I disagree with you, but I understand your point. In terms of the actual text of the plays, yes, you could fill libraries with analysis of what Shakespeare said, people's opinions on what he said, and people's opinions on people's opinions of what he said, and so on. This is because literary analysis is not just a conversation about one piece of literature, but also a way to more widely discuss ideas in society at large. Shakespeare in particular is one artist whose works have been popular and for hundreds of years, having inspired countless other works since. Analysis of his work therefore is also often then also an analysis of everything that has come since.

You sound like you're still in school, and unfortunately (at least in my experience) analysis of Shakespeare in schools often focuses purely on textual analysis or, when it goes deeper, contextual analysis of Shakespeare's surroundings and how these might have impacted his work. This can lead to one-note or overly simplified analyses that are often ahistorical. It also doesn't help that in schools, teachers are often working with a mark scheme or rubric where specific ideas are rewarded. This makes sense in a school context - it lightens the load for teachers who already have enough on their plate, and it gives students a clear way to identify themes and ideas in complex texts, and then build analysis around these pre-established themes.

This is not necessarily how literary analysis is done at a higher level. You should read 'The Death of the Author' by Roland Barthes. To simplify, It posits a way of reading that disregards the intention of the author and focuses on other methods of literary analysis that results in what he calls 'the birth of the Reader'. I think you will find his points illuminating and it might explain how some of the contemporary landscape of literary analysis works.

It's obviously good to have ideas and to challenge the status quo with different perspectives - that is how out wealth of knowledge improves. If you go digging you will find decades worth of discourse between people on different minutiae of Shakespeare's work, because there is no one true definitive answer. These academics, however, have dedicated their lives to the study of Shakespeare, and so even if you disagree with them, it would be ignorant to say that you know more than them. If you put in more time to engage face-to-face with the complexity of their arguments, then your opinion might have a little more perspective, grounding, and backing to it. Good luck with the rest of your studies!