Caserio to stay? . interview request by HOU rejected

[Love The Drake]

Confirmed p

Troll

lease ban.

 

[Love The Drake]

So is Caserio staying?
Could you imagine losing Patricia who is gone McDaniels who more than likely will leave and Caserio.
Wow Bill needs to get the little Belichildren into hyperdrive.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Evidently there was a rule change this year.

Plus we have no clue if any facts. Did caserio even want to interview.

The thing I find interesting is that Caserio turned down an interview with the 49ers last year during the playoffs. He did interview with the Dolphins in 2014 multiple times (and reportedly was offered the job) during the playoffs. He also turned down an interview with the Colts in 2012 during the playoffs.

But this is the first time I can recall the team actually blocking the request during the playoffs.

It makes me wonder if BB needs him more than before with Josh and Matty P both potentially gone. In past years, it looked like maybe Josh might go, but it sounds more and more likely both will be gone after this season. So I think BB felt with one or two of the trio, he could survive, but maybe not afford to lose all 3 at the same time.

 

[Ring 6]

The thing I find interesting is that Caserio turned down an interview with the 49ers last year during the playoffs. He did interview with the Dolphins in 2014 multiple times (and reportedly was offered the job) during the playoffs. He also turned down an interview with the Colts in 2012 during the playoffs.

But this is the first time I can recall the team actually blocking the request during the playoffs.

It makes me wonder if BB needs him more than before with Josh and Matty P both potentially gone. In past years, it looked like maybe Josh might go, but it sounds more and more likely both will be gone after this season. So I think BB felt with one or two of the trio, he could survive, but maybe not afford to lose all 3 at the same time.

The rules changed.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The rules changed.

They did, but not in a way that would make it easier to block requests. In fact, the opposite is true.

Courtesy of Schefter:

The changes to the policy, enacted quietly last spring, loosen the rules for teams to interview executives on other teams. It is no longer a prerequisite that having final say on a team's 53-man roster can prevent an executive from interviewing for another franchise's general manager job, according to a league source.

In past years, certain teams blocked other teams from interviewing key front office executives by saying that the individual had final say on the 53-man roster.

Sources: NFL reminds teams of tampering rules

So in past years, the team could block the request by saying the individual had final say on the 53-man roster, but this year, that isn't a prerequisite.

But in previous years (as well as this year), the team could block the request during their season. That part hasn't changed. The part that changed is how teams could block any requests after the year too by saying the person had final say on the 53-man roster. But now that is no longer a way of blocking requests.

So the rule change doesn't really impact the blocking of the initial request. What has changed is that several times in years past, the team allowed Caserio to decide. This year, they didn't.

Last year, the Patriots allowed Caserio to talk with the 49ers, but this year Houston did not receive the same opportunity.

Source: Pats reject Texans' GM interview bids

If that's correct (never know with ESPN), that means they could have blocked the request last year, but "allowed" it. Caserio was the one to decline the 49ers, not the team. This year, it was the team that denied it.

 

[fnordcircle]

I wonder if this is a way for Caserio to turn down a job that looks incredibly shaky without directly turning it down. The Eagles also blocked the request from the Texans, so who knows.

 

[Ring 6]

They did, but not in a way that would make it easier to block requests. In fact, the opposite is true.

Courtesy of Schefter:



Sources: NFL reminds teams of tampering rules

So in past years, the team could block the request by saying the individual had final say on the 53-man roster, but this year, that isn't a prerequisite.

But in previous years (as well as this year), the team could block the request during their season. That part hasn't changed. The part that changed is how teams could block any requests after the year too by saying the person had final say on the 53-man roster. But now that is no longer a way of blocking requests.

So the rule change doesn't really impact the blocking of the initial request. What has changed is that several times in years past, the team allowed Caserio to decide. This year, they didn't.



Source: Pats reject Texans' GM interview bids

If that's correct (never know with ESPN), that means they could have blocked the request last year, but "allowed" it. Caserio was the one to decline the 49ers, not the team. This year, it was the team that denied it.

I don’t think you understand. Since they cannot permanently block the interview, which they never gave intended to do, they block it during their season. This doesn’t limit the opportunity it just makes the other team respect the playoff preparation.
The rule change creates the opportunity to delay the process without barring the employee from the opportunity.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I don’t think you understand. Since they cannot permanently block the interview, which they never gave intended to do, they block it during their season. This doesn’t limit the opportunity it just makes the other team respect the playoff preparation.
The rule change creates the opportunity to delay the process without barring the employee from the opportunity.

But if that's the case, why didn't they block it last year too? There was no modification to the rule about in-season requests. It's the same rule as last year. The team can grant or deny it.

The only difference is after the season, where a team could previously still block a request if they wanted to based on "final say" of the 53. But they could also grant it last year. This year, they cannot block it.

So last year, the rules allowed them to block the request for the 49ers during their season too but they didn't.

This year, the same rules allowed them to block the request for the Texans during their season, and they chose to do so.

TLDR: they could always block in-season interviews for Caserio, and 3 times previously they haven't, this time they have.

 

[Love The Drake]

But if that's the case, why didn't they block it last year too? There was no modification to the rule about in-season requests. It's the same rule as last year. The team can grant or deny it.

The only difference is after the season, where a team could previously still block a request if they wanted to based on "final say" of the 53. But they could also grant it last year. This year, they cannot block it.

So last year, the rules allowed them to block the request for the 49ers during their season too but they didn't.

This year, the same rules allowed them to block the request for the Texans during their season, and they chose to do so.

TLDR: they could always block in-season interviews for Caserio, and 3 times previously they haven't, this time they have.

Maybe they are afraid Nick could bolt to Houston?
With familiar faces and more power being the formula to sway him?

 

[Ivan]

I wonder if this is a way for Caserio to turn down a job that looks incredibly shaky without directly turning it down. The Eagles also blocked the request from the Texans, so who knows.

I think Caserio knows he is going to get full control in NE when Belichick calls it quits and he isn’t interested in going elsewhere.

 

[Ring 6]

But if that's the case, why didn't they block it last year too? There was no modification to the rule about in-season requests. It's the same rule as last year. The team can grant or deny it.

The only difference is after the season, where a team could previously still block a request if they wanted to based on "final say" of the 53. But they could also grant it last year. This year, they cannot block it.

So last year, the rules allowed them to block the request for the 49ers during their season too but they didn't.

This year, the same rules allowed them to block the request for the Texans during their season, and they chose to do so.

TLDR: they could always block in-season interviews for Caserio, and 3 times previously they haven't, this time they have.

In the past if they blocked it they blocked it. Now they block it and after the season is over the employee can request overriding it.

 

[Ivan]

The Patriots would grant the interview if Caserio wanted them to. Blocking it against his will doesn’t make sense.

 

[Love The Drake]

The Patriots would grant the interview if Caserio wanted them to. Blocking it against his will doesn’t make sense.

Unless Kraft is truly concerned Bill nevermind.

 

[Ivan]

Unless Kraft is truly concerned Bill nevermind.

Kraft would not have said he absolutely believes Beluchick will be back if Belichick had other plans. Belichick has always been the anti-Parcells and he will leave this organization in the right hands and shape going forward.

 

[Love The Drake]

Kraft would not have said he absolutely believes Beluchick will be back if Belichick had other plans. Belichick has always been the anti-Parcells and he will leave this organization in the right hands and shape going forward.

Unless and I don't truly believe this but he felt disrespected or betrayed.
I can see Jimmy getting two chicks to fight over him but BB and Kraft that would be quite the feat.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

In the past if they blocked it they blocked it. Now they block it and after the season is over the employee can request overriding it.

That's not totally accurate. Last year, they could block an in-season request. They had to allow an interview after the season unless the person had final say over the 53-man roster.

This year, they could block an in-season request. They have to allow an interview after the season regardless of who has final say over the 53-man roster.

This article from last year outlines an example of that:

Chiefs blocked Chris Ballard from interviewing with 49ers

Last year, for example, the Packers decided not to allow Eliot Wolf to interview for the G.M. job in Detroit until the Green Bay playoff run ended.

So the Patriots could have blocked Caserio in previous years from interviewing during the season and made him wait until the off-season, but they didn't.

This year, they are making him wait. It's different, and not just because of the rule change.

 

[Ivan]

Unless and I don't truly believe this but he felt disrespected or betrayed.
I can see Jimmy getting two chicks to fight over him but BB and Kraft that would be quite the feat.

If Kraft ordered Belichick to trade Garrapolo against his will I would expect Belichick to hang them up as soon as the season ends. He’s not going anywhere else. However Kraft would also know that right next now and he would have been far more cautious than guaranteeing his return.

 

[Ivan]

That's not totally accurate. Last year, they could block an in-season request. They had to allow an interview after the season unless the person had final say over the 53-man roster.

This year, they could block an in-season request. They have to allow an interview after the season regardless of who has final say over the 53-man roster.

This article from last year outlines an example of that:

Chiefs blocked Chris Ballard from interviewing with 49ers



So the Patriots could have blocked Caserio in previous years from interviewing during the season and made him wait until the off-season, but they didn't.

This year, they are making him wait. It's different, and not just because of the rule change.

What good does blocking him do if he wants to leave?

 

[convertedpatsfan]

What good does blocking him do if he wants to leave?

I would guess that teams want to fill those vacancies as quickly as possible to start preparing for the off-season.

Using the Ballard example, the Chiefs blocked the interview request on January 7. They weren't playing their next playoff game until January 15, and depending on how that went, it could extend to the 22nd, or even potentially as far as February 5 had the Chiefs gone all the way to the Super Bowl.

During this time, they have other candidates they're interested in and other teams who are interested in those candidates. It's probably like musical chairs, and you don't want to be left without any of your top candidates. And there's no guarantee even if you interview Ballard that he will want the job, or you will want him to take the job. So York and the 49ers decided to move on with the other candidates, eventually naming Lynch on January 29.

Ballard would interview with the Colts after the Chiefs lost and be named GM of the Colts on the same day.

Matt Miller also brought this up last year regarding the issue:



There was a report floating that Ballard wasn't interested in the 49ers job, so that might be it. But it seems weird because the team could just request the search after the season ends.

So in terms of Caserio, it could be the team doing Nick a favour and declining on his behalf and hoping Houston finds a guy before then. But what if Houston doesn't, and they ask Caserio after the season ends? Maybe BOB feels confident he can get Nick to come over. Or maybe BB is sure the Texans will fill that position before the Patriots season ends.

 

[Simpelton]

So is Caserio staying?
Could you imagine losing Patricia who is gone McDaniels who more than likely will leave and Caserio.
Wow Bill needs to get the little Belichildren into hyperdrive.

We could legit have out entire coaching staff gutted by hungry competing teams. Hope it doesn't come to that.