Proof-of-stake tends towards oligopolistic control, which is antithetical to bitcoin.
Proof-of-stake
also has some other security issues that make it a bad substitute for
Proof-of-work with respect to equivocation (reorgs).
Overall you'll find me personally
in the camp that it's OK to explore non-PoW means of consensus long
term that can keep the network in consensus in a more capital efficient
manner, but that proof-of-stake is not such a substitute. Other
Bitcoiners will disagree with this invariably, but if you truly have a
novel solution for Byzantine Generals, it would be a major contribution
to not just Bitcoin but the field of computer science as a whole and
would likely get due consideration.
What's
difficult is that Bitcoin PoW has some very specific properties that
may or may not be desirable around e.g. fairness that might be difficult
to ensure in other systems, so there is probably more to the puzzle
than just consensus.