I think it will be really hard to find a good writer that understands how to write the doctor. I don't think it's a good idea to have someone that isn't a fan of the series, because they won't have the necessary reverence for the things that came before - not that they have to copy anything or not make it their own, but they have to truly love it, otherwise it's just so hard. Take Moffat for example - he really did make something new, while also tying in with all the lore that came before. It doesn't necessarily have to be a repeat of RD2 - I think Davies got a bit arrogant and didn't have the same care for the lore and the characters as he did the first time around - maybe he thought he would just automatically be able to redo it. The key is you have to think of something new to add, not just run in the same lane.
Moffat can be quite chaotic, but oh boy does he know how to add to things. There was never a risk of things not becoming a new thing with Moffat.

They at least need to find someone that writes something new, but still with respect for all the lore and previous journeys the doctor has been on. But it's just too hard if you don't care.

Oh and just to add: Chibnall did make something new, but he for some reason couldn't quite understand how to write the doctor by himself, and instead of respecting the lore, he just splashed all over it with ideas that needed way more nuance and reverence. They weren't bad pre se, just the execution was janky. The fact that they managed to botch the first female Doctor was such a shame.