Why do people still say "meta-golem" is such a bad thing?

I don't know about you, but I remember extremely varied picks top, relatively varied mids, extremely varied ADCs, relatively varied supports, and relatively varied junglers back then.

In addition, tops were usually unable to burst ADCs because of the heal/utility support meta, and GA was OP. Mids controlled the pacing, and often the outcome, of fights, giving them a very specific job to do, unlike now. ADCs were far more powerful relative to other classes late-game, though they had to scale into it and have superb positioning. Supports were exactly that. Enablers for their ADCs. Junglers were potential carries, but overall settled nicely into the rest of their team after laning was done.

The best part was how teamfights worked. They were strategic and drawn out; about double the duration, possibly more, of teamfights now. Due to the sustain of tanks and bruisers, front-line engages were common. While this happened, the utility mages tried to find an opportunity where either side trying to poke at said bruiser/tank would net their team an advantage when they threw out their AoE. It was a very delicate balance where being over-aggressive got you killed, and being under-aggressive did the same, but teamfights didn't end instantly. They 'started' early, but neither were usually really commited until the first shot, the AP's ult (sometimes top or jungle), was fired.

Idk about anyone else, but to me, nearly every game had moments to enjoy, win or lose. And every game was different. Yeah, there were a lot of Udyrs, GPs, and Lees, but outside of that, the most common champs were among at least 5-10 in each role.

Stagnant itemization is far better than stagnant picks.