That’s because (days of) intensity ≠ volume. Keeping that distinction is very important, e. g. last season with the help of a forum member I was able to figure out I was fatigued. So I went from 3 days of intensity back to 2 by switching from MV + endurance to LV + more endurance. Time-wise it was a wash, but it made a big difference.
TR should improve how it presents these plans and to make that distinction clear.
I don’t think coaches would universally say this. This really depends on the athlete, their goals and their current situation.
Perhaps this is true for some, but I think a lot more people are limited by time. I’d love to be able to work out 2 hours 4 days a week and go on 5+ hour rides at least once a week. But I’m definitely limited by time, and I think a lot of others, especially people with kids, are in the same boat.
The time crunched heritage of TR is both a blessing and a curse, depending on how time crunched you are.
Training consistency >> training plan details.
If more people stick to the training plan if you offer them an easy sweet spot workout rather than a Z2 workout, then it might make sense statistically.
Ideally, TR would factor in training experience when choosing training plans.