Before reading Guelzo, my opinion of Mead was the same as yours -- give the poor guy credit for a miraculous victory under impossible circumstances.
But Guelzo points out that Mead didn't WANT to win that battle -- he wanted to retreat, and form a defensive line many miles back, along a river.
Only the unauthorized actions and self-sacrifice of several brigade & division commanders forced Mead forward to Gettysburg.
Yes, once on the scene, and committed to battle, Mead did good work -- no complaints that I can remember from Guelzo.
But he still expected to lose the battle, and while Pickett's men were charging Cemetery Hill, where was Mead?
He was all the way in the rear, expecting defeat, and organizing his army's retreat.
But please, don't take my word for it.
I recommend you read the book, and would seriously respect your considered opinions on Geulzo's ideas.
I don’t want to get too far into the weeds on Meade and Gettysburg. I’ve read perhaps a dozen books on the Gettysburg campaign, but none actually about Meade as such.
I think it is entirely reasonable to point out that neither Lee nor Meade wanted to fight at Gettysburg. Both got dragged into it by their subordinates.
Meade had plans (possibly in reserve) to fall back to Pipe Creek, which was not necessarily a bad idea. The ground there might have been even better than at Gettysburg for the defense. An even more decisive victory might have been won.
That claim that Meade really, really wanted to retreat is primarily supported by Sickles and others of his political enemies. Somewhat rich, since Sickles dang near lost the battle on Day 2.
Recently finished a book about the battle, the name of which escapes me at the moment. What struck me the most, that I had not really realized before, is that the general focus on Pickett’s Charge in the general memory is quite mistaken. That charge just was not going to succeed.
OTOH, there were perhaps as many as a dozen points on Day 2 when the battle and therefore perhaps the war might have turned out completely differently.