JuanGuzman

I hope we manage to keep Kromer through some combination of 4 game suspension followed by a demotion to assistant O-line coach for the remainder of the year (promote the current assistant). The articles I have read this preseason have contained nice quotes about Kromer and his ability to teach and emphasize technique. Bills players seem happy with him and Kromer has had success previously so I hope we can hang on to him. That being said, the NFL's crackdown on personal conduct does not bode well for Kromer. An O-Line coach is the definition of expendable and the image conscious league may decide to make an example out him. Not to mention the whole Incognito factor.

Anyone Remember this guy, Spiller Vintage Year 2012-13: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/QpLIDa2FdTA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Edit: I can’t figure out to embed the video cause I’m a moron. But here is the youtube link: https://www.youtube....h?v=QpLIDa2FdTA The biggest differencet I noticed between 2012 and 2014 is the offensive sets/formations. In 2012 the Bills ran a lot of single back sets, with Spiller set deep in the backfield. Basically the philosophy was spread them out and let Spiller gash. This took advantage of Spiller’s strengths, acceleration and the ability to make people miss in space. You also see a lot of screens played called. Fast forward to 2014, and the offensive ground game look like a clogged toilet. You see a lot of power sets run to the weak side of the field, with a lead block back. This hasn’t hurt Fred Jackson who runs with excellent body lean and excels at getting those “Tough Yards” But CJ Spiller the play calling is a disastrous use of skill sets. Look Spiller has faults, number one I think is his is below average vision, number 2 as an RB and two he is never going to move the pile. He needs an offense designed to avoid the pile, put him in “one on one” situations and let him make the guy in front miss. *I am posting this as a new topic in the hopes the Nathaniel Hackett cruises this forum under the pseudonym “Can’t_Hackett”*

My biggest concern with EJ was the sixty sacks he took in two years. It suggested a lack of awareness. In his limited playing time last year, I saw nothing to refute it. I will be rooting hard for him to succeed but im guessing we will have a different qb come 2015 or at least hoping for one.

I didn't realize the giants had already cut Josh Freeman. What happened to that guy...? He looked like he might be a star in the league a few years back

I live in British Columbia. In 2008, the province instituted a carbon tax with a corresponding cut in income taxes. This made the tax "revenue neutral" so the governments total tax take remained the same. Although there was a transfer of wealth among citizens as people who were more depended automobile use (rural residents) paid slightly more tax, where as urban dwellers who used less gasoline and had some alternative transit options available earned some tax savings. Generally the Carbon Tax appears to be a success. It's estimated that B.C's GHG emissions have been reduced by 19% per capita, but the provinces GDP has kept pace with the rest of Canada. I don't believe taking action to reduce GHG emissions will be that costly economically. And if we are concerned that the human generated climate could render parts of the planet uninhabitable 100 years from now that it seems like taking action to reduce GHGs makes sense, if the economic costs are small. That being said, given global industrial growth its hard to imagine that reducing of GHG's in Canada and U.S. would do much to slow the pace carbon emissions.

You still don't think Obama Care is going to work?

Trumps a blowhard, he tries to attach his name to anything, I am hoping this is just more hot air coming from him, I would not like to have him as the bills owner.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/us/politics/census-survey-revisions-mask-health-law-effects.html'>http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/us/politics/census-survey-revisions-mask-health-law-effects.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/us/politics/census-survey-revisions-mask-health-law-effects.html I normally post positive Obamacare stories since i believe the policy is much better than the status quo, but I thought I would post a negative story. This is disappointing, i hope its purely a coincidence, but the fact the new data won't be comparable to the old and that will overstate obamacares impact is concerning. There are ways out there to measure the data but I still dislike this change,

Despite Healthcare.gov's botched rollout, federal budget forecasters now expect Obamacare's insurance exchanges to cover slightly more people with less money. The Congressional Budget Office now estimates that 25 million people will gain insurance through the new marketplaces over the next decade. That's an increase from 24 million, the agency's last projection. But here's what's most surprising: CBO thinks that, even as the exchanges insure slightly more people, the overall price tag for everyone goes down. It now expects the federal government to spend $104 billion less on the coverage expansion. CBO's new forecasts reflect the fact that premiums on the exchange have come in slightly lower than initially expected. The ones being sold this year tend to pay doctors less and have "narrower networks of providers." When health plans contract with fewer doctors, they typically can negotiate cheaper prices with the few physicians they do include in their networks. When premiums are lower, that means the federal government pays less to subsidize people buying insurance. CBO says the federal government is, on average, spending $300 less per person on insurance subsidies than it had expected. ttp://www.vox.com/2014/4/14/5613346/obamacares-price-tag-just-got-cut-by-104-billion

Right now the estimate is: "Using a survey fielded by the RAND American Life Panel, we estimate a net gain of 9.3 million in the number of American adults with health insurance coverage from September 2013 to mid-March 2014." - http://www.rand.org/blog/2014/04/survey-estimates-net-gain-of-9-3-million-american-adults.html

What is the whole story in your opinion?

I think you're splitting hairs here. I meant that it may not be the end of the world for humanity, although it very well could be. Anyway I recommended the video cause I thought it was a good take on the issue. I didn't see any flaws or holes in the presenters logic. But I'd welcome a critical review on it if someone watched. Part of the climate change inertia I think we see in society is because no one wants to think seriously about these issues. Here on the other hand is a very serious look at the issue. I urge people to watch it. Anyway, if people don't want to watch it. Can you at least summarize the consensus view from those opposed to action on climate change? Is it climate change doesn't exists, its a big conspiracy? Is it climate change does exist but we don't need to do anything about it, we'll muddle our way through it when we start seeing consequences? Or is it climate change does exist, and while we should in theory do something about it, government is incapable of doing. Why trust them with our tax dollars?

Yeh I'd just ask you to watch it. Its not some crackpot, it's a world class scientist reviewing the evidence for man made change. I think he makes a convincing case. Granted a warmer planet my not be the end of the world, also maybe there are adaptation measures that are possible like using SO2 to cool the planet etc. But I don't think its unrealistic to ask for a revenue neutral carbon taxes. We would reduce income tax and compensate for that revenue loss with a carbon tax. it would also be great if we eliminated any subsidies to fossil fuel producers IMO. Those policies would reduce our carbon footprint and actually might be good for the economy. E.g., why not tax something bad like carbon, and reduce tax on something good (peoples labour)

IF people can take time out of their day and comment on this video I would appreciate. I think it's a great 45 minute lecture on some of the science and politics of climate change. http://youtu.be/9CKNHpVUJKk <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9CKNHpVUJKk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I'll always be a Bills fan but its painful to see the organization frequentely mis-manage assets. Byrd's the best safety we've had in a long time. The franchise tag would seemingly give us enough leverage to sign him long term. Yet the F.O. is incapable of achieving it. Not sure if its because they're cheap or incompetent but god damn good organizations seem to retain their best young players.