I’m still a little suspicious of the Packers D. They’ve got plenty of talented players—I’m not disputing that. What I can’t tell yet, though, is how much of their success is because the teams they’re playing against haven’t seen any of this stuff from them before? And also, I think it’s easier for blitzing defenses to have success in the preseason because offenses are often pretty vanilla and aren’t schematically set up to capitalize on it.

So, to put it another way, I’d say that the Packers’ D is the one that might ‘emerge’ this year as very good, but I’ll believe it when I see it consistently for at least four games, whereas Rodgers (as you pointed out) is already there. This year will cement in as one of the top five young QBs in the league (in that rung just below Manning and Brady).

Fair enough. I guess last year I just didn’t see the consistency of zip, decisiveness, and vision we’re seeing in the preseason from Rodgers. I watched him closely and, no doubt, saw him as the best quarterback in our division last year. But, not a potential top-five talent in the league, which, it seems to me, is where he might be slotted at this point.

he has peterson, taylor, berrian, harvin, rice, johnson, and wade with him

It’s pretty funny to hear a Bears fan claiming that their receivers are what’s gonna make their passign game good. Dude, it’s the other way around, it’s Cutler that will make them look good. If they even do end up looking good (Cutler may not be enough)

Sorry, But I still think we should keep all 4

I would have taken him ahead of Romo. Both on absolute terms, and in the context of what you said about his D. Just think about it, if Packers D still isn’t good, then ball is in Rodgers hands even more. no way would I take Romo ahead of Rodgers. Especially with TO gone.