I am shocked by your deck breakdown; I expected to see it, or at least something, as a counterpoint session based on cards that would not be appropriate for the deck. Really have no position to change your train of thought, it doesn't push for much discussion outside of how other people would make it.
As a step of progression, something when it comes to deck construction and writing about, it has seems easy for others to get involved at moments of contest instead of acceptance, since much of a deck building is to work against your first list and put forth arguments as to why things don't work instead of why they do work. This is also a great area to practice writing such topics like this, as you have attempted to do with your Phyrexian Arena argument. As long as you make it go to a positive train of thought, that aligns with your goals of the deck, instead of being purely argumentative.
But counter argument and things that promote what hasn't worked has been more successful in pushing for quality discussion and reception points, as they give the reader something to not only follow along and make sense with. It is to also explore your train of thought in a more linear way, that the reader can then sympathize with or understand with, and try to navigate alongside your own.
Especially when it comes with deck building and construction, instead of deck promoting; Which, as just a blog, you are fully in the field of and with.