Note: this is just observational and off-the-cuff, I'm sure people have much better insights than I do on this topic

The way I've been made to understand card removal when it comes to making calls is something like "you want to unblock your opponents' bluffs, so calling down with Q3 on Q9742 is superior to calling down with QJ or QT", but it seems as if the opposite is being taught/practiced in terms of the hands one chooses to bluff/3barrel with. On that same board, one might advocate not 3barrel bluffing a hand like JT because we block the hands opponents will call twice and then fold with. By this logic, shouldn't a hand like QJ or QT come back into the fold as good bluff catchers since we unblock the hands our opponents will want to go for 3 with?

Alternatively, is the Q3 > QJ, QT line of thought just a product of the fact that most opponents are not constructing their bluffing ranges in the above manner? This has probably been discussed before but as I've put more thought into how I'm constructing river calling and bluffing ranges, these two modes of thinking seem to be at odds.