My concern is that for price oracles that need to care exclusively about maximizing cost of attack, monolithicness is actually good. You want to use an oracle system where, in the case where an attacker buys up 51% of the oracle tokens and uses them to cause a single incorrect price to be reported, the oracle token blows up completely and goes to zero (the market value going into a fork that zeroes out the attacker). You don’t want an oracle system where if an attacker takes over a large share of the system (including the reputation layer, including…), they can just interfere with one result and there isn’t that strong social contract of tight coupling that even one incorrect result is unacceptable.
Chainlink has always seemed to me to have more of a “choose and pay for the level of security you want” ethos and relies on quick automated responses, which is really nice for a lot of applications but is somewhat opposed to what ultra-high-value defi oracles need. In addition to the security issue above, you want delayed and even human-mediated responses in case the centralized APIs of the markets are attacked. Though if Chainlink does change itself in a direction that supports maximum-cost-of-attack-demanding oracles, I would definitely be happy with that too!