Yes. They developed the idea poorly. A mechanic's being developed for the worse has no bearing on its initial quality. If I give you a stellar painting and then much later splatter ketchup across it, that does not make the painting itself horrible. It merely means any conventional use of the painting was wrecked. GL ought to have been less punishing since it necessarily worked off a point of sustain, but all else literally ended with TK. You determine the potency cost, relative the assumed baseline (GL3 sustained), of ramping up to GL3 under PB and give that to TK. Voila. There is no longer a penalty to that ramp-up since the ramp-up occurs only as often as its due compensation.
That was it. That's where it should have ended. We did not need Riddle of Earth, at least as GL maintenance, because we already had TK. We did not need Anatman, because we already had TK. The compensation was already met. They needed only to not nerf PB to hell.
Yes, RoW's GL generation then necessarily allowed for TK to be used rotationally when both tools are present, since the potency cost would shrink even while its reward remains the same, but I don't see that as a problem (and even if you see a rotational action as being more involved than fire-and-forget-on-CD-refresh as a problem, it's still an altogether separate one caused by RoW, not the base concept of GL). To my mind, the only issue there was the triple-weave (especially given that XIV refuses to queue any oGCDs beyond the first per GCD-gap).