I was perfectly fine with that tbh. For me the point of a hypothetical DGW BB (if decided upon) is not to have awesome cheap bench players with two good fixtures necessarily, it's just to at a minimum match the points expectation of the best SGW BB opportunity with minimal effort, simply by utilising the fact that you have double appearance points and double chances of a CS.
Last year the reason I personally thought Brighton worked so well was that they also had a good DGW in the gameweek immediately before the BB DGW in question - so last year DGWBBing arguably magnified the advantage of a certain combination of players (rather than compromised them) because you got 4 fixtures in 2 gameweeks from Brighton. So in that sense I didn't particularly mind the tougher fixtures in the second DGW as I saw it as an investment over a 4 fixture-period that would inevitably provide less variance than a two-gameweek period. It was quite funny how they flopped in the easier fixtures and CSed in the tougher ones mind. A decent example against the strawman that everyone doing a DGWBB picks bench players with eyes only on that week, at significant extra price, with good DGW fixtures, at the cost of the surrounding weeks though.
Of course, if we're now in a world where 4atb is the new norm, rather than 3atb, then arguably all BBs are devalued.