I was 100% thinking this same thing the other day. In corporate culture you'd always have project managers, scrum masters, or some other such structure for organizing development across a team. It's one thing when you've got a solo project, as you can of course manage it for yourself, but as your stakeholders grow more diverse (God those words feel gross to type given how they've been used) it's not entirely reasonable to expect people to be both adept at writing code AND at managing the tensions between different areas of interest.

I'm not saying Core needs to adopt a full on AGILE framework, but it could probably stand to cinch up its governance by exploring some personnel who aren't on explicitly to be wiz kid coders.

There's also something to be said for having new maintainers selected only by existing maintainers being a glaring governance issue that Jimmy Song brought up on a recent podcast, which I 110% agree with being an issue. I'm not sure how this could be otherwise addressed (what are we going to do, have a github "election"?). But the recent kerfuffle over op_return has if nothing else brought to the fore the clear fact that Core's governance is lacking.

And heck, maybe the solution is indeed just more implementations. But maybe, it's addressing the multifaceted angles of development not being quite as simple as just code.