If they want a system of honours it should be for ordinary people who have served the community and for services to sport.
Which is exactly what we've got.
I do read about the "ordinary people" getting awards, but only the local ones in my local paper. The celebrity names make up a tiny proportion of those getting awards in any normal year, and even in Olympic year, with all gold medalists getting at least an MBE, I can't see it being much different. Not least because most people wouldn't be able to recognise half of the rowers or cyclists who got a single gold as part of a team. Putting aside the celebs, and even the scientists and other high flyers, there are thousands of "ordinary" people awarded each year. The biggest stumbling block is that someone has to do all the nomination paperwork, which most folk wouldn't think to do. If you are famous, or are doing something with a precedent (Olympic medalist) then it seems to be more automatic.
I imagine it was the LTA that nominated Tim for his award, and they may have done for Andy too, if he wasn't already being considered by virtue of the Olympics.
I saw one person on twitter trying to create controversy because Andy had got an OBE and Farah the "lower CBE", and the only difference between them was the colour of their skin. I'd have loved to have been in the room when someone told her it was the other way around! A few people thought that any kind of honour meant Andy would become a Sir. The fact is, most folk don't really understand it. They know it's an honour and that's about it.
I'm not against updating the system, especially the names, but being old, historic and a bit confusingly out of date is part of the charm and sets it apart from winning a GQ or Cosmopolitan Award (for turning up).