'm prepared to invest the effort.