The nose gear and mains are all much more sturdy on a Cherokee than they are on a Cessna 172 and the tires are larger in diameter. The center of gravity is lower. A Cherokee is easier to land on a soft field without damaging it. There are hundreds of them based in Alaska because of this.
You are repeating arguments that have been hashed over hundreds of times mostly by newbies that have no back country flying experience. If you want to fly true back country... you probably should not be looking at a Cherokee or a 172. I use my homebuilt tail dragger for that type of situation. There is no sense chewing up a freshly ground prop on a gravel landing strip or risking damage to your landing gear.
You started this thread whining about the high cost of GA aircraft. I looked into what you said and found that it really wasn't true that they were not available and the prices had gone way up. You just do not seem to know where to look and have narrowed your range of acceptable aircraft to basically one model a newish 172. So I guess for you it is valid, but for others it is not.
I mostly track 172s, so maybe it’s a model thing...
And maybe it is. Cessna model 172s are popular for many reasons.
Ditto on this comment... :)