Because I love playing KOF, I've learned to get used to strikers... but I could careless if the system is there or not.
Taiso did bring up a valid point, though... the strikers in KOF do take away from the actual one on one fight. Because the strikers are key elements in the game, most people couldn't survive without them in regular play. No matter how good you are with your team, without your striker you're pretty much toast. This is one of the reasons why I stopped playing MvC2... despite all the "skill" needed to play, to be successful at the game you have to rely too much on your assist characters and not the actual one on one fight.
I too prefer standard one on one battles, with "team assists" being of limited use, and not gamebreaking as they currently are. I also don't like the idea of being able to use such moves to cover up blatant mistakes, like missed uppercuts or DMs. If you do the move and you miss, you should pay the price... end of story. Not have a striker/assist come out and help you land on the ground, preventing a counter attack. Notice how it's things like this why most MvC2 fans can't stand CvS? <IMG SRC="smilies/ohno.gif" border="0">
If they do decide to keep the striker system, they need to make it VERY limited in use. Either make it one use per round, or only useable when your meter is flashing red, like in Kizuna Encounter. That would prevent a lot of the supposed "infinite abuse" that is currently plaguing KOF 2000.