I am sure this was a joke, but I'll take the bait.
I think that notion would make it too easy for bad decks to win tournaments--you should be punished for overextending or not managing the exact amount of cards in your hand at every phase.
TLV has a drawback--is it a big one? Not really---
However, if you have a really jaime'd out 60 card deck, like I had in North Carolina 2 weeks ago--then you can start slaying those 85 card decks because your cards are better--and I was barely ever drawing an extra card (maybe 1 or 2 times during luwin or condon procs, and 1 special plot in negotiations).
Yarly! (I wonder who will get this, lol)
The 85 card drawback is such a great consideration. It's a non-issue if you just want to put a bunch of good cards in, but when you want a tight deck, you have to decide whether the lowered odds of getting the combo is off-set by the higher average value of a draw.
And to explain that, basically what it boils down to is that for X number of cards those cards will have a contribution to the game (value) of Y. A combo of cards might have an additional value of 30 when together, but the odds of drawing it are 50% in a given game. The average value of 2 cards drawn is, let's say, 10 in that deck. On the flip side, the TLV deck's 3 cards drawn have a value of 15. So over 4 turns, the TLV deck has drawn cards that add up to 60 value, while the non-TLV deck has a 50% chance of its cards adding up to 40 and a 50% chance of its card adding up to 70. Which do you play?
The numbers I used are mostly in favor of TLV in this case, but clearly those numbers will change dramatically dependent on how each deck is built. There's a huge, and really cool, decision point that everyone now makes when building a deck, but it adds almost 0 complexity to the game. Don't want to think? Don't play the agenda or do play the agenda. It doesn't really matter! Are you a min/maxer? You get to do all the math in the world to make your deck uber awesome! Stepping up the draw phase to 3 cards dilutes the contributions of TLV fairly significantly. Instead of 10/15 split (+50% with TLV), you get a 15/20 split (+33%). TLV is therefore 11.33% less effective if you increase the draw phase to 3. That could be enough to make it fall out of favor and lose the awesome considerations it currently brings to deck-building.
And with regards to skill vs. luck. It's bad too reduce luck too much. Let's say an individual player has an x factor that they apply to the cards they draw. The x factor of a great player is 2. The x factor of a noob is 1. Noob draws 20 value in cards, multiplied by 1, ending with 20 value in cards. Great player draws 20 value in cards, multiplied by 2, and can produce 40 value with his superior play. This results in being 100% stronger, and +20 value more effective. If you changed the draw, you change how much power a better player has. Noob gets 30 value in draw, and 30 value in productivity. Great gets 30 value in draw, but 60 value in productivity. He is still double the noob, but winds up with +30 value. That could be the difference between wiping someone's board and them being left with a character or two. It would probably be great for tournaments, but damage the already fragile equality of casual play.
Tangent: It'd be funny to see something silly for the next agenda like look at top 3 and choose 2, put the third on the bottom of your deck. These little manipulations are awesome.
TL:DR - Increasing the draw phase dilutes TLV's effectiveness 11.33%. Increasing the draw phase favors skilled players and would probably be great for tournaments, but would damage the already fragile equality of casual play.