Are you sure?
The Qg = 68nC 
That Qg is too high for me!
Str.
It's actually 64 nC, not 68, but yeah, I noted the same thing.
Keep in mind that with higher power, Qg tends to go up. It has to because in order to meet the required current density demand and preserve other relationships, they make these by replicating unit cell transistors in parallel, meaning there are multiple smaller gates in parallel, which means multiple Qgd and Qgs in parallel too. It adds up. The other thing that matters is the breakdown voltage. The higher the BV, typically/often the input capacitance and Qg increases too. The FET channel will be longer, which means larger surface area of the gate capacitance, which likely means larger Qg.
The Cree C3M0280090 is small (900 V, continuous drain current 6.8 A continuous at 100 C) compared to that Microsemi FET (1200 V, 26 A continuous at 100C), so of course the Cree is more "nimble". Side note: the Qg of these transistors are at different conditions so not exactly comparing apples to apples but still...
I'm about ready to populate a board with the Transform TP65H035G4WS: only 650 V but Qg = 22 and Id continuous at 100 C = 29.5 A. Potentially not the best solution for me but at least it is available right now, which is more than I can say for some other choices!
In any case, if he was trying to run that MicroSemi FET at 15 MHz (picking a number out of the air), it might be low(er) efficiency compared to other solutions due to the higher Qg. (Maybe.) On the other hand, I'm only aware of him using 6285 and 4185 KHz, so maybe he doesn't care about anything above 6.3 MHz.
Also, at some point it may make sense to use RF transistors - as opposed to switching transistors - to meet the performance goals you want, particularly at higher frequencies. (That's why they exist.) Personally, I'm nowhere near that point but I have thought about it.