Let's just assume they're thinking about a Nintendo-only park in the context of 2 dry parks at the South Resort..., the question is still why not split them up?
Scenario 1 (Nintendo-only park + another dry park):
Dry Park #3 headliners:
Mario, Pokemon, Zelda etc.
Dry Park #4 headliners:
LOTR + maybe Star Trek or DC?
# of Crossover rides to force multi-ticket hopping:
0
Scenario 2:
Dry Park #3 headliners:
Mario and LOTR part 1 (Mordor + Minas Tirith)
Dry Park #4 headliners:
Pokemon/Zelda and LOTR part 2 (Shire + Isengard)
# of Crossover rides to force multi-ticket hopping:
2 (One between the Nintendo lands, and another between the LOTR lands)
Okay, now if you're a Universal Executive... don't you go for Scenario 2 automatically? You basically force everyone to get a multi-hopper to use the crossover rides for Nintendo and LOTR. You create 2 strong parks instead of a potentially strong Nintendo park and a 2nd park that caters to a completely different audience...
I mean, if they're delaying all the Nintendo stuff, then go all out and make 2 parks with those headliners, and you're looking at 2 parks with 10 million guests easy. Scenario 1? That's a lot more iffy on the 4th dry park.