OP does have a point though, especially with DJB's thoughts (and others) on the matter.

https://nitter.net/hashbreaker?lang=en

For FIPS in particular, they've first gotta sunset the traditional algorithms for anyone to strictly need to care (and even then, parallel constructions of PQC+traditional could let other PQC algorithms in -- like the Chrome experiments -- from a FIPS perspective, you can treat the PQC like plaintext). And for them to be useful, adoption needs to occur in the IETF communities (PKIX, TLS, SSH, IKE, ...).

You're probably looking at least 5 years on the adoption window to customers running the lastest updates. NIST's blessing might help some of the IETF conversations that now need to happen. But not listening to DJB, given his track record, likely will anger a subset of IETF contributors and might hinder adoption.

It'll be interesting to see if IETF takes the more conservative approach advocates by DJB or if they continue on with NIST's blessing alone. But I'm just a watcher... :-)

Edit: and for the record, FIPS never mandated Dual EC DRBG but it was still a mistake for NIST to rubber stamp.