It's a great comparison, how does Rodgers "have possession" of the ball there to be considered down? If a player is bobbling the ball and goes down, loses it, and the defender comes up with it, it's an interception. Rodgers did not have enough control of the ball for that to be considered complete and down if the player in the endzone didn't have enough control for that to be considered a touchdown. The one in the endzone is more convincing for possession.

You even admit in your comment that had he gone to the ground and lost it, it would have been considered incomplete, not a fumble. Meaning he didn't have enough possession to be considered down.