How is that too much? If anything, nearly every single meta for the last year if not longer would've been perfectly fine with 10 bans. I can't remember the last time I've thought "you know what, we totally have enough bans" in either solo queue or competitive. It would definitely change the game in a good way because it would bring up far more balanced comps and maybe certain champions that were underutilized would now start seeing some more picks.

We're at what? 130 champions? 6 made sense when we had half of those, or maybe even 100... but we're at 130 (more maybe? I don't even remember). That's less than 5% of the champion pool and raising it to 10 would still be less than 10%.

DotA has been doing 5 bans for a while now haven't they? I'm pretty sure they're over 100 heroes now and they had 5 even back when they had well below that.

Riot's balance team seems to like to make infrequent but major sweeping changes but honestly I think they'd be better off constantly looking at champions and tweaking them as often as they can because there's so many champions that are either not used at all or rarely picked. With 10 bans you'd see a lot of the same stuff banned which would obviously mean they'd need to work on them so that they stop being banned so often and just work their balance around that. Oh Mao is being permabanned on a consistent basis? Maybe we should look at him. Ekko being permabanned? change him. Etc.

I forget the exact point in the meta that it was, but there was a time where the bans just felt like "ban what I feel is annoying" and there was a list of like 10 different champions or something like that. There was nothing (or very little) that felt inherently OP so you just banned whatever you didn't feel like playing against that game. They need to reach a point in balance that's like that again.