why only have a maximum of 60 cards in a deck?

[smX]

I get why there is an inferior limit to the deck size, but why can we only have a maximum of 60? I think it would please many elements fans if they could have all their favorite cards in a single deck. Sure, it would mean that the bigger the deck gets, the smaller the chance gets that you draw a particular card, but you can compensate with increasing the number of cards. This brings me to another thing: limiting the number of card copies you can have. It's a good thing to limit the rare cards to only a few, but why also limit the common cards? If a deck has to many copies of the same card, it gets more predictable and easier to beat. To reach a compromise: raise the number of common card copies to about 10 but lift the maximum card limit. I think the game would last a little longer (which is a good thing, I think) and it would have more strategy involved.

[King of doom]

I disagree because you could use 10 Sog's in a stall deck

[smX]

I disagree because you could use 10 Sog's in a stall deck

alright, then let only those who are past a high score of let's say  10k  use this feature, it wouldn't matter, since by the time you get to a score of 10k everybody will have a good amount of Sogs...

[SickPillow]

... I think the game would last a little longer (which is a good thing, I think) and it would have more strategy involved.

Raising the card limit, or the maximum number of copies, would not increase the length of games.  In fact raising the maximum number of copies would do the opposite since you could pack even more of the same powerful card into a small rush deck. 
As for increasing the card limit... to allow you to put in every card that you like... well... why not just put 1 of every single card you like... i'm sure you would have enough variety.