Very interesting question. If the GB guys share 1/2 a brain between them, you can bet they've given this lots of consideration. (And according to Ray Franz in CofC they were talking about this very subject way back in the days of Knorr and Crazy Freddie).
That being said, they evidently still haven't been able to come up with anything better than the ridiculous "Overlapping Generation" nonsense.
Interestingly, when I started associating with JWs back in the early '80s they had completely ditched any pre-1900 dates even though Russell was still oft spoken of in fond, reverent tones.
Fast forward to today and it's obvious that the WTBTS are trying to distance themselves from their modern day founder. Recent articles are deliberately written to toss ol' Charlie to the wayside. How convenient was it that the latest "New Light" puts the appointment of the FDS after his death! Bye, bye Charlie!
To put it bluntly, 1914 is already irrelevant. In fact it has been since its very inception, at least in reference to Bible prophecy. The religion fondly known as Jehovah's Witnesses and its leaders are just too stubborn to admit it.
Obviously, some--maybe even many--of the R&F question or even doubt its relevance. I know I did. The last few years I served as an elder I completely avoided the subject of chronology in any of my talks or presentations in the ministry, specifically refraining from mentioning the year 1914 as having any significance in Bible prophecy.
You wanna' know the craziest thing? No one seemed to notice!
Now I'd been an elder for about two decades and, as many elders do, I gave public talks about once a month in my own congregation and others within about 100 mile radius, I had weekly meeting parts, conducted the Book Study and so on and so forth. For the last few years I was an elder I deliberately and scrupulously avoided the subject of 1914 and no one even noticed; or if they did they didn't say anything, at least not to me.