By: Joe Pinzone
Ralph Wilson conducted his first interview by phone with the AP and is prepared to to revamp his entire football operation after the season and warned that no position is safe. When asked about spending money, Wilson said he's open for anything to get the Bills back on track.
“It’s not about money, it’s about winning,” Wilson said by phone from his home in suburban Detroit. “If it was about money, we wouldn’t have brought in and paid for somebody we know was a great player.”
Wilson was referring to the signing of receiver Terrell Owens(notes) to a one-year $6.5 million contract in March after he was cut by Dallas.
“Anybody that says I’m cheap is looking down the wrong side of the street,” Wilson said. (Quotes From AP)
Mind of Joe
Look, I'm happy it would seem on the surface that Wilson is finally going to open up his treasure chest and bring in a real football guy. But for him to say that he's not cheap because he signed Terrell Owens is a little flawed. Sure he spent 6.5 million dollars, but you decided to jettison Jason Peters because you didn't want to pay him. You refused to pay for the offensive line. You didn't see fit to sign a legit linebacker so Bills fans could see an end to the Keith Ellison era. Lastly, you've been extremely cheap for the last ten years when it comes to paying your coaches.
That's the problem with Mr. Wilson, he thinks he spends a ton of money on this team when in actuality he really doesn't do enough. He better realize that to get a high priced coach it's going to cost him a lot more than the 6.5 million dollars he paid Terrell Owens. Help us all, if Wilson thinks paying guys like Jim Haslett and Jim Fassel 4 million dollars a year is a way to break the mold of paying for coaches.
Again, I'm still a little apprehensive that this "wish list" may be a smoke screen to calm Bills fans down for demanding a high priced coach. Just because the Bills decide to talk to guys like Shanahan and Cowher, doesn't mean they will act on hiring them.
-When asked about the prospect of interviewing Mike Shanahan, Wilson discounted the reports saying, "I don't know anything about him." He did add that the team would release a statement today regarding all the speculation-
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Friday, November 20. 2009
Buffalo Bills: Don't Call Ralph Wilson Cheap
Posted by Joe Pinzone
in NFL Blog: The view from the End Zone
at
12:13
| Comment (1)
| Trackbacks (0)
Harry Reid Keeps Straight Face Saying Health Care Bill Reduces Deficit
Metro Group Inc. in no way supports any particular political view point. "Health Care blog" is a forum where both sides of the issue can state their point of view and make their case for their positions on the very important issue of Health Care Reform in the U.S.
By Robert Laszewski
The accounting gimmickry in Harry Reid’s Senate health bill is astounding even by Capitol Hill standards.
Reid says his bill will cost $850 billion and reduce the deficit by $130 billion—all over ten years.
Based upon the outline Reid gave the CBO that could well be right. But let’s look at it further:
Reid delays most of the spending in the bill to 2014—a year longer than in the House. More importantly, his new taxes start in 2010. That is ten years of taxes and only six years of the expensive entitlement expansion! Who wouldn't want to use that gimmick to balance their books?
He once again avoids the $250 billion Medicare doc fee fix—apparently he didn’t get the message when the Senate voted down his attempt to pay the docs off with the $250 billion but just add it to the deficit. Since everyone knows the docs will get their money just add $250 billion to his $850 billion cost. (Unless you are one of those who says since the SGR was wrong in the first place so we shouldn't count it--and I want my capital losses back from last year because the financial crisis was wrong.)
* He collects billions in new long-term care program premiums—a program that will have relatively low first year outlays—and lets that income offset the bill’s costs elsewhere making the overall bill’s net costs far better than they really are. That gimmick gives Reid about $70 billion of his $130 billion "deficit reduction." Sort of like spending the kids' college savings and claiming your family budget is balanced.
But maybe the real sleeper is this from the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) letter to Senator Reid regarding his bill (from page 17):
Key Considerations. These longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation. For example, the sustainable growth rate (SGR) mechanism governing Medicare’s payments to physicians has frequently been modified (either through legislation or administrative action) to avoid reductions in those payments, and legislation to do so again is currently under consideration in the Congress.
The legislation would put into effect a number of procedures that might be difficult to maintain over a long period of time. Although it would increase payment rates for physicians’ services for 2010 relative to those in effect for 2009, those rates would be reduced by about 23 percent for 2011 and then remain at current-law levels (that is, as specified under the SGR) for subsequent years. At the same time, the legislation includes a number of provisions that would constrain payment rates for other providers of Medicare services. In particular, increases in payment rates for many providers would be held below the rate of inflation (in expectation of ongoing productivity improvements in the delivery of health care). The projected longer-term savings for the legislation also assume that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board is fairly effective in reducing costs—beyond the reductions that would be achieved by other aspects of the bill—to meet the targets specified in the legislation.
Based on the extrapolation described above, CBO expects that Medicare spending under the bill would increase at an average annual rate of roughly 6 percent during the next two decades—well below the roughly 8 percent annual growth rate of the past two decades (excluding the effect of establishing the Medicare prescription drug benefit). Adjusting for inflation, Medicare spending per beneficiary under the bill would increase at an average annual rate of roughly 2 percent during the next two decades—much less than the roughly 4 percent annual growth rate of the past two decades. Whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care is unclear.
Basically, the CBO is saying its estimate that this thing would cost $850 billion and reduce the deficit by $130 billion is based upon unrealistic assumptions.
But Reid got the answer he was looking for!
We started the year in search of health care reform and this--so far--is what we get.
Read more of Robert Laszewski at healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com
By Robert Laszewski
The accounting gimmickry in Harry Reid’s Senate health bill is astounding even by Capitol Hill standards.
Reid says his bill will cost $850 billion and reduce the deficit by $130 billion—all over ten years.
Based upon the outline Reid gave the CBO that could well be right. But let’s look at it further:
Reid delays most of the spending in the bill to 2014—a year longer than in the House. More importantly, his new taxes start in 2010. That is ten years of taxes and only six years of the expensive entitlement expansion! Who wouldn't want to use that gimmick to balance their books?
He once again avoids the $250 billion Medicare doc fee fix—apparently he didn’t get the message when the Senate voted down his attempt to pay the docs off with the $250 billion but just add it to the deficit. Since everyone knows the docs will get their money just add $250 billion to his $850 billion cost. (Unless you are one of those who says since the SGR was wrong in the first place so we shouldn't count it--and I want my capital losses back from last year because the financial crisis was wrong.)
* He collects billions in new long-term care program premiums—a program that will have relatively low first year outlays—and lets that income offset the bill’s costs elsewhere making the overall bill’s net costs far better than they really are. That gimmick gives Reid about $70 billion of his $130 billion "deficit reduction." Sort of like spending the kids' college savings and claiming your family budget is balanced.
But maybe the real sleeper is this from the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) letter to Senator Reid regarding his bill (from page 17):
Key Considerations. These longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation. For example, the sustainable growth rate (SGR) mechanism governing Medicare’s payments to physicians has frequently been modified (either through legislation or administrative action) to avoid reductions in those payments, and legislation to do so again is currently under consideration in the Congress.
The legislation would put into effect a number of procedures that might be difficult to maintain over a long period of time. Although it would increase payment rates for physicians’ services for 2010 relative to those in effect for 2009, those rates would be reduced by about 23 percent for 2011 and then remain at current-law levels (that is, as specified under the SGR) for subsequent years. At the same time, the legislation includes a number of provisions that would constrain payment rates for other providers of Medicare services. In particular, increases in payment rates for many providers would be held below the rate of inflation (in expectation of ongoing productivity improvements in the delivery of health care). The projected longer-term savings for the legislation also assume that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board is fairly effective in reducing costs—beyond the reductions that would be achieved by other aspects of the bill—to meet the targets specified in the legislation.
Based on the extrapolation described above, CBO expects that Medicare spending under the bill would increase at an average annual rate of roughly 6 percent during the next two decades—well below the roughly 8 percent annual growth rate of the past two decades (excluding the effect of establishing the Medicare prescription drug benefit). Adjusting for inflation, Medicare spending per beneficiary under the bill would increase at an average annual rate of roughly 2 percent during the next two decades—much less than the roughly 4 percent annual growth rate of the past two decades. Whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care is unclear.
Basically, the CBO is saying its estimate that this thing would cost $850 billion and reduce the deficit by $130 billion is based upon unrealistic assumptions.
But Reid got the answer he was looking for!
We started the year in search of health care reform and this--so far--is what we get.
Read more of Robert Laszewski at healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com
Thursday, November 19. 2009
Stanford University Center for Health Policy's advice to Obama on controlling costs of health care
Metro Group Inc. in no way supports any particular political view point. "Health Care blog" is a forum where both sides of the issue can state their point of view and make their case for their positions on the very important issue of Health Care Reform in the U.S.
The following letter was written by some of the most brilliant minds in the country. It was written by Alan M. Garber, Victor R. Fuchs and Kenneth J, Arrow of the Stanford University Center for Health Policy. This letter urges President Obama to include four elements in the health reform legislation that will help control costs. Please read this letter as it contains valuable information for all Americans that really want health care reform.
By Alan M. Garber, Victor R. Fuchs, Kenneth J, Arrow
November 17, 2009
President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
As the full Senate prepares to debate comprehensive health reform legislation, we write as economists to stress the potential benefits of health reform for our nation’s fiscal health, and the importance of those features of the bill that can help keep health care costs under control. Four elements of the legislation are critical: (1) deficit neutrality, (2) an excise tax on high-cost insurance plans, (3) an independent Medicare commission, and (4) delivery system reforms.
Including these four elements in the reform legislation – as the Senate Finance Committee bill does and as we hope the bill brought to the Senate floor will do – will reduce long-term deficits, improve the quality of care, and put the nation on a firm fiscal footing. It will help transform the health care system from delivering too much care, to a system that consistently delivers higher-quality, high-value care. The projected increases in federal budget deficits, along with concerns about the value of the health care that Americans receive, make it particularly important to enact fiscally responsible and quality-improving health reform now.
In developing our analysis and recommendation, we received input and suggestions from Administration officials, including the Office of Management and Budget and others, as well as from economists who disagree with the Administration’s views.
The four key measures are:
Deficit neutrality
Fiscally responsible health reform requires budget neutrality or deficit reduction over the coming years. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) must project that the bill be at least deficit neutral over the 10-year budget window, and deficit reducing thereafter. Covering tens of millions of currently uninsured people will increase spending, but the draft health reform legislation contains offsetting savings sufficient to cover those costs and the seeds of further reforms that will lower the growth of spending. Deficit neutrality over the first decade means that, even during the start-up period, the legislation will not add to our deficits. After the first decade, the legislation should reduce deficits.
Excise tax on high-cost insurance plans
The Senate Finance Committee’s bill includes an excise tax on high-cost health insurance plans. Like any tax, the excise tax will raise federal revenues, but it has additional advantages for the health care system that are essential. The excise tax will help curtail the growth of private health insurance premiums by creating incentives to limit the costs of plans to a tax-free amount. In addition, as employers and health plans redesign their benefits to reduce health care premiums, cash wages will increase. Analysis of the Senate Finance Committee’s proposal suggests that the excise tax on high-cost insurance plans would increase workers’ take-home pay by more than $300 billion over the next decade. This provision offers the most promising approach to reducing private-sector health care costs while also giving a much needed raise to the tens of millions of Americans who receive insurance through their employers.
Medicare Commission
Rising Medicare expenditures pose one of the most difficult fiscal challenges facing the federal government. Medicare is technically complex and the benefits it underwrites are of critical importance to tens of millions of seniors and Americans with disabilities. We believe that a commission of medical experts should be empowered to suggest changes in Medicare to improve the quality and value of services. In particular, such a commission should be charged with developing and suggesting to Congress plans to extend the solvency of the Medicare program and improve the quality of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries. Creating such a commission will make sure that reforming the health care system does not end with this legislation, but continues in future decades, with new efforts to improve quality and contain costs.
Delivery system reforms
Successful reform should improve the care that individual patients receive by rewarding health care professionals for providing better care, not just more care. Studies have shown that hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on care that does nothing to improve health outcomes. This is largely a consequence of the distorted incentives associated with paying for volume rather than quality. Health care reform must take steps to change the way providers care for patients, to reward care that is better coordinated and meets the needs of each patient. In particular, the legislation should include additional funding for research into what tests and treatments work and which ones do not. It must also provide incentives for physicians and hospitals to focus on quality, such as bundled payments and accountable care organizations, as well as penalties for unnecessary re-admissions and health-facility acquired infections. Aggressive pilot projects should be rapidly introduced and evaluated, with the best strategies adopted quickly throughout the health care system.
As economists, we believe that it is important to enact health reform, and it is essential that health reform include these four features that will lower health care costs and help reduce deficits over the long term. Reform legislation that embodies these four elements can go a long way toward delivering better health care, and better value, to Americans.
Sincerely,
Dr. Henry Aaron, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Kenneth Arrow, Stanford University, Nobel Laureate in Economics
Dr. Alan Auerbach, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Katherine Baicker, Harvard University
Dr. Alan Blinder, Princeton University
Dr. David Cutler, Harvard University
Dr. Angus Deaton, Princeton University
Dr. J. Bradford DeLong, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Peter Diamond, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Victor Fuchs, Stanford University
Dr. Alan Garber, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Mark McClellan, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Daniel McFadden, University of California, Berkeley, Nobel Laureate in Economics
Dr. David Meltzer, University of Chicago
Dr. Joseph Newhouse, Harvard University
Dr. Uwe Reinhardt, Princeton University
Dr. Robert Reischauer, The Urban Institute
Dr. Alice Rivlin, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Meredith Rosenthal, Harvard University
Dr. John Shoven, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Skinner, Dartmouth College
Dr. Laura D’Andrea Tyson, University of California, Berkeley
Letter:
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/22739/Economist_Letter_to_the_President.pdf
The source of the letter:
http://bit.ly/13omUB
OECD Tax Database (Table 0.1):
http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,2340,en_2649_34533_1942460_1_1_1_1,00.html
Bundled payments and ACOs:
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/november/rand-and-br-on-savings-through-bundled-payments
The following letter was written by some of the most brilliant minds in the country. It was written by Alan M. Garber, Victor R. Fuchs and Kenneth J, Arrow of the Stanford University Center for Health Policy. This letter urges President Obama to include four elements in the health reform legislation that will help control costs. Please read this letter as it contains valuable information for all Americans that really want health care reform.
By Alan M. Garber, Victor R. Fuchs, Kenneth J, Arrow
November 17, 2009
President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
As the full Senate prepares to debate comprehensive health reform legislation, we write as economists to stress the potential benefits of health reform for our nation’s fiscal health, and the importance of those features of the bill that can help keep health care costs under control. Four elements of the legislation are critical: (1) deficit neutrality, (2) an excise tax on high-cost insurance plans, (3) an independent Medicare commission, and (4) delivery system reforms.
Including these four elements in the reform legislation – as the Senate Finance Committee bill does and as we hope the bill brought to the Senate floor will do – will reduce long-term deficits, improve the quality of care, and put the nation on a firm fiscal footing. It will help transform the health care system from delivering too much care, to a system that consistently delivers higher-quality, high-value care. The projected increases in federal budget deficits, along with concerns about the value of the health care that Americans receive, make it particularly important to enact fiscally responsible and quality-improving health reform now.
In developing our analysis and recommendation, we received input and suggestions from Administration officials, including the Office of Management and Budget and others, as well as from economists who disagree with the Administration’s views.
The four key measures are:
Deficit neutrality
Fiscally responsible health reform requires budget neutrality or deficit reduction over the coming years. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) must project that the bill be at least deficit neutral over the 10-year budget window, and deficit reducing thereafter. Covering tens of millions of currently uninsured people will increase spending, but the draft health reform legislation contains offsetting savings sufficient to cover those costs and the seeds of further reforms that will lower the growth of spending. Deficit neutrality over the first decade means that, even during the start-up period, the legislation will not add to our deficits. After the first decade, the legislation should reduce deficits.
Excise tax on high-cost insurance plans
The Senate Finance Committee’s bill includes an excise tax on high-cost health insurance plans. Like any tax, the excise tax will raise federal revenues, but it has additional advantages for the health care system that are essential. The excise tax will help curtail the growth of private health insurance premiums by creating incentives to limit the costs of plans to a tax-free amount. In addition, as employers and health plans redesign their benefits to reduce health care premiums, cash wages will increase. Analysis of the Senate Finance Committee’s proposal suggests that the excise tax on high-cost insurance plans would increase workers’ take-home pay by more than $300 billion over the next decade. This provision offers the most promising approach to reducing private-sector health care costs while also giving a much needed raise to the tens of millions of Americans who receive insurance through their employers.
Medicare Commission
Rising Medicare expenditures pose one of the most difficult fiscal challenges facing the federal government. Medicare is technically complex and the benefits it underwrites are of critical importance to tens of millions of seniors and Americans with disabilities. We believe that a commission of medical experts should be empowered to suggest changes in Medicare to improve the quality and value of services. In particular, such a commission should be charged with developing and suggesting to Congress plans to extend the solvency of the Medicare program and improve the quality of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries. Creating such a commission will make sure that reforming the health care system does not end with this legislation, but continues in future decades, with new efforts to improve quality and contain costs.
Delivery system reforms
Successful reform should improve the care that individual patients receive by rewarding health care professionals for providing better care, not just more care. Studies have shown that hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on care that does nothing to improve health outcomes. This is largely a consequence of the distorted incentives associated with paying for volume rather than quality. Health care reform must take steps to change the way providers care for patients, to reward care that is better coordinated and meets the needs of each patient. In particular, the legislation should include additional funding for research into what tests and treatments work and which ones do not. It must also provide incentives for physicians and hospitals to focus on quality, such as bundled payments and accountable care organizations, as well as penalties for unnecessary re-admissions and health-facility acquired infections. Aggressive pilot projects should be rapidly introduced and evaluated, with the best strategies adopted quickly throughout the health care system.
As economists, we believe that it is important to enact health reform, and it is essential that health reform include these four features that will lower health care costs and help reduce deficits over the long term. Reform legislation that embodies these four elements can go a long way toward delivering better health care, and better value, to Americans.
Sincerely,
Dr. Henry Aaron, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Kenneth Arrow, Stanford University, Nobel Laureate in Economics
Dr. Alan Auerbach, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Katherine Baicker, Harvard University
Dr. Alan Blinder, Princeton University
Dr. David Cutler, Harvard University
Dr. Angus Deaton, Princeton University
Dr. J. Bradford DeLong, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Peter Diamond, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Victor Fuchs, Stanford University
Dr. Alan Garber, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Mark McClellan, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Daniel McFadden, University of California, Berkeley, Nobel Laureate in Economics
Dr. David Meltzer, University of Chicago
Dr. Joseph Newhouse, Harvard University
Dr. Uwe Reinhardt, Princeton University
Dr. Robert Reischauer, The Urban Institute
Dr. Alice Rivlin, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Meredith Rosenthal, Harvard University
Dr. John Shoven, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Skinner, Dartmouth College
Dr. Laura D’Andrea Tyson, University of California, Berkeley
Letter:
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/22739/Economist_Letter_to_the_President.pdf
The source of the letter:
http://bit.ly/13omUB
OECD Tax Database (Table 0.1):
http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,2340,en_2649_34533_1942460_1_1_1_1,00.html
Bundled payments and ACOs:
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/november/rand-and-br-on-savings-through-bundled-payments
Schefter & Carucci say Shanahan & Cowher top Bills list of head coaching candidates
By: Joe Pinzone
Adam Schefter first reported that the Bills contacted Mike Shanahan, now Vic Carucci is reporting that Shanahan has emerged as the Bills’ “No. 1 candidate” to become their full-time coach after the season.
Carucci says a meeting between Shanahan, Ralph Wilson and Russ Brandon, who is overseeing the hiring process, likely will take place next week.
There’s also strong speculation that the Redskins are pursuing Shanahan to replace Jim Zorn as their coach after the season. However, according to the source close to the Bills, Shanahan is intrigued by the “low-maintenance” situation he would have in Buffalo as opposed to Washington.
Carucci says former Steelers coach Bill Cowher also is high on the Bills’ list of candidates, but at the moment, they are focused on Shanahan.
Sources have told Carucci that the Bills are willing to offer whatever salary is necessary to land a high-end candidate such as Shanahan and would give him total control of the football operation, something Wilson has generally been opposed to doing in the past. Adding to the job’s attractiveness, according to the source, is the fact the team is in solid financial shape and not burdened by any dead salary-cap money.
“This is his (Wilson’s) last coach and (he) is going to do everything it takes to get it right,” the source said of the 91-year-old owner. (From NFL.com)
Mind of Joe
Wow! Unlimited salary? Bill Cowher? Have the Bills become the Dallas Cowboys? I don't know where to begin. If this is all true, and that's a big If, it's about time Wilson has woken up and smelled the "real" NFL. I'm more excited at the prospect that the Bills are going to do whatever it takes to finally bring in a real football guy.
I don't want to get ahead of myself, but if the Bills decide to go the route of Shanahan, they will have to match what the Redskins would offer him and then some. I know that the "low-maintenance" quote will make some Bills fans happy, but the NFL is a business. If the Redskins were to offer Shanahan 8 million dollars and the Bills offered only 6, I'm sure Shanahan would go to the Nation's Capitol.
Even before reading the blog from Carucci, I was going to write that it wouldn't shock me if Shanahan was trying to use the Bills as leverage to get more money from the Redskins, who he has been connected with for some time. Maybe it's the other way around now?
I think another big part of the equation is how much will Ralph Wilson open up his wallet for players. While in Denver, Shanahan spent a ton of money and gave out big one year deals to guys like Simeon Rice.
I just don't picture Shanahan being forced to start Bryan Scott at linebacker and some practice squad kid at starting left tackle. We all know the Redskins will pay for players and if the Bills don't follow in those footsteps, It would be hard to see Shanahan in Buffalo. Now if full control of football operation means a blank check for Shanahan or whoever is put in charge of the Bills, it's fine with me.
Now again, this is still in the developing stages and I wouldn't put it past the Bills to just make up a great wish list to appease the fans, only to wake up on Christmas Day with a lump of coal and Jim Haslett in our stockings. Like I said, it's a good start, but now the Bills have to bring their game and checkbook to the table.
Man, it's going to be a fun offseason for a change.
PS- Did I mention that Bill Cowher is on the list?
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Adam Schefter first reported that the Bills contacted Mike Shanahan, now Vic Carucci is reporting that Shanahan has emerged as the Bills’ “No. 1 candidate” to become their full-time coach after the season.
Carucci says a meeting between Shanahan, Ralph Wilson and Russ Brandon, who is overseeing the hiring process, likely will take place next week.
There’s also strong speculation that the Redskins are pursuing Shanahan to replace Jim Zorn as their coach after the season. However, according to the source close to the Bills, Shanahan is intrigued by the “low-maintenance” situation he would have in Buffalo as opposed to Washington.
Carucci says former Steelers coach Bill Cowher also is high on the Bills’ list of candidates, but at the moment, they are focused on Shanahan.
Sources have told Carucci that the Bills are willing to offer whatever salary is necessary to land a high-end candidate such as Shanahan and would give him total control of the football operation, something Wilson has generally been opposed to doing in the past. Adding to the job’s attractiveness, according to the source, is the fact the team is in solid financial shape and not burdened by any dead salary-cap money.
“This is his (Wilson’s) last coach and (he) is going to do everything it takes to get it right,” the source said of the 91-year-old owner. (From NFL.com)
Mind of Joe
Wow! Unlimited salary? Bill Cowher? Have the Bills become the Dallas Cowboys? I don't know where to begin. If this is all true, and that's a big If, it's about time Wilson has woken up and smelled the "real" NFL. I'm more excited at the prospect that the Bills are going to do whatever it takes to finally bring in a real football guy.
I don't want to get ahead of myself, but if the Bills decide to go the route of Shanahan, they will have to match what the Redskins would offer him and then some. I know that the "low-maintenance" quote will make some Bills fans happy, but the NFL is a business. If the Redskins were to offer Shanahan 8 million dollars and the Bills offered only 6, I'm sure Shanahan would go to the Nation's Capitol.
Even before reading the blog from Carucci, I was going to write that it wouldn't shock me if Shanahan was trying to use the Bills as leverage to get more money from the Redskins, who he has been connected with for some time. Maybe it's the other way around now?
I think another big part of the equation is how much will Ralph Wilson open up his wallet for players. While in Denver, Shanahan spent a ton of money and gave out big one year deals to guys like Simeon Rice.
I just don't picture Shanahan being forced to start Bryan Scott at linebacker and some practice squad kid at starting left tackle. We all know the Redskins will pay for players and if the Bills don't follow in those footsteps, It would be hard to see Shanahan in Buffalo. Now if full control of football operation means a blank check for Shanahan or whoever is put in charge of the Bills, it's fine with me.
Now again, this is still in the developing stages and I wouldn't put it past the Bills to just make up a great wish list to appease the fans, only to wake up on Christmas Day with a lump of coal and Jim Haslett in our stockings. Like I said, it's a good start, but now the Bills have to bring their game and checkbook to the table.
Man, it's going to be a fun offseason for a change.
PS- Did I mention that Bill Cowher is on the list?
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Posted by Joe Pinzone
in NFL Blog: The view from the End Zone
at
12:22
| Comments (2)
| Trackbacks (0)
Buffalo Sabres - Florida Panthers Game Recap

By: Joe Pinzone
With the way the Sabres offense played tonight you would of thought Dick Jauron took a one day coaching job with the team. What a boring game. All kidding aside, the Sabres played a sloppy game and were dragged down by an awful power play, in a 6-2 loss to the Panthers.
-Last nights performance against the Panthers was an exact copy of last year's games against poor teams. The Sabres were going against the "Trap" and tried too many times to carry the puck in, instead of dumping it in.
-This was the first game this season that the Sabres defensemen didn't show up. The defensemen were awful on both sides of the ice. On the offensive zone, the d-men either couldn't get the puck on net or they couldn't keep the puck in the offensive zone. I saw way too many pucks that jumped over the defensemen's sticks at the blue-line. As far as defensive zone goes, the Sabres had a hard time in gaining puck possession and were beaten off the puck to many times by the Panthers-
-I know most media members were touting the power play going into tonight's game, but being ranked 19th in the NHL isn't exactly getting me excited and tonight proved it. The Sabres had a devil of a time getting the power play set-up, and when they did, they would over pass the puck. The Sabres have to stop trying to get those cute highlight reel goals. The team's offensive style is about puck control and getting shots on net-
-Boneheaded play by Pat Kaleta towards the end of the hockey game. Kaleta didn't even look for the puck and just decided to take the body. Even if the Panthers didn't score, the game was pretty much over at that point because the power play would of ended with 17 seconds left in the game-
-Way too many turnovers by the Sabres tonight. The biggest example was when the Sabres pulled Ryan Miller and turned the puck over about a second later and Florida scored on the empty net. Just not smart with the puck-
-You want to talk about the housing market being bad, how about going to Population Pominville. The 5-million dollar man only has one goal in his last nine games-
-I have to agree with Ryan Miller's comments after the game, the Florida Panthers are one of the most boring teams in all of hockey. If the NHL wants to really get fans to watch their product, ban the Panthers style of play-
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
NHL News: Northeast Division Teams Struggle for positions
by Mike Haim
By the end of this weekend, every NHL team will have played at least 20 games, about one-quarter of the 82-game season. While it may be intriguing to assess how things are starting to shake out for the Sabres and their Northeast Division counterparts, the reality is that the actual race so far is for a mere playoff spot.
Buffalo entered Wednesday’s action with 25 points and a slim four-point division lead over second-place Ottawa and only a five-point edge over Boston and Montreal. The Senators, however, ranked 10th in the Eastern Conference, which makes the Sabres the only team in their division to currently hold a playoff position.
Perhaps it’s not so much a matter of the Northeast Division being weak as much as the Atlantic Division having an incredible amount of balance with some more games played.
Along the eastern seaboard, New Jersey and Pittsburgh were tied for their division lead with 28 points, while Philadelphia and the two New York teams were all five points back. All five clubs are on the inside track for playoff berths. The Rangers and the Islanders, however, have played three more games than Ottawa (who is two points behind them) and four more than Buffalo.
Looking at the entire conference, only three teams – Florida, Carolina, and Toronto – have fewer than 20 points. The remaining 12 are separated by eight points.
Buffalo may understandably look to this weekend’s games against Boston and Ottawa as keys to taking a healthy lead in the division. Keep in mind, though, that it will be the relatively underappreciated games against teams like Atlanta, Tampa Bay, and the Islanders which may ultimately decide who in the Northeast - outside of the division winner - goes to the playoffs.
………
One of the teams in the thick of the mix in the Eastern Conference, the Florida Panthers, could be energized by a recent shift in their ownership.
Alan Cohen, who owned 43 percent of the franchise, indicated to the NHL that he would no longer pay for losses incurred by the team beyond January 1, 2010. The Panthers have not turned a profit (or made the playoffs) since a group led by Cohen bought the team in 2001. Losses have reportedly reached $20 million per year.
Enter Cliff Viner and Stu Siegel, two businessmen from Boca Raton who are self-described hockey fans. They bought just over half of Cohen’s share and are taking responsibility for the club’s losses.
Viner and Siegel are being viewed as saviors that couldn’t be found in Phoenix, where former Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes was incurring similar losses before declaring his club bankrupt.
Florida is probably the closest thing to “Exhibit B” in any criticism of the NHL’s southward expansion of the 1990s. The Panthers desperately need to win to bring people back to the BankAtlantic Center, but even then it is unproven whether a playoff contender will be enough to make the team viable.
There’s probably a lot of people offering Viner and Siegel congratulations on their transaction, but “good luck” might be more appropriate.
………
No one is rushing to anoint the Islanders as legitimate contenders for the Stanley Cup, but something they did last week brought back memories of past champions.
Friday night, the Islanders took a 3-0 lead in the first period against Carolina, marking the third straight game in which the Isles netted three goals in the opening stanza.
That hadn’t happened since March 15, 16, and 18, 1980, the week the team acquired Butch Goring en route to the first of their four straight Stanley Cups.
……
www.twitter.com/mikehaim
By the end of this weekend, every NHL team will have played at least 20 games, about one-quarter of the 82-game season. While it may be intriguing to assess how things are starting to shake out for the Sabres and their Northeast Division counterparts, the reality is that the actual race so far is for a mere playoff spot.
Buffalo entered Wednesday’s action with 25 points and a slim four-point division lead over second-place Ottawa and only a five-point edge over Boston and Montreal. The Senators, however, ranked 10th in the Eastern Conference, which makes the Sabres the only team in their division to currently hold a playoff position.
Perhaps it’s not so much a matter of the Northeast Division being weak as much as the Atlantic Division having an incredible amount of balance with some more games played.
Along the eastern seaboard, New Jersey and Pittsburgh were tied for their division lead with 28 points, while Philadelphia and the two New York teams were all five points back. All five clubs are on the inside track for playoff berths. The Rangers and the Islanders, however, have played three more games than Ottawa (who is two points behind them) and four more than Buffalo.
Looking at the entire conference, only three teams – Florida, Carolina, and Toronto – have fewer than 20 points. The remaining 12 are separated by eight points.
Buffalo may understandably look to this weekend’s games against Boston and Ottawa as keys to taking a healthy lead in the division. Keep in mind, though, that it will be the relatively underappreciated games against teams like Atlanta, Tampa Bay, and the Islanders which may ultimately decide who in the Northeast - outside of the division winner - goes to the playoffs.
………
One of the teams in the thick of the mix in the Eastern Conference, the Florida Panthers, could be energized by a recent shift in their ownership.
Alan Cohen, who owned 43 percent of the franchise, indicated to the NHL that he would no longer pay for losses incurred by the team beyond January 1, 2010. The Panthers have not turned a profit (or made the playoffs) since a group led by Cohen bought the team in 2001. Losses have reportedly reached $20 million per year.
Enter Cliff Viner and Stu Siegel, two businessmen from Boca Raton who are self-described hockey fans. They bought just over half of Cohen’s share and are taking responsibility for the club’s losses.
Viner and Siegel are being viewed as saviors that couldn’t be found in Phoenix, where former Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes was incurring similar losses before declaring his club bankrupt.
Florida is probably the closest thing to “Exhibit B” in any criticism of the NHL’s southward expansion of the 1990s. The Panthers desperately need to win to bring people back to the BankAtlantic Center, but even then it is unproven whether a playoff contender will be enough to make the team viable.
There’s probably a lot of people offering Viner and Siegel congratulations on their transaction, but “good luck” might be more appropriate.
………
No one is rushing to anoint the Islanders as legitimate contenders for the Stanley Cup, but something they did last week brought back memories of past champions.
Friday night, the Islanders took a 3-0 lead in the first period against Carolina, marking the third straight game in which the Isles netted three goals in the opening stanza.
That hadn’t happened since March 15, 16, and 18, 1980, the week the team acquired Butch Goring en route to the first of their four straight Stanley Cups.
……
www.twitter.com/mikehaim
Wednesday, November 18. 2009
Mike Shanahan: Buffalo Bills Head Coach in 2010
By:Joe Pinzone
One day after firing Dick Jauron, the Buffalo Bills have wasted no time identifying a potential replacement. Adam Schefter is reporting that Buffalo has contacted and is in the process of arranging a meeting with former Denver Broncos coach Mike Shanahan, according to two NFL sources. Shanahan, a two-time Super Bowl winner with the Broncos, is said to be willing to listen to the Bills. He has said in the past that he is determined to return to the NFL next season.
Wow! Maybe Ed Kilgore and Thurman Thomas were right about Ralph Wilson spending money on a coach. I've made my stance on Shanahan clear, he's a great offensive mind but since John Elway left, Shanahan has only won one playoff game and his defenses have been average to poor.
Of course, the thought of Shanahan roaming the sidelines rather than Dick Jauron puts a smile on my face.
In a perfect world, I would love Shanahan as the coach but wouldn't mind seeing the Bills bring in a strong personnel man. Shanahan may know running backs and quarterbacks, but when it comes to drafting other needs, history shows he isn't exactly a draft guru. Again, this is a good start in the search process for the Bills next head coach.
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
One day after firing Dick Jauron, the Buffalo Bills have wasted no time identifying a potential replacement. Adam Schefter is reporting that Buffalo has contacted and is in the process of arranging a meeting with former Denver Broncos coach Mike Shanahan, according to two NFL sources. Shanahan, a two-time Super Bowl winner with the Broncos, is said to be willing to listen to the Bills. He has said in the past that he is determined to return to the NFL next season.
Wow! Maybe Ed Kilgore and Thurman Thomas were right about Ralph Wilson spending money on a coach. I've made my stance on Shanahan clear, he's a great offensive mind but since John Elway left, Shanahan has only won one playoff game and his defenses have been average to poor.
Of course, the thought of Shanahan roaming the sidelines rather than Dick Jauron puts a smile on my face.
In a perfect world, I would love Shanahan as the coach but wouldn't mind seeing the Bills bring in a strong personnel man. Shanahan may know running backs and quarterbacks, but when it comes to drafting other needs, history shows he isn't exactly a draft guru. Again, this is a good start in the search process for the Bills next head coach.
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Posted by Joe Pinzone
in NFL Blog: The view from the End Zone
at
16:43
| Comments (3)
| Trackbacks (0)
Health Care Reform: Affordability of the Health Care Bill For "Ordinary Folks"?
Metro Group Inc. in no way supports any particular political view point. "Health Care blog" is a forum where both sides of the issue can state their point of view and make their case for their positions on the very important issue of Health Care Reform in the U.S.
By Robert Laszewski
I thought Trudy Lieberman hit the nail on the head in a post she did yesterday at the Columbia Journalism Review entitled, "Missing Persons--How Will Reform Affect Ordinary Folks." Here is a small part of it:
The media have talked about affordability mostly in the context of whether the country can afford reform, not whether individuals can afford it. It’s easier for a reporter to write about humongous numbers like $900 billion or $1 trillion, and give the arguments that those sums will or won’t add to the federal deficit, than it is to spend several hours with the Joneses in Peoria finding out where in the family budget they will find $8,000 to pay for health insurance. And the advocates—reform’s uber-cheerleaders—who see victory at hand aren’t terribly eager to point out that mandatory insurance might be unaffordable after all. Making that too transparent might undermine all the work they’ve done to advance legislation this far.
But what could be easier for a reporter than to write about the impact the current bills will have on a typical reader's checkbook?
Take a look at this chart and explain to me how a middle class family will be able to afford to purchase health insurance under either the Senate or House bills? This indicates the amount a family would be expected to pay for health insurance after any new federal premium subsidies:

Read more of Robert Laszewski at healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com
By Robert Laszewski
I thought Trudy Lieberman hit the nail on the head in a post she did yesterday at the Columbia Journalism Review entitled, "Missing Persons--How Will Reform Affect Ordinary Folks." Here is a small part of it:
The media have talked about affordability mostly in the context of whether the country can afford reform, not whether individuals can afford it. It’s easier for a reporter to write about humongous numbers like $900 billion or $1 trillion, and give the arguments that those sums will or won’t add to the federal deficit, than it is to spend several hours with the Joneses in Peoria finding out where in the family budget they will find $8,000 to pay for health insurance. And the advocates—reform’s uber-cheerleaders—who see victory at hand aren’t terribly eager to point out that mandatory insurance might be unaffordable after all. Making that too transparent might undermine all the work they’ve done to advance legislation this far.
But what could be easier for a reporter than to write about the impact the current bills will have on a typical reader's checkbook?
Take a look at this chart and explain to me how a middle class family will be able to afford to purchase health insurance under either the Senate or House bills? This indicates the amount a family would be expected to pay for health insurance after any new federal premium subsidies:

Read more of Robert Laszewski at healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com
Bill Cowher as your 2010 Buffalo Bills Head Coach
By: Joe Pinzone
Bill Cowher
Resume: Cowher sports a record of 149-90-1 with a Super Bowl ring in 2006. In Cowher’s 15 seasons, the Steelers captured eight division titles, earned ten postseason playoff berths, played in 21 playoff games, advanced to six AFC Championship games and made two Super Bowl appearances. He is one of only six coaches in NFL history to claim at least seven division titles.
Mind of Joe
We all know Cowher's no non-sense attitude would fit like a glove with the fans of Buffalo. I think fans would give up their first born for a crack at Cowher. However, the cynic in me, thinks Cowher may be a byproduct of coaching at a top tier organization like the Steelers. Look at how the Steelers have performed since Cowher left coaching. Two years, Two division titles, and one Super Bowl win. Now, would I take Cowher? Of course, but I'm not holding a candle to him like a lot of other Bills fans are.
Mind of Ralph
Like I said earlier, I don't see Ralph Wilson ponying up 7-10 million dollars for a head coach. It would be a great if he could be convinced other wise. But do you honestly think Russ Brandon is going to tell his boss to demote him? We all know Cowher would want full power and a lot of money. There are also rumors that Cowher would only want to coach close to his home in North Carolina. Besides location issues, I just don't see Ralph giving up his kid's trust fund to hire the "Chin."
Percentage that Cowher is the Bills head coach in 2010: 10%
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Bill Cowher
Resume: Cowher sports a record of 149-90-1 with a Super Bowl ring in 2006. In Cowher’s 15 seasons, the Steelers captured eight division titles, earned ten postseason playoff berths, played in 21 playoff games, advanced to six AFC Championship games and made two Super Bowl appearances. He is one of only six coaches in NFL history to claim at least seven division titles.
Mind of Joe
We all know Cowher's no non-sense attitude would fit like a glove with the fans of Buffalo. I think fans would give up their first born for a crack at Cowher. However, the cynic in me, thinks Cowher may be a byproduct of coaching at a top tier organization like the Steelers. Look at how the Steelers have performed since Cowher left coaching. Two years, Two division titles, and one Super Bowl win. Now, would I take Cowher? Of course, but I'm not holding a candle to him like a lot of other Bills fans are.
Mind of Ralph
Like I said earlier, I don't see Ralph Wilson ponying up 7-10 million dollars for a head coach. It would be a great if he could be convinced other wise. But do you honestly think Russ Brandon is going to tell his boss to demote him? We all know Cowher would want full power and a lot of money. There are also rumors that Cowher would only want to coach close to his home in North Carolina. Besides location issues, I just don't see Ralph giving up his kid's trust fund to hire the "Chin."
Percentage that Cowher is the Bills head coach in 2010: 10%
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Posted by Joe Pinzone
in NFL Blog: The view from the End Zone
at
16:07
| Comments (2)
| Trackbacks (0)
Campus Chronicles with Chris Forsman: History lesson
Well the Griffs are continuing to roll as of late as we picked up another three points of a possible four this past Saturday and Sunday. We tied Saturday night and won a close one on Sunday against a talented and hard-working opponent from the University of Connecticut.
That gives us seven of our last eight points, putting us above the .500 mark in conference play. Having said that, our recent hot streak has only put us in third place and we need to continue to play well just to keep pace in this very competitive conference.
Next up on tap for the Griffs is a road trip to American International College in Massachusetts. This road trip will be a welcome change since we have been at home the past few weeks. The AIC Yellow Jackets will be another tough test like every weekend in Atlantic Hockey and we need to be at our best again. Especially since the Yellow Jackets play very tough at home and we will see this on Friday and Saturday.
Since we are heading out on the road on Thursday, it is a short week of practice and school. Monday was a day off and once again most guys are resting their bumps and bruises from a tough weekend of competition. Having said that, all of us guys are always engaged in the never-ending pursuit of knowledge and we were busy studying or “watching” the incredible documentary WWII in HD on the History Channel. Since I am a history major and alongside resident history buff Pat Kenny, we watched, or rather studied, for hours these past few nights. Also, I would like to just throw something out there to any of you student-athletes out there looking for study hall hours – just put down the hours watching these documentaries, I’m sure they would count for study hall hours. But, maybe check with the coaches first, it’s worth a shot, eh?
Keeping this war theme in mind, on a more serious note, this past week around North America on November 11 was Remembrance Day in Canada and Veteran’s Day here in the United States. This is a very important day and I would like to take a moment to mention this and thank the men and women in the armed forces. It makes us guys on the hockey team think back to the ROTC training at the start of the year and it makes us realize that although we are on a high-level team, the men and women serving are part of a much more important team and this should always be remembered.
Relating this to hockey, most of us Canadians watch Hockey Night in Canada and Don Cherry does not let us forget the sacrifices being made everyday by these members of the armed forces. This is just something for all of us to think about, and until next time, keep your stick on the ice.
Chris Forsman, #4
That gives us seven of our last eight points, putting us above the .500 mark in conference play. Having said that, our recent hot streak has only put us in third place and we need to continue to play well just to keep pace in this very competitive conference.
Next up on tap for the Griffs is a road trip to American International College in Massachusetts. This road trip will be a welcome change since we have been at home the past few weeks. The AIC Yellow Jackets will be another tough test like every weekend in Atlantic Hockey and we need to be at our best again. Especially since the Yellow Jackets play very tough at home and we will see this on Friday and Saturday.
Since we are heading out on the road on Thursday, it is a short week of practice and school. Monday was a day off and once again most guys are resting their bumps and bruises from a tough weekend of competition. Having said that, all of us guys are always engaged in the never-ending pursuit of knowledge and we were busy studying or “watching” the incredible documentary WWII in HD on the History Channel. Since I am a history major and alongside resident history buff Pat Kenny, we watched, or rather studied, for hours these past few nights. Also, I would like to just throw something out there to any of you student-athletes out there looking for study hall hours – just put down the hours watching these documentaries, I’m sure they would count for study hall hours. But, maybe check with the coaches first, it’s worth a shot, eh?
Keeping this war theme in mind, on a more serious note, this past week around North America on November 11 was Remembrance Day in Canada and Veteran’s Day here in the United States. This is a very important day and I would like to take a moment to mention this and thank the men and women in the armed forces. It makes us guys on the hockey team think back to the ROTC training at the start of the year and it makes us realize that although we are on a high-level team, the men and women serving are part of a much more important team and this should always be remembered.
Relating this to hockey, most of us Canadians watch Hockey Night in Canada and Don Cherry does not let us forget the sacrifices being made everyday by these members of the armed forces. This is just something for all of us to think about, and until next time, keep your stick on the ice.
Chris Forsman, #4
Tuesday, November 17. 2009
Jauron canned, LJ to the Bengals

by Charles Roberts, Sports Reporter
-I don’t know what’s more surprising – the fact that the Bills gave head coach Dick Jauron a three-year contract extension after losing eight out of 10 games last season or the fact that it took until Week 11 to fire him.
-Speaking of the Bills, Tony Dungy recently speculated that they could be a “dark horse” to land his protégé, Michael Vick next season. Unless Dungy is lobbying for the chance to coach in Buffalo, suggesting the Bills are a solid fit for the previously-jailed quarterback is a questionable statement by a man that many people around the football community view as a very intelligent man.
-Despite the fact that he’s played awful in the opportunities Cleveland has given him, the Browns would be foolish to give up on quarterback Brady Quinn. Drew Brees struggled his first two seasons as a starter in San Diego, but has since emerged as a bona fide stud. Give the guy some weapons and assemble a coaching staff of winners, not castaways.
-Say what you want about the guy, but Ray Lewis’ passion is refreshing. The bone-crushing linebacker had this to say following a cheap-shot delivered to a teammate after their victory over Cleveland Monday night:
"Heck yeah it was a cheap shot. When you're running down and you're looking at the quarterback going at somebody's knees who doesn't even have the ball. I want to see if he gets the same fine I got or even higher. Now this man is out four or five weeks because of some baloney like that."
Note to any NFL player: getting on Lewis’ bad side is not a good idea. Just ask Rashard Mendenhall.
-Patriots head coach Bill Belichick has made a living on going for it on fourth down. During Tom Brady’s career, the Patriots have had a 63 percent conversion rate on fourth-and-two or less. You might call it arrogance, but let’s be serious – the Pats are a winning club and have been for the better part of a decade and made plenty of egregious play-calls along the way.
-I wonder if Bill Cowher slammed his fist into a table somewhere on Sunday when the Carolina Panthers beat the Atlanta Falcons, 28-19.
-Hall of Fame running back Thurman Thomas suggested that Titans’ owner Bud Adams may have been intoxicated when he gave his double-bird salute to the Bills this past Sunday.
He must still be upset about the 1993 comeback game, because if anyone should have been guns-blazing, it should have been Bills’ owner Ralph Wilson. The Titans ousted them from their last playoff appearance and narrowly escaped Buffalo a couple years ago in a playoff-like atmosphere on Christmas Eve.
-Larry Johnson to the criminal-friendly Bengals, huh? I’m intrigued to see how this relationship unfolds both on and off the field.
Posted by Matthew Ondesko
in NFL Blog: The view from the End Zone
at
15:53
| Comments (15)
| Trackbacks (0)
Should the Buffalo Bills Bench Their Veterans for Youth including Terrell Owens?

With the Buffalo Bills season spiraling out of control, fans and media members are starting to float the question about benching T.O. and others to see what the Bills youth can do. It's a very slippery slope to bag on the season only nine games in. But when you have a coaching staff that is on the verge of getting dragged out of town by its fan base, you have to think the coaches are thinking to win now. Now are the Bills finished? Hell, yes. They were finished after the Browns game. So, here is my player breakdown about certain players who should or shouldn't be benched.
Aaron Maybin for Chris Kelsay?
Yes
I said in the beginning of training camp that Maybin was a project player and it was good for him to be playing behind two decent defensive ends in Kelsay and Aaron Schobel. Well, the project has been moved up to a pop quiz, as in get on the field now. I don't see the Bills keeping Kelsay after this season. Kelsay has had a fairly decent year, but he isn't worth the 6 million dollars he's getting. As for the talk of putting Maybin in as a linebacker, it doesn't make sense. The Bills run a 4-3 defense, which means the strong side linebacker doesn't rush the quarterback as much like they would in a 3-4 defense. Seeing Maybin cover running backs and tightends wouldn't be something I'd want to see, especially since we are subject to seeing "Cowboy" Bob Orton (Notice, Paul Posluszny's sleeve) gasp for breath chasing after Vince Young.
James Hardy for Terrell Owens?
No
WHAT!? how can you justify that, if Owens is as good as gone next year. Easy, bench Josh Reed. Reed is gone after the season just like Owens. Reed hasn't done anything this season and has been a disappointment since having over 50 catches last year. I wouldn't mind seeing Owens in the slot and Hardy and Lee Evans on the outside. More importantly, do you really think James Hardy is going to do anything with Trent Edwards as his quarterback? Not to mention he's coming off an ACL injury. Everyone knew this year for Hardy would be a loss, not because of T.O., but because it takes a football player a season to get on his feet after tearing a ACL.
Jairus Byrd & George Wilson for Donte Whitner & Bryan Scott?
Yes and No
Hell, I'm waiting for the day Dick Jauron starts Whitner and Scott at linebacker, he's already halfway there. Lets cut to the chase, Scott is on your bench, plain and simple. I never liked him as a safety because he can't cover a lick and he doesn't get interceptions. Well, that kind of sounds like Donte Whitner, except Whitner is witty with a quote. I wrote after Byrd's 5 interceptions in 2 games that Whitner is becoming expendable. Since he's a FA after next season, he's more than likely gone. But as for now, Whitner should start over George Wilson. Wilson, like Whitner is a fun engaging guy, but he can't play starting SS in the NFL. The guy is another one of the Bills conversion players. The Bills future starting SS isn't on this team.
Fred Jackson for Marshawn Lynch?
Conflicted
Here is why I would be for Jackson playing over Lynch. Jackson deserves it. He has been the better running back this season and has more yards rushing in his first 3 games than Lynch has in his last 6 games combined! Now, why would I consider playing Lynch over Jackson? To try and up his value in the offseason. If I'm the Bills, I look into trading him. I've been saying since training camp that there isn't much of a difference between Lynch and Jackson, except for Lynch being younger. But you never know when Lynch will be asking for a new contract, where as Jackson is already on his second deal.
Read more of Joe at Joe in NYC
Posted by Joe Pinzone
in NFL Blog: The view from the End Zone
at
13:50
| Comments (3)
| Trackbacks (0)
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi must play nice to pass a Health Care Bill in 2009
Metro Group Inc. in no way supports any particular political view point. "Health Care blog" is a forum where both sides of the issue can state their point of view and make their case for their positions on the very important issue of Health Care Reform in the U.S.
By Robert Laszewski
Readers of this blog know of my yearlong pessimism over our getting a trillion dollar health care bill in 2009.
With the historic passage of the House bill, are we now on our way to a big health care bill in 2009—or even by early 2010?
Clearly, Democrats desperately want to pass a bill. Given their compromise over abortion and the neutering of the public option in the House legislation—things most liberals said they would never agree to—it is clear the Democratic leadership will take any deal they can get.
But there are still some giant obstacles on the way to a Rose Garden bill signing late this year or early next:
1. Getting and keeping 60 Senate votes across a wide spectrum of complex issues. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has not achieved a 60-vote consensus on any of the dozen or more contentious issues. In the wake of Nancy Pelosi not being able to get more than a two-vote margin for the neutered public option, some Democratic Senators will have no interest in the “robust” version with the state opt-out Reid has been talking about. He has made even less progress on all of the other contentious issues--and you can put abortion on the top of that list. Figuring out the “sweet spot” on each issue that keeps the same 60 votes on side for the entire bill would take a super computer—if that were even possible.
2. The growing angst over these health bills not bending any cost curves and actually getting the savings from Medicare that is projected. With the demise of the robust public option even a lot of "sympathetic voices" are having second thoughts. How many op-eds and editorials can you have announcing this is not health care reform and it is likely to continue adding to deficits before everyone wants out?
3. The latest blow was the report from the CMS actuary that says Medicare beneficiaries will suffer from the program cuts in the bills and health care costs will more likely continue to add to the deficits. I expect opponents are cutting new ads using the CMS report against the Democratic bills at this moment.
4. The polls are still showing opposition well ahead of support for the Democratic bills. Pollster.com combines a number of polls finding 42.5% favor and 48.6% oppose. How do you pass so big a piece of legislation with approval ratings in the 40% range?
If Reid finds a way to keep 60 Senators onside it will be an example of a political master performance. If he fails it will be the more likely outcome.
More than anything else, I sense a rising tide of anxiety particularly among people who understand this issue and want a health care bill: Somewhere we lost our way on the road to health care reform and we now find ourselves headed to an entitlement bill that falls far short of achieving universal access and a bill we still can’t afford. This will eventually spill over to mainstream voters already anxious about a trillion dollars in new spending in the midst of an economic crisis.
That is not the place Democrats would have wanted to be just when they need to overcome what would have been stiff resistance under the best of all circumstances.
By Robert Laszewski
Readers of this blog know of my yearlong pessimism over our getting a trillion dollar health care bill in 2009.
With the historic passage of the House bill, are we now on our way to a big health care bill in 2009—or even by early 2010?
Clearly, Democrats desperately want to pass a bill. Given their compromise over abortion and the neutering of the public option in the House legislation—things most liberals said they would never agree to—it is clear the Democratic leadership will take any deal they can get.
But there are still some giant obstacles on the way to a Rose Garden bill signing late this year or early next:
1. Getting and keeping 60 Senate votes across a wide spectrum of complex issues. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has not achieved a 60-vote consensus on any of the dozen or more contentious issues. In the wake of Nancy Pelosi not being able to get more than a two-vote margin for the neutered public option, some Democratic Senators will have no interest in the “robust” version with the state opt-out Reid has been talking about. He has made even less progress on all of the other contentious issues--and you can put abortion on the top of that list. Figuring out the “sweet spot” on each issue that keeps the same 60 votes on side for the entire bill would take a super computer—if that were even possible.
2. The growing angst over these health bills not bending any cost curves and actually getting the savings from Medicare that is projected. With the demise of the robust public option even a lot of "sympathetic voices" are having second thoughts. How many op-eds and editorials can you have announcing this is not health care reform and it is likely to continue adding to deficits before everyone wants out?
3. The latest blow was the report from the CMS actuary that says Medicare beneficiaries will suffer from the program cuts in the bills and health care costs will more likely continue to add to the deficits. I expect opponents are cutting new ads using the CMS report against the Democratic bills at this moment.
4. The polls are still showing opposition well ahead of support for the Democratic bills. Pollster.com combines a number of polls finding 42.5% favor and 48.6% oppose. How do you pass so big a piece of legislation with approval ratings in the 40% range?
If Reid finds a way to keep 60 Senators onside it will be an example of a political master performance. If he fails it will be the more likely outcome.
More than anything else, I sense a rising tide of anxiety particularly among people who understand this issue and want a health care bill: Somewhere we lost our way on the road to health care reform and we now find ourselves headed to an entitlement bill that falls far short of achieving universal access and a bill we still can’t afford. This will eventually spill over to mainstream voters already anxious about a trillion dollars in new spending in the midst of an economic crisis.
That is not the place Democrats would have wanted to be just when they need to overcome what would have been stiff resistance under the best of all circumstances.
Tigers' Den: Road trip
So, last week, I told you how we were going on our first road trip of the year – all the way to Williamsville North High School – for the Western New York Varsity Hockey Federation coaches meetings.
In years past it was so much fun that I normally wished that I were going to the dentist to get some work done with out Novocain.
This year wasn’t any different. What made it more pleasant was the fact I was going to this two-hour meeting stiff feeling the effect of a cold I had for the past week.
For those of you who don’t know, the coaches meeting is where all 24 coaches get together with the league president, Mark DiFilipo, the stats person and head of officials to go over the new rules for the upcoming season.
At times the meeting could be painful, especially when they go over certain rules like the commitment rule.
Basically, the commitment rule is such that if a player is playing for his varsity team then he may not miss games to play for his travel team. If so he will be suspended for a game, next time two games and then a third time the entire season.
Another rule that is causing a lot of waves is whether or not schools that have teams in the Club League can bring players up to play varsity.
The discussion was heated between coaches and between Canisius coach Terry Miller and DiFilippo.
DiFilippo said that he will bring it up to the executive board and the coaches will have an answer next week and so will we.
Other than that the meeting went as planned. The pizza was good as always and the pop was ok. Got a little warm after being there forever.
It’s always funny to see the pairing when it comes to sitting at tables. You will never see Canisius and St. Joe’s sitting together – even though they are both pretty good guys.
All the Williamsville schools usually sit with each other, as does the Southtowns. West Seneca East and West made sure they weren’t next to each other and then the new schools like North Tonawanda and Lewiston-Port were just trying to fit in.
I, myself, sat with the misfit table. I mean that in a good way – I like all you guys. I sat with Pat Fisher (Timon), Terry Miller (Canisius) and Derek Gilham (Orchard Park).
I get along great with all of them and they always have nothing but nice things to say about me (yeah right). They treat me like there little brother. I get picked on so much – my Lord. That’s ok; I get even with the pen (kidding).
News around the week: We will be down at practice on Wednesday getting our annual team preview. No practice for me today as I am at a banquet that our company (Metro Group Inc.) is hosting for the girls soccer and boys football teams.
Our schedule looks like this for the next two weeks: Practice on Wednesday, practice next Monday and Tuesday; game preview for Thursday; game story Thursday night after I eat all that turkey; and game story on Friday.
Now that the season is finally here, we will be doing features stories on some of the kids that will run here and in the paper.
Also, we will take a look back 20 years ago when Timon won their first Federation title.
Congratulation goes out to former Timon coach Frank Panek has he will be inducted into the Bishop Timon-St. Jude High School Athletic Hall of Fame in February.
Hopefully now we can get other hockey players in their like Pat Fisher and Doug Matteson.
Thank you for the suggestions. I am on it and still figuring out how to go about some of those things that were mentioned.
In years past it was so much fun that I normally wished that I were going to the dentist to get some work done with out Novocain.
This year wasn’t any different. What made it more pleasant was the fact I was going to this two-hour meeting stiff feeling the effect of a cold I had for the past week.
For those of you who don’t know, the coaches meeting is where all 24 coaches get together with the league president, Mark DiFilipo, the stats person and head of officials to go over the new rules for the upcoming season.
At times the meeting could be painful, especially when they go over certain rules like the commitment rule.
Basically, the commitment rule is such that if a player is playing for his varsity team then he may not miss games to play for his travel team. If so he will be suspended for a game, next time two games and then a third time the entire season.
Another rule that is causing a lot of waves is whether or not schools that have teams in the Club League can bring players up to play varsity.
The discussion was heated between coaches and between Canisius coach Terry Miller and DiFilippo.
DiFilippo said that he will bring it up to the executive board and the coaches will have an answer next week and so will we.
Other than that the meeting went as planned. The pizza was good as always and the pop was ok. Got a little warm after being there forever.
It’s always funny to see the pairing when it comes to sitting at tables. You will never see Canisius and St. Joe’s sitting together – even though they are both pretty good guys.
All the Williamsville schools usually sit with each other, as does the Southtowns. West Seneca East and West made sure they weren’t next to each other and then the new schools like North Tonawanda and Lewiston-Port were just trying to fit in.
I, myself, sat with the misfit table. I mean that in a good way – I like all you guys. I sat with Pat Fisher (Timon), Terry Miller (Canisius) and Derek Gilham (Orchard Park).
I get along great with all of them and they always have nothing but nice things to say about me (yeah right). They treat me like there little brother. I get picked on so much – my Lord. That’s ok; I get even with the pen (kidding).
News around the week: We will be down at practice on Wednesday getting our annual team preview. No practice for me today as I am at a banquet that our company (Metro Group Inc.) is hosting for the girls soccer and boys football teams.
Our schedule looks like this for the next two weeks: Practice on Wednesday, practice next Monday and Tuesday; game preview for Thursday; game story Thursday night after I eat all that turkey; and game story on Friday.
Now that the season is finally here, we will be doing features stories on some of the kids that will run here and in the paper.
Also, we will take a look back 20 years ago when Timon won their first Federation title.
Congratulation goes out to former Timon coach Frank Panek has he will be inducted into the Bishop Timon-St. Jude High School Athletic Hall of Fame in February.
Hopefully now we can get other hockey players in their like Pat Fisher and Doug Matteson.
Thank you for the suggestions. I am on it and still figuring out how to go about some of those things that were mentioned.
Monday, November 16. 2009
Buffalo Sabres Impress with Wins Over Flames and Flyers
By Jeff Barnes
By Joe in NYC
The Sabres are making a lot of naysayers believe in the team. I wrote prior to Friday, that this was redemption weekend because of their embarrassing performance against the Flyers and Bruins. I wrote if the team could split this weekend's games, it would be a good step in the right direction. Well, they did much more than that, they swept the weekend series against two of the upper echelon teams in the NHL.
The Philly victory had to be the most impressive of the weekend. First, the Sabres were playing on back-to-back nights and had just played in a physical shootout victory over the Flames. Secondly, the Sabres haven't exactly played well in the third game of these three games in four night stretches over the season. Last but not least, the Sabres were only a week removed from getting spanked by the Flyers on their own ice and hadn't beaten Philly in their last five chances. This was a game that the Sabres team from last year would of lost. Instead, the Sabres went for the jugular and didn't let the ghosts of Flyers past intimidate them.
Random Thoughts:
-Where the hell have all these young Sabres players been all my life? First, we get Tyler Myers and Tim Kennedy, now we get Tyler Ennis who was rushed to the Philly game (Presidential style) from Portland to play for the injured Drew Stafford. All the kid does is score a goal in his first NHL game. I know, I've been giving Darcy Reiger and the Sabres front office a hard time when it comes to building their teams over the last couple months, but I have to give the team credit for grooming tomorrow's Sabres to play effective hockey today. Lets hope they can keep it going 2-3 years from now-
you of the late 90's version of the Sabres. Those teams were led by Dominick Hasek and a suffocating defense that would only allow a handful of scoring chances a game and were masters of the 2-1 and 3-2 games. Pat Kaleta is playing the role of Matt Barnaby with his agitating play, Craig Rivet is playing the role of Jay McKee with his stellar defense, and Ryan Miller is doing his best Dom Hasek with his minuscule GAA-
-Just like the 90's teams, the Sabres are still having issues with their powerplay. It has gotten so bad that the team is putting Steve Montador on the point. I know they scored two power play goals against Philly, but the team's power play has to improve, especially since they are having issues scoring-
Read more of Joe's Blogs at Joe in NYC
