This whole middlebox obsession is some kind of Stockholm syndrome. Here you are telling me there's people who make shitty devices that don't respect network traffic and because of that you can't change network traffic. It's like saying there's someone breaking into houses to steal stuff, so we can't install stained glass windows because a thief might break them.
High end routers are able to do pretty conplex lookups into their asics, but this usually only extends to specific use cases. (as far as I am aware for instance, an juniper MX series is able to do a lookup of both vlan tags in a single asic pipeline step when using q-in-q. the same also applies to mpls stacked lable lookups on provider edge routers).
I'm not sure the distinction you're drawing here. When my switch balances based on port numbers,-- yes, it's technically just peeking at "data within the ethernet frame". (is this IP? OK, let's add the address at this offset to the hash. Oh, it's TCP too? let's add the port numbers at this offset to the hash).
L2 hashing puts everything from a single pair of hosts on the subnet on one wire, but this can suck when a lot of traffic comes in through a gateway. L3 hashing fixes the gateway problem. L4 hashing lets individual connections have entire links. And, of course, the more fine-grained the hashing, the better the balancing can be expected to be and the lower the odds that 80% of your traffic goes down 1 link in a 4 connection bundle.
The real issue is that we can't get away from UDP/TCP because of middleboxes (firewalls, load balancers, etc) and the fact that switches only know how to hash on 5 tuples of protocols they know about. If you're lucky, your router will be able to look inside a GRE header or something, but that's about it.
When was the last time you used SCTP, for example? (If you've used it recently, I bet it was tunneled over UDP)