Whitney Mercilus

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
3,408
Reaction score
364
I'm happy with the signing. A needed position. And he seems to have been playing decently...at least he has some sacks. Wonder why they let him go. They already paid him.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
6,614
Reaction score
1,326
I'm happy with the signing. A needed position. And he seems to have been playing decently...at least he has some sacks. Wonder why they let him go. They already paid him.
From what I understand, the new staff is trying to go younger and cheaper and they initiated the departure. This was his last year and obviously Houston is on a 5 game losing streak. It’s time to look towards next season and get their rising stars a chance to get significant reps. I doubt they would’ve resigned him past this season because he’s too expensive for his age. He’s just not in their future plans because he’s in those twilight years now.
I really think he could do well in GB as a 3rd rotational and if we somehow get healthy towards seasons end we could be loaded at Defensive depth.
 
Last edited:

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
6,559
Reaction score
1,549
Location
PENDING
From what I understand, the new staff is trying to go younger and cheaper and they initiated the departure. This was his last year and obviously Houston is on a 5 game losing streak. It’s time to look towards next season and get their rising stars a chance to get significant reps. I doubt they would’ve resigned him past this season because he’s too expensive for his age. He’s just not in their future plans because he’s in those twilight years now.
I really think he could do well in GB as a 3rd rotational and if we somehow get healthy towards seasons end we could be loaded at Defensive depth.
A better draft position by getting rid of a guy they weren't going to have next season anyway?
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
6,429
Reaction score
1,057
From what I understand, the new staff is trying to go younger and cheaper and they initiated the departure. This was his last year and obviously Houston is on a 5 game losing streak. It’s time to look towards next season and get their rising stars a chance to get significant reps. I doubt they would’ve resigned him past this season because he’s too expensive for his age. He’s just not in their future plans because he’s in those twilight years now.
I really think he could do well in GB as a 3rd rotational and if we somehow get healthy towards seasons end we could be loaded at Defensive depth.

Exactly too many reasons for them to not allow him this chance; rebuilding has started there with these losses and Watson issue, young guys need evaluated and they can provide Whitney the chance to go elsewhere at his choice.
 

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
586
Reaction score
198
A better draft position by getting rid of a guy they weren't going to have next season anyway?
I think the idea is that if a good player is gone the chances of losing go up. Therefore, the draft pick would go up. I'm not sure losing him loses any games for them. Maybe, but I think that is the thought there.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,118
Reaction score
607
The Texans really just want everyone to have their happy endings elsewhere...
This is one of the best internet response I've ever read. I should have given you a laugh instead of just a like but now that Mondio has done so I don't want to feel like I am copying him.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
13,262
Reaction score
1,630
This is one of the best internet response I've ever read. I should have given you a laugh instead of just a like but now that Mondio has done so I don't want to feel like I am copying him.
It's ok to imitate greatness. Indulge :)
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,249
Reaction score
345
1) Trade

2) Tag and trade
Can't say I'm happy with that, but it would probably be a miracle to get much else. I'd really like to keep Rodgers and Adams (I think Rodgers would prefer that too), but if it's not practical I'm at peace with it.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,118
Reaction score
607
I just realized that along with being a pretty good football player he plays a pretty mean trumpet.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,625
Reaction score
1,581
Can't say I'm happy with that, but it would probably be a miracle to get much else. I'd really like to keep Rodgers and Adams (I think Rodgers would prefer that too), but if it's not practical I'm at peace with it.

Here's how I see it.

Rodgers turns 38 this year. Whether he would work it out to stay in Green Bay or not, his time as the Packers' starter is drawing to a close.

After this year, the focus should be on the transition to a new QB.

If the Packers can trade Rodgers for a haul of draft capital, it puts them in position to either:

a) Build around Love with lots of premium talent.

b) Go get another QB if Love ain't the guy.

Not many franchises get the chance to move on to a really talented 1st round QB who has been groomed for two seasons along with a nice float of assets from trading the last guy. That's an ideal situation for transitioning, in my mind. It's more attractive than hanging onto Rodgers for a couple more declining seasons.

On Adams, I would be fine if they worked out a deal with him and kept him around for Love, but I just generally don't love the idea of paying a WR elite money. I don't think the positional value is worth it. I'd rather spend on the OL, DL, ED, CB, etc. So if they could tag and trade and get a nice pick back, I think I'd do it.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
3,249
Reaction score
345
On Adams, I would be fine if they worked out a deal with him and kept him around for Love, but I just generally don't love the idea of paying a WR elite money.
Big weapons are nice, but I guess losing Adams would encourage Love to throw the ball around more. I'm guessing Adams follows Rodgers if possible.

I'm not thrilled with the idea of losing Rodgers, QBs are playing longer these days, the rules keep them healthier. But if we can get a bundle for him (unlike with Favre), it would ease the pain.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,118
Reaction score
607
Can we get this thread back on topic please. Its getting difficult to follow.

I'm guessing we won't see Whitney from Houston until the Cardinals game at the earliest.
 

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
586
Reaction score
198
Here's how I see it.

Rodgers turns 38 this year. Whether he would work it out to stay in Green Bay or not, his time as the Packers' starter is drawing to a close.

After this year, the focus should be on the transition to a new QB.

If the Packers can trade Rodgers for a haul of draft capital, it puts them in position to either:

a) Build around Love with lots of premium talent.

b) Go get another QB if Love ain't the guy.

Not many franchises get the chance to move on to a really talented 1st round QB who has been groomed for two seasons along with a nice float of assets from trading the last guy. That's an ideal situation for transitioning, in my mind. It's more attractive than hanging onto Rodgers for a couple more declining seasons.

On Adams, I would be fine if they worked out a deal with him and kept him around for Love, but I just generally don't love the idea of paying a WR elite money. I don't think the positional value is worth it. I'd rather spend on the OL, DL, ED, CB, etc. So if they could tag and trade and get a nice pick back, I think I'd do it.
I actually don't disagree with any of this. It makes the most logical sense if one looks at it from a business standpoint. It would just be really hard to watch the current roster be torn apart for the rebuild. The nonlogical part in me wants to work it out with Rodgers and think "if Brady can play to 45 then Rodgers can too". It's just not realistic though. I think you're right on this @Dantés. Sometimes you just have to cut the cord though.
 

thisisnate

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
170
Location
Maine
The current roster is going to get torn apart next year regardless. You can destroy the roster next year but try to keep Rodgers around or you can destroy is a little bit more without Rodgers. It's going to be a completely different team next year either way. We've got like 30 guys with a contract expiring in 2022 and a few others like Z with contracts that we are absolutely not paying.
 

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
586
Reaction score
198
The current roster is going to get torn apart next year regardless. You can destroy the roster next year but try to keep Rodgers around or you can destroy is a little bit more without Rodgers. It's going to be a completely different team next year either way. We've got like 30 guys with a contract expiring in 2022 and a few others like Z with contracts that we are absolutely not paying.
Totally agree. Might as well get as much as you can for the rebuild.

I do like the moves they are making. I think this Mercilus signing, along with Jaylon Smith, shows they are all in on this season. It's Super Bowl or bust and then rebuild next year.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
6,614
Reaction score
1,326
Can we get this thread back on topic please. Its getting difficult to follow.

I'm guessing we won't see Whitney from Houston until the Cardinals game at the earliest.
Yeah that makes sense. He’d have essentially 2 weeks practice, which while minimal, could be enough to get a seasoned veteran involved. I think AZ is a good hypothesis for his debut.

I’m really hoping we can find a way to get our best talent out their simultaneously. Having some passing downs sending Clark, Mercilus, Gary, Preston all simultaneously is formidable. Can’t wait to see him in action. Merciless is a unique blend of power and speed. Similar but yet different from Garys’ attributes. We suddenly have THREE Day 1 selections in that front group.
 
Last edited:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
26,317
Reaction score
1,675
Good opportunity. Even if it is for a year or two. At least the Pack is trying. This rarely happened with Thompson in mid stride. Look at Peppers. He was past 30 and he gave us a few very good years. I think this signals that Z is likely done. And even if he returns he will not be 100 per cent and it could be mid-January.

I don't think the Packers signing Mercilus indicates Z is done for the season but strongly suggests the team was in need of an upgrade at the position now.

2) Tag and trade

The Packers most likely won't have the cap space available to tag Adams.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
22,634
Reaction score
2,385
Location
Milwaukee
Big weapons are nice, but I guess losing Adams would encourage Love to throw the ball around more. I'm guessing Adams follows Rodgers if possible.

I'm not thrilled with the idea of losing Rodgers, QBs are playing longer these days, the rules keep them healthier. But if we can get a bundle for him (unlike with Favre), it would ease the pain.
Reallisticly a new team prob only does a short contract. Would Adams follow just for that? He would be in same spot as he is now.
 
Top