Boohoo, *only* listed as the 6th best player in the entire league? Total non-story.

---

Pretty much. Writers are bored, and we're all ready for football to start.

Players voted, from those I heard who actually voted, not many knew just what the peramaters were that they were supposed to follow.

Some voted on past performances, some voted on potential.


There were a hundred other reasons guys voted one way or another.

Doesn't really matter, hey if it makes that so-callec "chip" on Aaron Rodgers shoulder grow, only better for The Packers.

August can't get here soon enough!!

I'm actually looking foward to Pre-season games this year, gonna be a lot of talent on display at Lambeau!!!!

---

Who's above him?

If Joe Flacco's higher, I'm gonna barf.

---

I still look at it this way: Who would I rather have on my team? Adrian Peterson, or Aaron Rodgers. It's not even a question to me, it's Aaron Rodgers. I think many would feel that way. Therefore, how can Adrian Peterson be #1 and Aaron Rodgers be #6? It doesn't matter though, the list is a complete joke anyway.

They should do a Top 10 list at each position. Not a top 100. It would make it a lot easier. The top 100 is just to many players for a fucking list..

Even at that Rodgers would be #3


here was the top 5

5 jj watt
4 Tom Brady
3 Calvin Johnson
2 Peyton Manthing
1 AP



AND THIS IS HOW THE FANS HAD IT


5 Rodgers
4 Brady
3 Manning
2 Calvin Johnson
1 AP

---

The funniest thing to me is the best passing game in the last 2 years with the highest passer rating ever in 2011 and the 14th highest passer rating ever in 2012 had ZERO WRs in the top 100.

Even though they have had the leagues highest scoring WR in each of the last 2 years.

But Brandon Marshall got a lot of yards, so that is much more importat than TDs.

---

As I said, I wouldn't take ANY of those players over Aaron Rodgers, not even close. I can almost guarantee most teams wouldn't either. The only exception would possibly be Brady or Manning, so at least I could buy having some combination of Brady, Rodgers, and Manning in the top three. Anything else, is pretty laughable. If a team would actually choose Calvin Johnson, JJ Watt, or Adrian Peterson over Aaron Rodgers, well, they'd be freakin' stupid and should be fired and laughed out of town. An elite QB gives an NFL team in today's League the best chance to win, much more so than a JJ Watt, or especially Calvin Johnson. Even with a decent to good QB, Calvin Johnson hasn't done much to proper his team into a contender year in, year out. Adrian Peterson had a season for the ages last year, but I wouldn't expect that to happen again. It also had as much to do with the rest of the team as himself (e.g. a shitty passing game and no WRs). I would still take Rodgers season without thinking twice. I could care less about stats, I just want the best chance to win. In my opinion, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, and Peyton Manning would give me the best chance at doing so, in that order over the course of a full season.

I'd be willing to bet that at least 90% of general managers in the NFL would feel the same way.

Regardless, it's just a worthless list that NFL Network tries to suck every last 'drop' of ratings out of. The "Reaction shows"??? Give me a break. I only watch a minute of the program by mistake. Certainly not on purpose. NFL Network isn't much better than CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC. They are all about ratings and ultimately making money. Nothing else. I can't necessary blame them, they're running a business. It's not a charity or publicly funded. They really shouldn't care about much else. If actual news or factual analysis happens to intersect with achieving the best ratings, then that's great, but it certainly isn't the focus of such networks.