False. Hero bans would make an even more rigid meta. The devs know this.
Hero pools allow for the upsides of hero bans while actually keeping the meta moving.
They could do this by looking at player count and hero pickrates as well.
Say Orisa is banned for a week, and the number of players skyrockets. Then the next week they move onto banning someone else and the numbers plummet. That makes it pretty obvious that a lot of people have a problem with Orisa and she likely needs to be adjusted.
Likewise, if, say, Reaper is banned and Winston’s pickrate skyrockets, then it’s likely that Winston isn’t weak and in need of buffs, but rather Reaper is just what’s holding him back.
Hero pools just make it more systematic (and fair) instead of biasing everything towards the most hated hero(es).
Again, you are assuming that different heroes get banned every time. That is, again, false. We’d likely just see a “ban meta” where people ban the most frustrating heroes over and over again. It wouldn’t make things any more fluid than they are already, we’d still just be locked into a single meta, only this time with fewer heroes.
Hero bans would really just cause infighting whenever someone’s preferred pick isn’t banned.
I agree that this game is severely lacking in teamwork and communication, which your system would rely on, it wouldn’t magically create it.