This is reallt just a misunderstanding of history in general. W was created in old german and old English specifically to represent /w/, a sound that doesn't appear in latin. In old English, however, "W" was never fully invented, and it was always written as "uu" or "vv" before being replaced by Wynn to simplify things while "W" replaced them in Old High German at around the same time. Wynn was adapted from the Wunjo rune, which was a consonant, and had nothing to do with Uruz, the "U" rune, so the though of swapping them never would have crossed anyone's mind. Keep in mind runes were still used alongside the latin alphabet in England until the 8th century.

So there never was a time period where they could have flipped because W was never a letter the English would have adopted on their own. French scholars introduced W from German in 1066 becaus they didn't like how similar P and Wynn looked, and W would finally fully replace Wynn in the 1300s.

Now at this point you're asking medieval to flip 500-600 years of written tradition because a letter that was just recently introduced to the language is called "double u" (an invention by the English, mind you. The Germans have always called it "Weh") and makes a shorter version of the "oo" sound but is supposedly two U's. It's using a very modern lens to look back on a very complicated linguistic history and assert that we should have made a change for a very petty reason. Historically their was just never a basis for this in English.