This. Recognition would be nice, but at the end of the day, all I care about is keeping ARod healthy and with a good supporting cast. Maybe once he gets another couple rings the Brady/Manning lovefest will end. But until then, just happy to have one SB victory and one awesome QB.

I stopped reading after that.

---

"Manning, for example, has never been backed by an elite defense, yet he has continued to make the Colts one of the league's most productive units. The Colts led the league in 2010 with 34 10-play scoring drives, with 21 of those resulting in touchdowns.The Packers only produced 17 10-play scoring drives, but finished fifth in the league in points off takeaways."
What this writer forgets to say is the year the Colts won it all was the year their defense caught fire in the play-offs and carried them to the SB win.

Brady and crew haven't won the big one since their so-called "hof" coach was caught cheating.

Big Ben was carried his first SB win, he did pull out the 2nd, but as we have already seen, head to head, Aaron Rodgers has come out on top.

Give Aaron Rodgers a few more years and then revisit this article. IMHO he will top the list.

---

Is it just me, or does the orange print in buckeye's post appear to be floating in front of the computer screen? It's an awesome effect. I'm not sure if it's supposed to look like that.

Anyway, buckeye, I'm glad you brought this point up, because it was a really dumb one on the part of the writer. When a QB has a bad defense, he is more likely to put up big numbers, especially in the regular season, because the games often turn into shootouts. But of course a good defense is much better for generating wins and championships. This writer tries to play it both ways in this article.

---

I’m not sure what NFL.com is talking about with the expert debate. I actually read their choices and I counted three for Aaron Rodgers.

Regardless, I will not dismiss the accomplishments of Brady and Manning, but it is worth noting that Brady and Manning have won fewer postseason games since 08 than Aaron Rodgers. Keep in mind, that still holds true when combining Brady and Manning’s postseason wins.

Manning is 2-3 in the playoffs since 08.

Brady is 0-2 since 08. Both of Brady's losses came at home.

Aaron Rodgers is 4-1 and all five games were on the road.

That is the mark of a big game QB.

Now, I agree Rodgers needs to put together more accomplishments before he's anointed into pro football history. However, this is not history. This is present day NFL. In today's NFL, Rodgers is every bit the player of any of those QBs Bucky Brooks listed. That is unless you can make a case that Rodgers' career will take a Kurt Warner like slide. If someone believes Rodgers is going to follow the path of Warner, then just say so. I get the feeling that is what some people are pondering. You do it once and everyone wants you to do it again. I believe that is fair enough.

Still, as I said in the other thread, currently it is 2011 and not 2004. The NFL is always changing and to fear change is to become a product of your past. When that happens in football, teams take a Kurt Warner style nosedive. The league is evolving and so are the players. You have to keep up with that in my view.

Right now, I wouldn't trade Rodgers for any other QB in pro football. If I had to win one game, I would want Rodgers. Perhaps I would choose differently if given a certain hypothetical situation, but that is not the debate of the top 100 of 2011 series.

Certainly, Rodgers is not without flaws, but give me five more years of Aaron Rodgers in his prime and I'm good to go. Five years from now, I might want Andrew Luck over any other QB in pro football. I rather have a guy in his prime than a guy at the twilight of his career, which is why I would take Rodgers over Brady and Manning.

---

If I had to win one game, not only would I want Arodge, but I'd probably take the rest of our offense with him.
As for who I'd take in 5 years? Dunno, but I bet you they'll have someone waiting in the wings.

---

Nerdmann, if I had the choice, I wouldn't take our offensive line under any circumstances. They are so lucky to have a quarterback like Aaron Rodgers to make them look even passable. Had they not been blessed with such a mobile, improvisational quarterback, most of them probably would have been playing for other teams or even unemployed right now.

---

The offensive line is the only questionable part of our offense. And they will be improved this year. MARK IT DOWN!

---

Put Arod behind the Pats O-line the last several years and give him a bunch of undrafted rookies and they would still say how lucky he got with his recievers having breakout years at once.

How many great seasons after another can they keep bringing up the lifetime achievement speech. It still holds a small smount of weight, but really that weight gets a whole lot lighter every year he puts in the books.
Damn this has to be the longest offseason ever.

---

damn... never thought of that.

Its ok though, Rodgers dominates in domes

---