Not really. Directly elected Senators don’t represent the states as originally intended and pretty much fuel the growth of the federal government because that is their power base. They have no incentive to defend their state from unfunded mandates and encroachments on state powers because all they need to curry favor with is some deep pocket donors and the media.
Appointed senators are beholden to the state legislature that sent them so they will be far more vigilant in taking the states side in the above mentioned items. Their power base will be at the state level with their state level colleagues in the legislature.
The 17th amendment really jump started the progressive takeover of the federal government.
All of this has been covered and addressed/rebutted in discussions in this thread and others. I suggest reading the points Billyboy & I have stated upthread.
Just as an aside, if there was some viable way to return to a high-minded states rights agenda to balance out the federal government, many of us could be persuaded to support it, but repealing the 17th isn’t going to do it, not at all. You guys imagine a Senate populated by John Adams or Edward Everett or Henry Clay or John C. Calhoun types. What you’re gonna get is the same radical leftists from Democrat states (Elizabeth Warren) and “Republicans” like Karl Rove from GOP states (TX). Senators chosen by bosses and flunkies and those looking for more and more $$ for their states. And all of them thoroughly unaccountable.