Firstly, the point of the proposal I have made is to get the most information about candidates possible without changing the infrastructure of the system, so I haven't considered going back to all the exams in A2 year. Having said that, I think there are three good reasons not to go back to that:
1) having public exams taken just before applying to uni gives the universities a lot more to go on about a candidate's suitability about a particular course. I am against making everyone apply post a-level.
2) Making people do loads of exams at one time seems unnecessarily tough on teenagers. People doing 4 A Levels will have about 20 exams to do in a very short amount of time. This means people will do worse for no good reason, IMO.
3) The whole point of the AS system was so people could do 4 or 5 ASs, then drop ones they didn't like so much/found harder. It is right people who drop a subject after a year (most) should be recognised for their achievements in that subject.
I don't really understand the opposition to an A* grade - it is just a clearer way of showing a new benchmark of achievement. By your logic, why have grades at all? Why not have loads of numbers? Because they are cumbersome, so having a grade is neater, and gives people something concrete to aim for. Besides, it would make it easier for unis to give offers based on grades at A* level, if they so chose.
I don't want AEAs to be accessible to everyone, the whole point is they are aimed at the best 10% of students, to differentiate those at the very top. I would suggest everyone who gets an A* at AS should be put in for them automatically, and those with As can do them if they choose. No need to make them easier.