This article raises an interesting point in the 737 MAX discussions. Far too much the press coverage about the MAX has concentrated on whether the MAX can be made to fly safely - which I think it can be, but not, whether it is actually the right design for the tasks it is meant to do.
And it does not surprise that stretching a smaller design wouldn't do the trick so well.
I am not an aviation expert, so the article was a bit short on details which make the 757 better than the 737 MAX, but I assume it is the wider body and probably better sized wings etc.?
707, 727, 737, and 757 all have the exact same cross section. One of the advantages of the 757 is that it sits higher off the ground and can accommodate the large engines necessary for a longer fuselage. More generally, 757 is designed to be longer, with larger engines and wings, and higher fuel capacity. 737 had to have these features bolted on as it was stretched, fitted with higher bypass (more fuel efficient) engines, and given larger wings and fuel capacity.
I am not an aviation expert, so the article was a bit short on details which make the 757 better than the 737 MAX, but I assume it is the wider body and probably better sized wings etc.?