Aaron Rodgers is Sixth-Best Player, According to Peers

268 17
Aaron Rodgers is not please

Aaron Rodgers is not please

The NFL Network unveiled the top of their top 100 players list this week and Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers finished sixth.

The list is voted on by NFL players. Rodgers finished first on the same list last year, so his drop will probably piss him off and he’ll make it a point to tear it up this season.

Adrian Peterson finished at the top of the list, followed by Peyton Manning, Calvin Johnson, Tom Brady and J.J. Watt.

Clearly, there are arguments to be made for all of those guys to be above Rodgers, but really, most people would agree that Rodgers is the best player in the NFL.

The reason for Rodgers’ drop has to be because most of these guys just looked at the 2012 season. Rodgers’ performance dipped slightly from his MVP 2011 season. Meanwhile, Peterson was rushing for over 2,000 yards, Manning had the Broncos looking like the best team in the NFL until the playoffs, Johnson nearly reached 2,000 yards receiving, Brady is Brady and Watt was the defensive player of the year.

It probably also didn’t help that the Packers lost in the divisional round of the playoffs for the second year in a row.

Clay Matthews came in at No. 31 on the list. Charles Woodson was No. 85 and Randall Cobb and Jordy Nelson were among a bunch of players who got votes at the bottom of the list.

You can see the whole glorious list if you go here.

About The Author

Monty McMahon is one of the founders of Total Packers. He is probably the most famous graduate of UW-Oshkosh next to Jim Gantner.

17 Comments on "Aaron Rodgers is Sixth-Best Player, According to Peers"

  1. FITZCORE1252

    While he’s clearly the best player in the league, I like this. Wish they’d of ranked him in the 20’s, really piss him off. If there’s anything I like better than #12, it’s a chippy #12.

    Good luck league, and remember, you brought this upon yourselves.

  2. Iltarion

    This only further proves that players don’t know shit. The reason why they don’t is because they don’t watch football. Tough to watch games on Sunday when you are playing on Sunday.

    They look at the stats and know the once or twice during the season that they might have played against them. That is all.

    There is no effin way Rodgers should be lower than Manning or Brady. Apparently everyone missed the first 5 games of the season when Manning was throwing like 3 picks a game.

    He would basically pull a Carson Palmer, meaning the Broncos would fall behind by 3 scores, and then they’d rally in the 2nd half and Manning would end up with big numbers.

    Though I’m not sure what is worse, Rodgers being at 6 or CM3 being at 31. That is ridiculous.

    • Phatgzus

      I agree with you on the premises that Rodgers and The Bloodline were rated too low (CM III should be top 20, def ahead of Marshall, Wayne, RG III, and Luck at least), and that the list is a joke (Jimmy Graham wasn’t even on it and he’s arguably the best TE in football), I have to disagree about the players and Manning. Technically they do watch football, a lot more in depth than most of us (at least certain positions)-game tape-they also play against most of these guys at some point in their career, granted I’m sure most have never seen a certain player perform, still, it’s difficult not to have a solid idea of how good someone is when you play against or with them. That being said, career bench-warmers may not deserve vote and special-teamers probably shouldn’t, as the majority game tape (and football in general) is that of special teams play (unless they’re a 3rd or 4th string DB, RB or WR).

      As for Manning he had a couple bad games in the first quarter of the season, the Atlanta game was literally historically bad (they did still almost win that game). After that game, I believe he regained his timing and feel for the game and understood where his receivers would be, and he performed exceptionally well for most of the remainder of the season. That being said, he had the best statistical O-line in football, and Rodgers still outperformed him (Brady, Brees, and any other QB the media has a hard-on for). I believe Rodgers should have been #1 or at least #2 behind AD.

  3. Eli

    If ARod wasn’t ranked 6th no one would be talking about this garbage list. I’m glad ARod was the one to get bumped since he seems to take this crap personally.

  4. the real russ letlow

    Aaron does a great job of using this crap to motivate himself…….a bigger chip on the shoulder = woo hoo!

  5. AZPackFan2000

    Was Watt even in the game against us? Oh yeah, he was the one doing diddly squat. How did he get ranked higher?

  6. Bic

    The reason these lists aren’t even worth looking at is because the people voting (the players) don’t give a shit about putting any thought into it whatsoever. The majority of them couldn’t care less about handing in a half decent list. And does anyone actually know how it is worked out? The method is ridiculous and should’ve completely discredited the rankings as soon as the show started. It’s now even worth discussing.

    • Kreg

      Now you sound like a dumb Vikings fan. Lets keep it real. 76 tds, 11 rushing tds and no pix. There, that is a little more believable.

  7. tedtomato

    Why does there always have to be one idiot viqueers fan? Jealous much? If any team has a player with sand in her vagina it would be..the purple pukes and your goat roping roidhead..gayred allen!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *