but probably serves best to have both worlds: competent pilots in state of the art engineered aircraft.
Yes but.... This objective describes aircraft of increasing complexity (perhaps to compensate for a reduction in some basic pilot skills), and pilots meeting the skill level of "competent" for that aircraft. It does not describe an excess of skill for the aircraft, just competent. That may be okay nearly all the time, but the more narrow gap between competence and aircraft complexity can also have more criticality if breached. The pilots must realize that they are not flying with an excess of competence to possibly be applied to overcome a problem, they may have to draw on every bit of the skill they were trained, and at just the right moment in a stressful situation. They may not be relying on muscle memory to handle the basics, when when of the more complex systems fails, and they are left with the combination of simple and complex problems all at once.
It takes me back to the decades old urban legend of the man who was given excess salesmanship on all the features of the motorhome he bought, without truly understanding them, nor their limitations. Once on the road, he put the cruise control on, and went to the back to make coffee. The more we have automation, and complex labour/skill saving systems, the more the pilot must recognize that, and the limitations of those systems. If the systems have absolutely no limitations, I guess we don't need the pilots anymore - and I will stop riding in airliners!