It certainly looks good on paper, but is it so remarkable in context? Consider the fact that in the first three years of Rodgers' tenure, he has thrown 1,524 times for 12,165 yards. When you're throwing that often, even mediocre receivers are bound to get their yards. Bear in mind that the Packers have been a pass-first offense under Aaron Rodgers and this year have had essentially no running game whatsoever. In 2010, a paltry 26% of the Packers' offensive output has come on the ground; our passing game has been our offense.

Something else to consider is that on an intuitive basis (I'd have to go back through the film to get firm numbers, and even then it would probably be subjective), it seems to me that in only a few games this season have the majority of incompletions been Rodgers' fault. The first game or two and then the two games immediately following his first concussion come to mind. In most of the games, his few incompletions have resulted from WRs giving up on routes or dropping balls that hit them in the chest or hands. Yesterday was a prime example of this. Rodgers was 25/37. On paper it looks like he missed 11 passes. Yet how many of them were actually off target? The only ones that come immediately to mind are the ones where he threw it away. The vast majority of those passes were on target and even in stride. The receivers simply failed to complete the catch.

Even in the Lions game, where he posted an abysmal 34.7 rating, the responsibility for most, if not all, of his incompletions rested on the WRs, including a pass that should have been an easy touchdown for Greg Jennings.

It should also be borne in mind that Rodgers has only thrown one interception since Week 7, three weeks before the bye, and that lone interception was unquestionably Jennings' fault.

If it weren't for his WRs failing to come through in key moments, Aaron Rodgers would be recognized along with Tom Brady as one of the most accurate passers in the league.

It's unfortunate that for the third year in a row, there has been a catastrophic failure in one of the phases of the game -- as well as an incredible performance by another team's quarterback -- that have overshadowed Aaron Rodgers' unbelievable performance. They were saying on NFL network last night that Tom Brady should get the MVP because he is the best player in the league this year. But the award doesn't say "Most Bestest Player," it says "Most Valuable Player," which I interpret to mean the player most indispensable to the team's success. I look at this team's a) utter lack of a running game (Aaron Rodgers accounts for over 22% of this team's rushing output!) and b) substandard offensive line and I compare it to the amount of time Tom Brady has in the pocket and the casual way he lobs passes downfield, and it's difficult for me to imagine how Tom Brady is more valuable to his team's success than Aaron Rodgers, his stellar statistical performance notwithstanding.

---

So do you think the Packers need to replace all of their offensive personnel except for Aaron Rodgers? This is sounding like the Favre years, where some fans felt compelled to constantly rip Favre's teammates and the coaching staff in order to justify Brett's lack of championships, MVP awards, or gaudy stats.

This receiving corps is very good. Yes, they drop too many passes, especially Jones. But not everybody is as good as Aaron Rodgers. Even Aaron Rodgers was not as good as Aaron Rodgers during the first half of the season. He threw too many interceptions. Now that he's on a roll, he's as good as anybody in the league, including Tom Brady, but Brady is going to get the nod because of his track record and because his team has won more games this year than Rodgers' team. Brady does a lot more than casually lob the ball downfield. He has entered the "best of all time" discussion.

The only thing that really bothers me is that Woodson dropped an easy interception against Brady, while Rodgers' last interception (ending a long streak without one) was the pass that Jennings mishandled. But then, luck plays a part in any kind of streak.

---

That's exactly my problem with the MVP as it's currently awarded. They were saying on the NFL Network that Tom Brady will get it because of his performance over the years. But in my opinion, that is what lifetime achievement awards are for. The MVP is a seasonal award and prior-season performances shouldn't play a role in the voting. Also, I think the voters are entirely too blinded by season record. Again, it's not the "Most Winningest Player," it's the Most Valuable Player. I don't understand why a player on a 13-3 team has a far greater chance to get the award than one on a 10-6 team, even if the latter player's statistical output and overall role in his team's performance is far greater. For example, last year Chris Johnson ran for 2,006 yards -- 35.7% of his team's total offensive output -- and yet he was never in contention for MVP, because his team's record was lousy. In my opinion, he was just as valuable to the Titans as Peyton Manning was to the Colts.

But the MVP voters take the easy way out, and it's frustrating. If the award is for Most Winningest Quarterback, they should rename it as such.

---

I've never had a problem with that, unless it is a really blatant example of the player from the lesser team being better. A team that has won more games has accomplished more, so there's more "value" to be had. Brady's stats are better than Rodgers' stats this year anyway, so I don't think the teams' records matter much in this case.

---

Indeed, although I would be willing to bet almost any sum that an examination of the film would reveal that Tom Brady has far more time in the pocket than Aaron Rodgers does.

---

Donald Driver is something like just over 80 yards from being the all time yardage leader for a Packers receiver. That's pretty neat isn't it?

---

And I hope he gets it. No one is more richly deserving of that accolade than he. He's the lone receiver on our team I trust to fight in traffic for a couple extra yards and not lose the ball. :D

(By the way, they should rename the MVP award to Most Valuable Back, since only two players have received it who weren't quarterbacks or running backs: placekicker Mark Moseley [1982] and defensive tackle Alan Page [1971].)

---