Mike Mearls is a...?

We’re going to make some generalizations and assumptions for this entry.
I don’t have the data in front of me so I just have to go with the anecdotal data I have.

Assumption: MMOs are a growing market. So for 4E, WotC wanted to emulate MMOs to appeal to younger players and rejuvenate the player base.
Result: It worked. More new players started playing than ever before.

Assumption: 4E was a flop with established players.
Result: This created a schism among D&D players. The older players played an older edition of D&D, Pathfinder, or an OSRIC-type game.

Assumption: The original OGL/SRD of 3E got other publishers to support D&D (or more specifically the D20 system).
Result: It created a new golden age of D&D. Huge numbers of D20 books were written with almost every group playing D20.

Assumption: Pathfinder and other game systems have pulled once-D&D-players away from D&D.
Result: The lowest number of actual D&D players in recent memory.

Assumption: A new OGL will be established for 5E. It will be less restrictive than 4E’s SGL, but more restrictive than 3E’s OGL.
Result: Some gamer confidence may be restored.

Assumption: 5E is going to lure old players back and keep the 4E players.
Result: Mike Mearls will be seen as a savior to D&D.

If 5E fails, then I don’t see WotC/Hasbro doing anything more than barely maintaining D&D enough to keep it going as a springboard for the novels and board games.

If 5E succeeds, Mike Mearls will be credited with saving D&D.

Personally , I see it more as Mearls doing everything he can to get the game profitable again while his back is against the wall due to competition from Pathfinder and the ever-hounding demands from shareholders.

But, I don’t like Mike Mearls because made the pussified version of the rust monster in 4E. It’s an unforgiveable sin. Worse than creating 4E even.