Wayland and "an Xorg user experience that's not a disaster" came from roughly the same developers because of the same needs. Generally lots of stuff was moved out of Xorg into places where it fits better, into the Linux kernel (modesetting!), into Mesa, into application frameworks. This development is what made Wayland possible in the first place. By making large parts of Xorg obsolete, you enable a solution that trims out all the old garbage that nobody realistically needs anymore and hence nobody wants to maintain anymore.
Because the developers of window managers and desktop environments are precisely the people that benefit from foregoing backwards compatibility and getting rid of all the duct tape and zip ties that hold the modern X stack together. It is true that a duct-taped thing can work very well after sufficient iterations, but you absolutely don't want to be maintaining it.
