Goes against the point of what they're trying to do.
If you had 6 groups of 6 you'd still have a greater chance of 'different' fixtures and facing bigger sides. You'd still get your 10 game minimum and better yet no completely confusing 36 team group where not everyone plays each other and less 'dead rubbers'.
Why? I struggle to see any problems with the current system. Why does it need to be changed?
I could be wrong but based on the clubs who've welcomed this. The idea is that with the 8 groups of 4 there isn't enough games, enough 'different' games and revenue. For English football with it's larger calendar, to us this is obviously insane but to Dutch, Belgian type nations they want to face more big clubs, more times and this gives them the opportunity to do this.
This method guarantees every team 10 CL games a season, some even 12 . I think UEFA are doing it for revenue but the less reputable leagues have been wanting a bigger piece of the pie for years and this gives them it which I think is ultimately a decent enough compromise if you're going to keep fecking them over and reducing the number of their teams who enter the CL.
UEFA are in a tough spot, they've got one side wanting more inclusiveness and then another who think they have a right to be in the CL and if they don't get in they'll make a new league....
They've given the top leagues 4 automatic spots, they've given them winning the Europa League to get in and it still isnt enough.
Within ten years I reckon the Europa League will go and the CL will feature 48 teams. This is where it's all heading to.