Reports/Speculation: Texans will pursue Caserio AGAIN after 2020 Draft/UPDATE - Rumor: He wants out

[DaBruinz]

...except he's not the GM. Give him the title and a raise and be done with it. He's done a fine job for the team and works well with BB.

Just because he doesn't have the TITLE of GM doesn't mean he's not the GM. He does ALL the duties of a GM. And the TEAM can set how the pecking order is.

How do you know he's not being PAID as a GM already? You don't. So stop pretending like you do because you damn well know that you don't.

Seriously. You get all over people about making statements that can't be proven and yet that's exactly what you're doing here. You're making all sorts that have no basis in reality.

 

[Hyped]

I like it. Raise a stink so teams think twice about courting our front office talent in the future.

And give Nick a raise already.....

 

[goheels22002]

If Easterby is shown to have been involved in this matter, then what a spineless little back-stabbing hypocrite he turned out to be.

Perfect, now I know how to get in at next year's ring ceremony:

Hostess: "Good evening, sir. Welcome to the Krafts for tonight's festivities. May I have your name, please?"

Me: "Yes, thank you. My name is Hypocrite. Spineless Little Back-stabbing Hypocrite."

Hostess: "Here you are, Mr. Hypocrite. You are at table 20. For the main course will you be having collusion, tampering or fabricated deflation? Tampering? Excellent choice, sir. Enjoy your evening. Next?"

 

[supafly]

Hostess: "Here you are, Mr. Hypocrite. You are at table 20. For the main course will you be having collusion, tampering or fabricated deflation? Tampering? Excellent choice, sir. Enjoy your evening. Next?"

This sounds like a scene in a bad M.Night Shyamalan movie.

 

[Kontradiction]

Just because he doesn't have the TITLE of GM doesn't mean he's not the GM. He does ALL the duties of a GM. And the TEAM can set how the pecking order is.

First, this statement is assuming a hell of a lot which makes your second paragraph ultimately rich. Secondly, there is literally zero harm in giving him the title. There are no negatives. Only positives. BB will still ultimately have final say in every dealing with the team from the personnel standpoint. If you think there is a negative to a title change, and I’m assuming that you do since you’re arguing so voraciously against it, please name it.

How do you know he's not being PAID as a GM already? You don't. So stop pretending like you do because you damn well know that you don't.

And you don’t know that he’s already doing all the duties of a GM. That said, you are aware that most people, no matter what they make, enjoy raises, correct? It’s an extrinsic motivator no matter which way you slice it to go along with the intrinsic motivator of a title change.

Seriously. You get all over people about making statements that can't be proven and yet that's exactly what you're doing here. You're making all sorts that have no basis in reality.

Not even remotely close. There are literally zero negatives to what I’m posting. You’re just picking an awfully weird hill to die on. But if this is the hill you want to die on, I’ll be happy to swing the axe.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I like it. Raise a stink so teams think twice about courting our front office talent in the future.

And give Nick a raise already.....

I still don't understand why people insist Nick needs a raise. For all we know he could be making north of $3m annually

BB knows what Nick is worth. It's not like Nick is in indentured servitude to the NEP.

 

[PatriotsReign]

lmao ok let's calm down. If you had signed a no-compete clause or something at your job and then a friend of yours let you in on a deal you would think was better for your career would you really be a scumbag if you considered it?

As is typical in these types of conversations it's perfectly fine for the organization to do whatever it wants, contracts be damned, but the moment an individual may be doing what is in their best interests out come the pitchforks and moral outrage.

1. None of us work in jobs that have tampering rules.

2. Likely none of us have jobs that pay us $3M/year

So let’s stop with the empathy angle. Cassario’s situation can’t be compared to our lives. In most issues like this, emotion & empathy should be laid aside when forming an opinion.

This is really just about facts. Did tampering happen or didn’t it?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

This is a situation that proves that the old adage, "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying," only applies if you actually have a chance to win something as a result.

As far as I can see, this entire mess is a losing proposition for the Texans...why does that not surprise me?

 

[mike_usagisan]

I don't think we get this far if Nick didn't tell the Texans he was interested. The last time we had a tampering case, Revis was already out the door to the Jets. We'll see if he can be persuaded to stay, but it might be too late (the Josh case suggests that Bill might be able to persuade Nick to stay).

If Nick does go, is there a chance that Scott Pioli comes back? He did just leave the Falcons without another job.

 

[XLIX]

Just because he doesn't have the TITLE of GM doesn't mean he's not the GM. He does ALL the duties of a GM. And the TEAM can set how the pecking order is.

That’s not true. On many teams, the GM is the final word on player personnel but we certainly know on the Patriots he isn’t.

 

[XLIX]

That could be argued.

No, it kinda can’t.

While there are clearly other people whose opinions and input Belichick values, it cannot be argued that on this team, Bill Belichick has the final say on all player personnel decisions.

The Patriots are not the only team in the NFL where the HC has that authority, but it is a minority.

 

[XLIX]

[QUOTE="reamer, post: 5602369, member:17441”]Re: tampering, if the Patriots didn't receive any compensation after the Revis fiasco, then I strongly suspect that nothing will come of this allegation, either. Even if the Texans are found guilty, don't expect much to happen. [/QUOTE]
Teams do, on rare occasions, get punished for tampering but the aggrieved parties don’t receive compensation.

However in this case, Caserio is under contract with NE. So it is not impossible to suggest they work out some sort of compensation to release Caserio from his contractual obligations (and drop the tampering accusations while they are at it).

 

[XLIX]

Have the rules been changed since the Patriots denied Houston permission to interview Caserio and Ossenfort in January 2018? If not, I don’t understand how the Patriots could deny permission then but not now.

The rules haven’t changed but I suppose it is possible that Caserio’s contract has. He may have negotiated an out-clause in his last extension giving him the right to leave if he desires.

I am just spitballing here and, of course, that does beg the question of how other teams could approach him because even with the (hypothetical) out clause, he’s still under contract in NE.

 

[RobertWeathers]

This is a situation that proves that the old adage, "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying," only applies if you actually have a chance to win something as a result.

As far as I can see, this entire mess is a losing proposition for the Texans...why does that not surprise me?

Not if the result is a $100k fine and give up a 2nd rounder and land a Grade A front office exec with intimate knowledge of all aspects of the greatest NFL franchise and HC in history

 

[crownontherocks]

A source told ProFootballTalk the Texans and Patriots could strike a deal for Nick Caserio.

 

[XLIX]

A source told ProFootballTalk the Texans and Patriots could strike a deal for Nick Caserio.

 

[RobertWeathers]

A source told ProFootballTalk the Texans and Patriots could strike a deal for Nick Caserio.

The "source" is totally spitballing.

 

[Bourne Again Christian]

It would be a huge loss no other way to paint it.
Promote Monty and bring on Pioli as a assistant or a confidant is the best case scenario if we lose Caserio which still sucks no matter the draft pick compensation.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

This is key:

March 1 Rule. After March 1 of any year and through the conclusion of the annual Selection Meeting, if an inquiring club seeks permission to discuss employment with a person who is under contract for the succeeding season or seasons to another club, to offer him or her a position as a high-level club employee, the employer club is under no obligation to grant such permission if such persons current responsibilities include gathering information on and evaluating draft-eligible players or veteran free agent players. At the discretion of the employer club, however, such permission may be voluntarily granted.​

The "Selection Meeting" is the draft, I'm pretty sure. So I don't believe this rule applies since the alleged tampering happened after the draft ended.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I focused on bullet ii

Doesn't matter. Bullets i and ii are joined with "and", so the rule doesn't apply unless both bullets are true and from everything we know bullet one is not true for Caserio because BB has final say, not Caserio.