[teejers1]

Maybe someone in the Houston front office has a heart and decided that even if not suspended no way will we play a sexual bully.

Not sure whether it was having a heart or a cold-blooded evaluation of the publicity hit playing him would have created. Either way, they pretty much had no choice.

Well, Houston could have played him - and then forced the NFL to step in and say "no, he cannot."  Then they don't have to pay him . . . (but maybe that's not right.  Don't know if players on Commissioner's list still get paid).  I'm not sure what the practical difference is between Houston playing him last season and another team playing him in the future - and barring criminal conviction (which is highly unlikely, imo), some team is going to play him.  The allegations will all still be there, even if the cases are settled . . . hell, they'll be there even if the jury reaches a verdict after trial (and who really thinks these cases will be tried?).

The NFL told the Texans that if they tried to play Watson that he would be placed on the exempt list. Either way he would be paid his full salary. Given that 1) he didn't want to play for Houston, 2) it was a P.R. problem, 3) they hoped to trade him; it was in the Texans, the league's and Watson's interests for things to play out as they have.

Your answer makes sense - particularly if Watson gets paid no matter what.

But I did stumble across this while looking for an answer on exempt list payments.  
Of course, there is nothing authoritative about this answer, just one guy's opinion (as far as I can tell):

Q.  Who pays the NFL player's salary while he is on the Commissioner's exempt list?

A.  Players on the Commissioner’s Exempt List are considered to be on leave and can be paid or not. 
Teams don’t have to count them on their active roster, and only Roger Goodell can put a player on or take them off the list.

[teejers1]

Maybe someone in the Houston front office has a heart and decided that even if not suspended no way will we play a sexual bully.

Not sure whether it was having a heart or a cold-blooded evaluation of the publicity hit playing him would have created. Either way, they pretty much had no choice.

Well, Houston could have played him - and then forced the NFL to step in and say "no, he cannot."  Then they don't have to pay him . . . (but maybe that's not right.  Don't know if players on Commissioner's list still get paid).  I'm not sure what the practical difference is between Houston playing him last season and another team playing him in the future - and barring criminal conviction (which is highly unlikely, imo), some team is going to play him.  The allegations will all still be there, even if the cases are settled . . . hell, they'll be there even if the jury reaches a verdict after trial (and who really thinks these cases will be tried?).

The NFL told the Texans that if they tried to play Watson that he would be placed on the exempt list. Either way he would be paid his full salary. Given that 1) he didn't want to play for Houston, 2) it was a P.R. problem, 3) they hoped to trade him; it was in the Texans, the league's and Watson's interests for things to play out as they have.

Your answer makes sense - particularly if Watson gets paid no matter what.

But I did stumble across this while looking for an answer on exempt list payments.  
Of course, there is nothing authoritative about this answer, just one guy's opinion (as far as I can tell):

Q.  Who pays the NFL player's salary while he is on the Commissioner's exempt list?

A.  Players on the Commissioner’s Exempt List are considered to be on leave and can be paid or not. 
Teams don’t have to count them on their active roster, and only Roger Goodell can put a player on or take them off the list.