The issue is everyone's subjective measure varies by a lot. The NIPS experiment showed that the papers selected for publication by peer review is more on the ra

The issue is everyone's subjective measure varies by a lot. The NIPS experiment showed that the papers selected for publication by peer review is more on the random side. Now assume you got this much randomness but on your career progression. And it would be even worse as in the peer review system works on more niche topics then university panel judging the work could be so their review will be even more subjective and changing with time. In short, I think it is definitely clear neither the citation nor the journal brand is the best proxy for the worthiness but the system you are proposing is worse while still reliant on subjective judgement.