I love how the same people who have bashed USBC for not doing enough to regulate the scoring environment are also the ones complaining about these proposed changes. Would it have been nice if these things had been done years ago? Sure, but as I've said over and over again, high scoring paces are NOT what has hurt the sport. Bowlers are two-faced as all hell. Many say that they want lower scores, yet they're the first ones to complain after they shoot 580 for a few weeks in a row. The game has suffered because time has past it by. There are 50,000 recreational activities, both real and online, that people can be involved in these days; that wasn't the case 30 years ago. Also, getting younger bowlers to commit to a 33-week season just isn't a thing like it used to be.
Lastly, in regard to skill level, outside of the league environment, the best bowlers with the most talent still win 99.9% of the time. Sure, if you put them on a house shot where ANYBODY can score, the playing field becomes more level, but in truly competitive environments (Open Championships, PBA, big money events), the best bowlers still win because they're the most skilled.