You said the ideas are bad with no argument to back it up.
Because they are ideas to change a system. The system itself is the argument to back it up. It is perfectly valid to question a system, and it is perfectly valid to stand on the success of that system if you believe that the changes would degrade that system. The counter-argument is already in place: "The system obviously works- it is designed for entertainment and to draw a crowd, and it currently does that." The suggested idea must first prove that the system needs a change, and/or prove that the system will benefit from that change. The suggestions present, both here and from you, accomplish neither.
--- 99% of internet signatures don't end abruptly. If yours is one of the 1% that do, copy and