In some states, electors can go back on their commitment. How about this for a solution: In future elections, if the popular vote would produce the opposite result as the electoral vote, all electors are free to vote as they choose. Otherwise, they must vote for the candidate they were pledged to.
How would that be different than a straight up popular vote?
The electoral college serves to protect us from tyranny. I wouldn't want to strip that protection.
I can see allocating the electoral college according to the results of the vote in that state. Perhaps by district, or proportionally. That would stop huge overrepresented states like CA from controlling how elections turn out.