I agree. Too much bloat. Too much using a Technology X hammer when a screwdriver is what's need.
That said, the metric here is too blunt, too broad.
1) We need to call out avoidable bloat. A simple example: too often I'll visit a site where say the full-hero image is full width and full height. The problem is the same 300-500k+ image that's served to desktop is served to mobile. No media queries (if they're using background-image), no sizes and srcset if it's an image tag.
2) It's about expectations. Some site are naturally image heavy (e.g., photography). Within reason, that's acceptable. Some use of lazy load is better than paging, and such.
3) And do we throw the baby out with the bathwater? If a site is slightly bloated but accessible, I think there should be redeeming points for that. That is, you had X or Y amount of resources and you made #a11y a priority, at say the expense of trimming some bloat. I'm okay with that.
That said, the metric here is too blunt, too broad.
1) We need to call out avoidable bloat. A simple example: too often I'll visit a site where say the full-hero image is full width and full height. The problem is the same 300-500k+ image that's served to desktop is served to mobile. No media queries (if they're using background-image), no sizes and srcset if it's an image tag.
2) It's about expectations. Some site are naturally image heavy (e.g., photography). Within reason, that's acceptable. Some use of lazy load is better than paging, and such.
3) And do we throw the baby out with the bathwater? If a site is slightly bloated but accessible, I think there should be redeeming points for that. That is, you had X or Y amount of resources and you made #a11y a priority, at say the expense of trimming some bloat. I'm okay with that.