Yes, you can, as those were created in Origins, for Origins. Back To Origins is basically Origins with a few entity replacements, and might as well be an entirely separate game the way I see it.
Also, it's not "damage control" (you need to stop using that word so often, given how you've never once successfully pointed out actual 'damage control'). There's no clear way to objectify whether Back To Origins really can be considered one-hundred percent Rayman Legends (like you claim it to be, and like I claim it not to be), so accusing people of faulty arguments over something based on interpretation is really quite silly.
Back to Origins is a part of Legends because, again, it's on the disc. That's like saying "Throwback Galaxy" isn't a part of Super Mario Galaxy 2, just because it's based off of a level from Super Mario 64 (and by based off of, I mean literally ported and polished up for the Galaxy engine).
And as far as I'm concerned, the updated graphics and level design, the physics tweaks of Legends, the added Murfy interaction, the different method of getting double lums, and the extra collectibles are enough to set "Back to Origins" apart from the original levels. They feel different to play (and I have been playing Origins on my laptop in college during my three hour breaks, so I've a fresh experience with both games for comparison), to the point where my playstyle is totally different (especially regarding lum collection and secret searching).
And it is damage controlling to act as if Legends doesn't include the Moskito and Tricky Treasures, when it does, even if it's not new ones (as I've said, not much more could be done with those anyway, and the Invasion levels and Musical levels are the replacements). Trying to warp the facts just to suit ones own point is a great example of damage controlling.
Again, this is entirely based on what you want out of a game. I strive for both on an equal level, and as it so happens, each one (Origins & Legends) had what the other one lacked. I know you fawn over mechanics #1 ftw leet, but presentation and structure can matter just as much.
First of all, quit making assumptions about me. I value presentation and structure as much as mechanics in many games (not all games, though - certain games are all about mechanics). In some games, I value the presentation above all else. It's entirely dependent on the game.
Second, I think "each world hasn't got the same amount of levels as each other" is far from a legitimate criticism to make towards a game.
Are you sure you didn't get that backward? Legends has little to no world structure, you can go and alternate playing between different worlds whenever you want. Legends' world structure is fully incoherent because that's how it's supposed to be. How can that even be compared to a linear game founded upon world-progression structure like Origins? Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by 'world structure', I really don't see what you can do to usefully compare the two.
Keep in mind that personally, I couldn't give a shit about the world structure in Legends and Origins. I'm only trying to think on Rayrobi's terms. Although I do think that the choice Legends offers makes it a bit better than Origins in terms of player progression, I was never bothered by the structure of Origins (though objectively, in any difficult platformer, it's seen as a good thing to offer choice in progression, as it avoids the feeling of being "stuck").
By world structure, I was referencing Rayrobi's complaint regarding how the world structure in Legends is worse because each world has the same number of levels. But if you want to talk about coherency, isn't Legends better than Origins in that regard? Because not every world in Origins had the same number of levels. Some had very few, some had many. It was very haphazard. Legends had the same number of levels in each world, with the exception of Living Dead Party (which is obviously just the bonus world, like many platformers have. Bonus worlds are always known for doing things differently to the rest of the game). Not that I PERSONALLY could give a damn either way, but objectively, Legends is more coherent in how it's worlds are structured.
If you think about it, they do nothing more than cry out for help. And there is no real reason why you must free them in the game, basically you are just told to free them without knowing why. They do nothing with the story, they only appear in the intro, and that's it. And as you can see, legends is ALL about freeing those damn dwarves that don't do anything.
...You're saving them because they are the innocents of Rayman's world that are being terrorised. Rayman is a hero, not an anti-hero. There doesn't need to be a "use" for the people he saves, he does it regardless. As a Rayman fan, this should be basic trivia for you. How you miss that point is beyond me.
It has never been the "driving force" behind the games, that't true, but people who got used to the first 3 games do miss a more complex story from Origins/Legends. Sure it was not very "deep" in any game, but at least they had a more complex story that made you understand things about Rayman's world plus understand why you have to do this and that. The story in Legends doesn't tell you why the heck do you have to collect lums and free the teensies. You basically have to do them because you earn cups and get a better rank in the leaderboard and increase your awesomeness, which has NOTHING to do with Rayman's world itself OR the story, but it has something to do with the GAME.
Honestly, the first three games didn't have complex stories. Rayman 1 and Rayman 2 have stories as complex as Origins and Legends (only Rayman 2 had a bit of extra fluff, but the overall plot was still "free people, beat the bad guy, save the world". Rayman 3 had a bit more complexity, but it was still nothing terribly complex.
Of course you are not forced to unlock him or reach the last rank, but people who are thrilled to do so could get bored easily if they keep having to play the same 5 challenges for weeks or even months to accomplish their goals, and each challenges has maximum 30-40 areas that vary, if you have played them all and then comes another one, after a bit of time you sure go like: "Oh this part again, this is boring, why isn't it something new". It's everyone's own desicion, that's right, but people who decided to do it, then play the challenges for weeks if not month, isn't that repetitive and tedious?
Again, these challenges are randomly generated. You can't expect them to have the variation of the story levels. Of course, this random generation has a pattern (if it didn't, we'd likely get unplayable levels). But regarding it getting tedious, of course it will. But that's the point where you are supposed to put them down.
Now, I'm not arguing the point that the challenges have gotten kind of stale. I feel they have. I don't spend that much time on them since the Beyond Gaming competition. But I'm not going to criticise the game for it, as I recognise the purpose of the mode, and the game succeeds in the purpose. It's meant for high score junkies. The kind of people who would play the same level over and over just to be the best at that level. It's not meant for people who would play the same thing over and over to get a costume.
People say that because they are bored of Origins/Legends already, and want something different. And because a sequel to Legends will likely be similar to its predecessor, that's why they say that. I understand both you and them though.
Considering how much Legends built upon Origins in mechanics, presentation, and world building, I don't see why people don't trust a final entry to the trilogy to innovate even further.
Of course, but you know, Legends didn't show as mind-blowing new things as Origins. It only expanded upon it, however the gameplay did not change, you are still Rayman and his friends, who run jump and fight. It's the same as it was in Origins, but in 123 levels instead of the 63 in Origins.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
It's true that Legends built upon Origins, but Origins only really did something new and mind blowing each world, for the first half of the game (as the second set of worlds were just rehashes in terms of theme, except for Moody Clouds). However, Legends introduces something new almost every level. Which is why I have faith in the team behind the game if they were to make a third installment.
Then dying in the evil spiky notes because I was going too fast to know where I was going. 
