Yeah, this is McGinn-ish. Consider the timing (bye week) and need to consistently drive traffic to the site for ad revenue.

Look at the blues. Those are the guys who change games. None for either team without Rodgers. The Packers have three reds to the Browns’ one, and eight golds to the Browns’ five. So the Packers again come out ahead. But it doesn’t come close to accounting for the difference between these two teams.
So sure, there are differences between some NFL rosters. Coaching matters, too. But a lot more often than not, one player separates teams in this league.
Apparently, that one player isn't a red or gold. I'd say if you're grading a roster overall, I'd rather have more blues, reds, and golds than not...and GB has them over CLE in spite of their respective annual drafting slots.
Draft talent tends to get sorted into tiers, and it's rare for GB to draft in that top tier.

I honestly don't think the roster -- when healthy -- is devoid of talent or on a par with Cleveland (whose defense is improved BTW). They have some depth issues, but every team does. Losing starters exposes that.
Going into the season we could see they were taking some risks with their pass rush/OLB's and that has proved to be a losing proposition. I think that's where they've suffered the most...a pass rush helps the secondary, and can force 3-and-outs.
King and Jones will get better over the season, and hopefully Burnett/HHCD will get healthy and back to playing like they can. Daniels is good, and Clark is up and coming. It's the LBs that need to force the issue IMO.

The pre-Hundley offense was pretty good despite all the OL shuffling. Haven't seen much in Hundley to make me think Rodgers' job is in danger, but maybe he'll be Matt Flynn 2.0.

The manic-depressive nature of NFL fandom is either hilarious or maddening, depending on your take.