PDA

View Full Version : Flanagan to visit...


TheTim5125
03-11-2006, 02:25 PM
Texans | Flanagan will visit team Saturday
Sat, 11 Mar 2006 11:13:45 -0800

Adam Schefter, of the NFL Network, reports free agent C Mike Flanagan (Packers) will visit with the Houston Texans on Saturday, March 11.



heres something i kind of figured considering sherman and all...

The Dude Abides
03-11-2006, 02:30 PM
I wouldn't mind him. He's a little older, but he can't do any worse than McKinney at center last year.

ESPN has him ranked at 7 among all centers.

bigTEXan8
03-11-2006, 02:50 PM
If we get Flanagan, does that mean the Texans will pass on Mangold, if he's still available with out next pick.

Vinny
03-11-2006, 02:52 PM
probably...they would project him to start over Hodgdon I assume. No way we would go with 3 centers on the roster.

Dunta_23
03-11-2006, 02:57 PM
Maybe Hogdon will play guard and they will select Mangold to learn under Flanagan? just speculation of course.

Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan/Mangold-Hogdon-Wade/Wand?

MorKnolle
03-11-2006, 04:10 PM
Maybe Hogdon will play guard and they will select Mangold to learn under Flanagan? just speculation of course.

Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan/Mangold-Hogdon-Wade/Wand?

I would think they would keep Hodgdon at C and move Mangold to G if anything, I wouldn't be opposed to still getting Mangold in that situation, but I'm not sure I see the Texans doing that. It sounds like they really like Chris Chester, the C/G out of Oklahoma, and I would love to see him in our zone blocking scheme after his impressive Combine, and it sounds like he impressed at his pro day too. The combination of liking Chester, signing McKinney, and maybe signing Flanagan would likely rule out Mangold.

Bubbajwp
03-11-2006, 04:12 PM
Maybe Hogdon will play guard and they will select Mangold to learn under Flanagan? just speculation of course.

Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan/Mangold-Hogdon-Wade/Wand?
I would flip that around and let Hogdon learn from Flanagan and let Mangold play guard. If this did happen I would look at LB's in the second round Thomas Howard, Ernie Sims, and Abdul Hodges.

keyfro
03-11-2006, 04:40 PM
yeah i would think so if we signed flanagan then hodgdon would be the primary back-up and there would be no need to draft mangold...flanagan is like 32 or 33 yrs old he would give drew adequate time to develop and in 2-3 years be able to take the starting job with a smooth transition

Bubbajwp
03-11-2006, 04:47 PM
yeah i would think so if we signed flanagan then hodgdon would be the primary back-up and there would be no need to draft mangold...flanagan is like 32 or 33 yrs old he would give drew adequate time to develop and in 2-3 years be able to take the starting job with a smooth transition
But we could draft Mangold to play backup guard for a year or two.

ArlingtonTexan
03-11-2006, 04:48 PM
yeah i would think so if we signed flanagan then hodgdon would be the primary back-up and there would be no need to draft mangold...flanagan is like 32 or 33 yrs old he would give drew adequate time to develop and in 2-3 years be able to take the starting job with a smooth transition

That would depend on whether you think Mangold could play guard. Also, while Hodgdon started 4 games, he was a 5th round pick and has done nothing to preclude the Texans from taking another interior OLman.

GP
03-11-2006, 05:32 PM
Sherman is o line coach, right?

This has his fingerprints all over it, which is fine with me. One of the great things about acquiring other teams' coaches is that they have the inside scoop on at least "their" players and if they would make a nice fit with us.

At this point, I think it's a pretty good bet that with the addition of a great run blocking FB and the very possible addition of a veteran C in Flanagan, we're looking at drafting Reggie Bush. Or, trading and grabbing 'Brick for what could be a pretty decent o line for a change.

There's no way we're drafting Vince Young, guys and gals :stirpot:

travfrancis
03-11-2006, 06:07 PM
There's no way we're drafting Vince Young, guys and gals

we might not draft vince young, but it wouldn't have anything to do with upgrading at center and fb, regardless of who is playing at rb we want the blocking to be good.

Kaiser Toro
03-11-2006, 06:15 PM
I like the prospect of Flanagan being here. Finally something that makes sense.

DomDavis
03-11-2006, 06:16 PM
There's no way we're drafting Vince Young, guys and gals :stirpot:

So if we drafted Vince Young, we wouldn't want to upgrade the interior of the line and the fullback position?

As the above poster said, we might not select Vince Young, but these signings have nothing to do with that.

sprtsfanatic
03-11-2006, 06:18 PM
aint that the truth!

GoBlue
03-11-2006, 06:20 PM
This would be even better than Cook or Weaver- an upgrade on the O-line? who wudda thunk?

TheRealJoker
03-12-2006, 12:30 AM
Looks like we went 3 for 4 today. I hope it is only because Flanagan wants to see every option before making his final decision. Not because he doesn't want to be a Texan.

MorKnolle
03-12-2006, 12:32 AM
Looks like we went 3 for 4 today. I hope it is only because Flanagan wants to see every option before making his final decision. Not because he doesn't want to be a Texan.

I don't know if it necessarily means we aren't going to get him, but I don't really know why we'd sign a 32-year old OLineman anyways, we'd probably end up overpaying him like we've done with the rest of our OLinemen. I'd prefer to have Hodgdon and look for Mangold or Eslinger in the draft than overpay an aging veteran (hopefully we're looking at Chris Chester in the 4th-5th round anyways, he played C in college and could be a C or G for us, and would be a great fit in our zone blocking scheme).

samomin
03-12-2006, 12:53 AM
I like him at center, even if we overpay (just a little though) for his services. Didn't he take over the LT spot for Green Bay when Chad Clifton got blindsided by Sapp few years ago? I might be mixing up the players but if its true then he is versatile also. (Edit: Clifton took over the Center spot when Flanagan was injured[see below], not sure about Flanagan playing T. Probably didn't happen but I can't comfirm it). From the Packers site:

# Had season-ending surgery Oct. 7, 2004, to alleviate recurring knee tendinitis after the level of pain became unmanageable for him. Though the decision to undergo surgery limited him to three regular-season games a year ago, it also likely prevented him from suffering a more serious, career-threatening injury down the line
# Overcoming the long shadow of injury early in his professional career, had built a games-played streak of 82 (87 counting playoffs) prior to having his 2004 season cut short by knee tendinitis issue
# During the 2001-03 seasons when he was an every-game starter, Green Bay allowed an NFL-low 68 sacks. Culminated that successful three-year stretch by making his first Pro Bowl following the 03 campaign the first Packers center to be named to the all-star squad since 1996
# Had current Packers head coach Mike Sherman as his offensive line coach for one season (1994) at UCLA

whiskeyrbl
03-12-2006, 01:12 AM
C 2 Kevin Mawae UFA 12 6-4/289 LSU /NY Jets
C 3 Mike Flanagan UFA 10 6-5/297 UCLA /Green Bay
C 4 Justin Hartwig UFA 4 6-4/300 Kansas /Tennessee
C 5 Jeff Mitchell UFA 8 6-4/300 Florida /Carolina
C 6 Seth McKinney UFA 4 6-3/300 Texas A&M/ Miami
C 7 Trey Teague UFA 8 6-5/290 Tennessee/ Buffalo
C 8 Cory Raymer UFA 11 6-2/300 Wisconsin /Washington
C 9 Melvin Fowler UFA 4 6-3/295 Maryland/ Minnesota
C 10 Cory Withrow UFA 6 6-2/287 Washington State/ Minnesota
C 11 Jon Dorenbos UFA 3 6-0/250 UTEP /Tennessee
C 12 Billy Conaty UFA 9 6-2/300 Virginia Tech/ Arizona
C 13 Andre Gurode UFA 4 6-4/316 Colorado /Dallas
C 14 Austin King RFA 3 6-6/303 Northwestern/ Atlanta
C 15 Mike Schneck UFA 7 6-0/237 Wisconsin/ Buffalo
C 16 Joe Iorio UFA 2 6-2/300 Penn State NY/ Giants
C 17 Brock Gutierrez UFA 8 6-3/304 Central Michigan/ Detroit
Here is a look at the remaining C in FA as listed by www.foxsports.com

Wild.Bill
03-12-2006, 01:19 AM
Now hypothetically, if the Texas were to sign Flanaghan, why would they draft a center (Mangold) to have him play guard??? Unless the guy has done it in college, there are probably better prospects that actually played guard through their college career that we could target rather than drafting someone who plays center to see if they could make the transition to guard.
We're not going to carry more than two centers on our roster which means that if we sign Flanaghan, then Hogden is the back up.

mancunian
03-12-2006, 12:12 PM
I like the prospect of Flanagan being here. Finally something that makes sense.

yeah I like that too. Makes a lot of sense as he's an experienced C. I'm interested to see what our line will be like come the season starts.

Runner
03-12-2006, 12:17 PM
I don't know if it necessarily means we aren't going to get him, but I don't really know why we'd sign a 32-year old OLineman anyways...

Fixing the center position would go a long way to fixing our line. A proven player, even if 32 years old, could help the unproven Hodgdon grow into the position for a year or two. An upgrade doesn't have to be a blockbuster to be effective, especially in an area where we are very weak to start with.

MorKnolle
03-12-2006, 12:21 PM
Fixing the center position would go a long way to fixing our line. A proven player, even if 32 years old, could help the unproven Hodgdon grow into the position for a year or two. An upgrade doesn't have to be a blockbuster to be effective, especially in an area where we are very weak to start with.

I understand but with our apparently continuing history of overpaying for mid-level talent we're probably going to give this guy a lot more money than he deserves to come in and compete with Hodgdon for our C spot for a couple years before he gets too old to be effective.

mancunian
03-12-2006, 12:21 PM
Fixing the center position would go a long way to fixing our line. A proven player, even if 32 years old, could help the unproven Hodgdon grow into the position for a year or two. An upgrade doesn't have to be a blockbuster to be effective, especially in an area where we are very weak to start with.

look what the Seahawks did with their number 1 pick last year. They chose Chris Spencer as heir to Robbie Tobeck. Played in a couple of games and over the next season or two wil challenge for the starter spot.

I think we could do the same if we bring in Flanagan and groom someone.

GP
03-12-2006, 05:04 PM
"we might not draft vince young, but it wouldn't have anything to do with upgrading at center and fb, regardless of who is playing at rb we want the blocking to be good.
" -- travfrancis

Those who are still holding out hope for us taking Vince need to just keep trying to conVINCE themselves all they want...

This team is not picking up Vince Young. What he did throughout his college career was well above average, and what he did in the Rose Bowl was special, but in my opinion Kubiak is sold on trying to salvage Carr as he did with Plummer.

There's no risk of starting a rookie QB who has no concept of what it's like to play in the NFL, which would provide a most difficult challenge to Kubiak trying to establish an immediate winning streak for this team from the get-go. Kubes is going with the guy (Carr) who was given a bad offensive scheme that had held him and this whole team hostage for four years.

I used to think that there was a real chance of us considering taking Vince...but that faded away as reports from scouts and NFL analysts have projected that Vince's stock is dropping a little after the hype hangover from the Rose Bowl has started to fade away. It was neat. It was special. Now it's his turn to get drafted and groomed by probably the Titans (at best) since it seems the Saints are bagging Drew Brees and thus would not draft Vince at No. 2. And then there's STILL no guarantee that the Titans would spend the No. 3 on Vince because you have 'Brick, AJ Hawk, Mario Williams, Leinart, Cutler, etc., who are excellent players and worthy of a top 5 pick themselves.

Nope, we ain't drafting Vince. We ain't trading to get Vince. I'd stake my hair on it. In fact, if we draft Vince...I will shave my head and post the bald-headed photo as my avatar for one week (of course I wouldn't post any messages during that time, either, so ha!).

Acquiring Flanagan would give CARR a nice insurance policy.

kcwilson
03-12-2006, 07:05 PM
Your right, that is funny.

It will be interesting to see what the Saints do before the draft, it would throw off some people on draft day if they got Brees.

Brees wants nothing to do with the Saints because they want him on a short term contract basis. Miami is his likely playground.

It is all academic because no one is going to trade up to #1 with all the talent in the draft. I only see someone trying to get Leinart with our pick, and suspect that Saints have been eyeing him given the nature of Brees' negotiations (or at least the rumors surrounding them).

Scottyboy
03-12-2006, 08:16 PM
Any news on signing this guy today?

Also ESPN Reports Drew Brees Left NO, no deal. Looks like Miami, or Raiders

TexanFan881
03-12-2006, 08:21 PM
I really hope we sign him, we could really use him. About time that we would get a player to fill our needs.

TheTim5125
03-12-2006, 10:17 PM
I saw mangold play all season and i think he'd be better off playing guard... he's quick and he would be a better pulling guard then pulling center.

Texans Pride
03-13-2006, 11:57 PM
The Texans were also negotiating with Packers center Mike Flanagan on Monday according to Houston radio station KMBE 790-AM. New assistant head coach Mike Sherman coached Flanagan, 32, for much of his career.

http://houstonprofootball.com/

outofhnd
03-14-2006, 12:08 AM
My Co worker is a Packers Buff here is what he told me about flanagan. All Pro center however given his age and current injuries GB is not willing to pay top dollar for his services anymore..

So if Healthy he is a true Center and if Hogdon is our center its because he beat out Flanagan. If He doesnt He atleast gets to work under a quality center andmaybe puch for the starting job in a year or two... Realistically I dont think Mangold is on the board by the time we have our second pick. I think he goes top 20.

Porky
03-14-2006, 03:05 PM
Brees wants nothing to do with the Saints because they want him on a short term contract basis. Miami is his likely playground.

It is all academic because no one is going to trade up to #1 with all the talent in the draft. I only see someone trying to get Leinart with our pick, and suspect that Saints have been eyeing him given the nature of Brees' negotiations (or at least the rumors surrounding them).

Remind me not to call you before I pick my next stock to buy. :redtowel:

O.G.
03-14-2006, 03:49 PM
Your right, that is funny.

It will be interesting to see what the Saints do before the draft, it would throw off some people on draft day if they got Brees.

And the Saints did just that

dat_boy_yec
03-14-2006, 07:10 PM
Man I hope we get Flannagan. I think we have a good shot at the guy because he's familiar with Sherman. Even though he's older he can still bring alot to the Texans and hold down the spot while Hodgdon improves and later on can take the spot. Also this would really help with the line.

TommyS
03-17-2006, 01:34 PM
any news?

texan279
03-17-2006, 05:59 PM
any news?

I don't think he has visited with anyone else since he visited with us, so I am not sure exactly what is going on with him.

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 06:08 PM
hopefully he's in the process of signing with us

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 06:16 PM
This delay is actually good for us considering i'm sure we made him an offer....and if he would have jumped all over it....well....you can bet we overpayed....

Well its good for us if he does end up signing....i don't think he has any more teams he is visiting. So we know he is contemplating.

Porky
03-17-2006, 06:26 PM
If he thinks any longer, the dude will turn to stone.

Oops, too late.

http://www.hawaii.edu/lruby/art400/THINKER.GIF

JAXwithanX
03-17-2006, 06:29 PM
Odds are he is sitting in that position....except in front of a meal.

Texans86
03-17-2006, 06:43 PM
Odds are he is sitting in that position....except in front of a meal.

To stuff my face, or not to stuff my face, That is the question.

edo783
03-17-2006, 06:46 PM
Might be a done deal and they are just holding the announcement for Putz and the guy from the Bungles. Joint type of announcement thing for more affect.

Porky
03-17-2006, 06:48 PM
Might be a done deal and they are just holding the announcement for Putz and the guy from the Bungles. Joint type of announcement thing for more affect.

Effect.

Ususally though it leaks out somewhere. If the guy truly is a done deal, they are hiding it better than the CIA.

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 08:14 PM
The Bengals are expected to not match the offer from the Texans so it looks like he will be coming to houston.

texan279
03-17-2006, 08:15 PM
The Bengals are expected to not match the offer from the Texans so it looks like he will be coming to houston.

Did you post in the wrong thread?

TexanFan881
03-17-2006, 08:18 PM
Did you post in the wrong thread?

lol, I was replying to this

[QUOTE=edo783]Might be a done deal and they are just holding the announcement for Putz and the guy from the Bungles. Joint type of announcement thing for more affect.[QUOTE]