No mate. A rider like WVA would be a multiple GT and classics winner in the 70s. But nowadays, he is a "specialist" in cobbled classics despite being a good all around. However in this era, he can only fight for wins in cobbled classics (or races like MSR). He can't win Gts or hilly classics like LBL or GdL but I strongly believe he could do that in the 70s. Specialization is a proof how cycling has becoming harder and better.How can you claim that this era is stronger when a ski jumper turns into cycling in his mid 20s and becomes a multiple GT winner?
You have more riders and more nations competing, that's true, but that's not a proof for a stronger era.
Riders turning to cycling from other sports and starting to win, however, makes you ask how strong the era actually is?
(both of these are legit questions)
And then you can bring the argument that riders nowadays can't compete in GTs and cobbled classics (except for Pogacar) and you can conclude, based on everything above, that today's era is actually weak in competition.
See how twisted can the "weak era" argument can be and how it can work in both directions?
But let's move on, this is pointless. You will never agree with me.