I respect big communities and I do think that bigger communities should get bigger numbers of quality players, but if we can't be equal, it should be done proportionaly !
Have you checked that it isn't proportionally? Do you have evidence or strong beliefs that the average % of talent differs per country consistently? I'm the NT coach of the Netherlands, a little smaller country than yours (100 users), and we also have only 3 18yo HoF talents each draft, a couple of times just 2 like this draft, on occasion we get 5. It seems consistent with your experience, and I would guess it's the same for other countries. I would be stunned if large countries see a bigger % or less variance, do you really think the BB's coded a differerently for specific countries?
I think the question is, how fixed do you want it to be, and how much variance do you accept? Because just having a fixed % of HoF+ players each draft doesn't mean you can work with it ideally. Then you'll get only short players one draft, or just with low TSP. Or maybe bad skill distribution. Do you want or need the draft to be so consistent? Where do you draw the line? Is that even necessary? Or maybe do you just want the overall numbers to be higher for everyone, does that fix your problem? Or is it really that big a deal that one season you get 2 good talents and the other one 5?
Personally, I like being the underdog because I like a challenge. To see what you can make of the things that you have, instead of looking at what others have. It enables you to stand out as a great manager and tactician, to achieve the same with less. Be creative, try something different. There's not 1 path to success. You don't need high number of HoF talents to succeed, we started a Superstar potential player and we got to the European semis.