Which quarterback deserves x amount of money based on y statistics almost invariably misses the entire point that I personally have been trying to drive home for any that care to listen...And to those that do not care to listen, for that matter.
When an NFL team finds a quarterback that is not, at a minimum, a liability to the team, much less an asset, they are going to have to try and hang onto him, almost without exception. The market for functional quarterbacks in this league is going up, up and up.
The who is better than who argument is for stat fans, barroom discussions, etc.
The reality is that all of them are going to get what the market will bear. The market is the market. The only way to get around that reality is to do precisely what our GM did. He went "early" in the sense that Aaron Rodgers had not proven himself to the degree that would warrant full market price. Why this aspect escapes so many is beyond me. The brilliance of it is that I am pretty confident that Aaron Rodgers and his agent understood the leap of faith Ted Thompson made at that time and context. It is evidenced in the nature of the contract that he signed, heavily dependent upon performance-based incentives.
Is Eli worth more than Aaron? Not to the Green Bay Packers, he isn't. Is Jay Cutler worth more than both of them? He probably will be worth an incredible contract to the Chicago Bears... Why? Because if he plays as advertised, him and his agent will have the Bears by the short hairs. If, for example, Cutler were to put up numbers identical to say, Rodgers numbers from last year...How much do you think it will cost the Bears to extend that contract. I do not know, but I know it will be more than the 680k base and 7.9 LTBE that Rodgers' commands.
Ted made a leap of faith and we are being rewarded, at least $$$$ - wise, imo.... and if there is any such thing as a "home-town discount" or it's equivalent (which I sadly doubt)..What Ted did is about the most a GM could do in that department for future negotiations.