It’s supposed to be a Wrangler competitor, though. Neutering the off road performance for roadability sort of defeats the purpose, don’t you think? The Wrangler clearly has no problems moving units despite riding on the same sort of setup the original Willys MB did during the war. Like you said, ‘extreme rock crawling’ Wrangler is currently the only marque that can come close to that out of the box. Either the Bronco is a Wrangler competitor or its not. Trying to dip a toe in both pies is just going to lead to the same issue the FJ Cruiser had, and it will just make it look like Ford were too scared to commit to anything beyond surface-level looks. There’s a reason the Wrangler outsold the FJ Cruiser at a ratio of 10:1.
Besides, wouldn’t disconnecting the sway bar on independent suspension have the opposite effect? The bar should be the only thing keeping the suspension from compressing enough to allow the oil pan to get friendly with rocks and stumps. A live axle benefits from swaybar disconnect because the axle pulls all the family jewels up and out of the way as the suspension works. IFS for obvious reasons doesn’t work that way.
It can compete with the Wrangler and still have IFS. It's going to depend on the setup it has, which we don't know yet. An IFS can be plenty capable, even in stock form, if it's setup correctly from the factory. My Tacoma never once let me down on any trails after I swapped out the terrible OEM tires. I never once wished I had done a SAS upfront and I didn't exactly do the easiest trails with it either. I only lifted it because I wanted 33's and that was more because I liked the way it looked than actually needing any improvements.
As for a stock Wrangler being an extreme rock crawler? It's not even close to that. Yes, it can manage the Rubicon in stock trim, but so can an FJ and more recently, a 4Runner. While the Rubicon is indeed tough, it's not so extreme that you need a dedicated trail rig to tackle it. What I'm talking about is some of the trails in places like Moab that require an extreme degree of flex in order to navigate. A stock Wrangler isn't going to be able to do that any more than any other stock off-road vehicle.
The Bronco is also based off the Ranger platform, which is IFS. It wouldn't make a ton of sense to re-engineer the front of the platform to accommodate a solid axle, especially because the Bronco will probably be more of niche vehicle that won't sell millions.
Yes, the Wrangler did sell more than the FJ, but the JK also came in more configurations than the FJ. The JK also had the added benefit of being offered in 2 and 4 doors, plus it's starting price was about $5,000 less than the FJ. The FJ was also not exactly practical with backseats that sort of sucked, not much cargo space, virtually no visibility, and it was also horrendously ugly. None of that helped its sales. I don't know what the global sales figure for the FJ vs. the JK is, but in the US the ratio was closer to 5:1 in favor of the JK. Globally, I'm guessing that ratio is lower. Seems about right for a vehicle that has more configuration options and a cheaper price.
Regarding disconnecting the front swaybar, it's a common thing to do when off-roading. The suspension itself will limit how much the flex is and you're probably not in any danger of smashing the oil pan. When I'd disconnect mine, my tires would hit the inner fender long before any vital components would hit the ground. Anyone who does moderate off-roading though has a skid plate though to prevent anything like that. I assume the Bronco will come with one stock since most off-road-oriented vehicles do.