HuskerNMO

Question no more http://www.omaha.com/huskers/in-san-francisco-meeting-eichorst-and-perlman-find-our-guy/article_d024a272-7cb1-11e4-97d9-7f8f570d3d6e.html Ten years ago, the Oregon State coach popped up on Riley's radar during South Carolina's coaching search. Eichorst was an assistant athletic director at South Carolina. South Carolina eventually chose Steve Spurrier, but Eichorst didn't forget what he liked about Riley. "He's an elite coach," Eichorst said. "He's a teacher." Monday morning, following the first of five consecutive short nights of sleep, Eichorst determined that Riley was his No. 1 target. He contacted the Oregon State coach to see if he was interested. Riley was. "At that point, I recruited my tail off like I've never done before," Eichorst said. "I was focused, I was locked in, I knew what I wanted." He learned that Riley and NU Chancellor Harvey Perlman, by coincidence, were going to be in San Francisco on Tuesday. "Well," Eichorst told Riley, "this might be meant to be." Eichorst headed for the Lincoln airport to catch United Flight 5185. It was scheduled for 8:07 p.m. It didn't leave till 9:14. Eichorst nearly missed his connection in Denver. He landed in San Francisco at about midnight and arrived the Hilton Union Square at 12:30 a.m. The next morning, Eichorst and Riley met in Room 3670 - Eichorst can't remember the number exactly. They spoke for an hour. Then Perlman joined the discussion for another hour. Riley left the room, so Eichorst and Perlman could chat. "I think this is our guy," Eichorst said. Perlman agreed. Eichorst called Riley back to the room, where they went over details. Tuesday afternoon, the A.D. was headed back to Lincoln.

Jimmy Johnson, after getting in the best shape of his life to have a go at CBS's Survivor, felt the urge to get back to coaching kids again. He met Shawn Eichorst in a back room poker game in Miami, people think Eichorst is behind the scenes because he doesn't like the spotlight, but the truth is he is one heck of a poker player. Fast forward and Shawn needs a splash hire, Jimmy Johnson decides he is going to give the next 5 years of his life to bringing Nebraska back to glory. Jimmy's first call is to Butch Davis, his former protege and DC at Dallas as his DC at Nebraska. They call Norv Turner who declined to come back to college as an OC, but recommended LSU OC Cam Cameron who accepted the position.

Confirmed that last years alternate N on the chest with black helmets are in

Nope. I don't think he is traveling with the team this weekend. This is what I've heard. This is correct, he is not traveling, and currently in Omaha. He raised a small stink over at HOL, he posted on Facebook about being done with his obligations to UNL, and people thought it meant that he was leaving school. In reality it meant he had a free weekend.

Local newspaper has a Facebook poll up about the favorite team, let's beat the Tigers in their own state! https://www.facebook.com/questions/341913485892401/

Tyler has left Nebraska, and enrolled in another 2 year school. He will get his AA degree and be free to transfer wherever he wants without limitation, redshirting this year.

But what do we define as healthcare and what needs reformed? People attack the insurance industries as the big bullies of healthcare, they on average make about 2.2% profit margin. The median operating margin for hospitals that had 200+ beds was -.7%, some do make a lot of money, but most operate on razor thin budgets. The profit and hole of healthcare in in the research arms of the drug companies and medical device industry, these guys are raking in 20%+ profit margins, we pay for the innovations here in the United States and those with the money to pay for it are going to places like the Mayo Clinic to get bleeding edge treatment and paying the cost of it. Of course other countries piggyback on the medical research done in the United States and spend less on research which lowers their cost, while still having the benefit of what we provide. The US has the most advanced systems in the world, and the best care for those that can afford it, it's the American way. The only real solution to drastically altering the cost model is to have better pricing control across the board, but that could ultimately gut the profitiblity of the research arms which will slow innovation and ultimately lead to reduced quality of care and curing of diseases. Health care costs are not a bubble, if you put an action into part A there will be a reaction somewhere else along the chain that could cause a larger problem than the one we started out with.

Cost is the key thing, and that's a great point to bring up. Yes, healthcare costs a lot. But that doesn't mean that those needing healthcare are to be punished. It means that costs need to be controlled. That, to me, is the largest swing-and-miss of Obamacare. Most everyone agrees that some reform was needed because costs of healthcare are outstripping consumers' abilities to pay for it, but instead of figuring out a way to help rein in costs, Obamacare simply says, "You have to cover everyone." That's nice, but it doesn't fix the problem. I'll be the first to admit I don't have the answer to healthcare costs. But the current political battle is no more likely to solve the problem than Obamacare did. And meanwhile, we live in the most prosperous nation on earth, yet a huge chunk of our population cannot afford the basic healthcare offered by countries half as wealthy as us. The theory is that if you reduce the revenue streams then the hospitals will be forced to adapt and reduce costs on their own accord, which they will do, but I think it will have the opposite effect that the American public really desires. It will lead to further crowding of ER's, increased wait times for PCP's and the further consolodation of the industry as a whole into large corporations that don't have the pulse or intrests of the local community at mind when making decisions. We do agree that there is NO simple answer, and there probably won't even be a correct answer. As long as America continues to live our fast paced, unhealthy lifestyle health care costs will continue to rise in turn. Poverty is not a new issue in America, why is health care suddenly such a hot topic for everyone? Why is it suddenly such a fundamental right? Because American's work too much, are too stressed and take poor care of themselves. I hate to stereotype, but how many people complaining about the cost of healthcare own multiple newer vehicles, are overweight, choose to smoke or whatever cliche you want to use to describe people? Why does our tax system and welfare system encourage and reward individuals to have multiple children with tax incentives and increased welfare? To me it's a worse injustice to bring a child into a poor house where you can't afford to take care of them than to have healthcare cost more than people can "afford". The unfortunate truth is we, as a society, are getting exactly what we put into our collective existance, we pour greed in by wanting a bigger house, nicer cars, the newest TV or whatever else and rack up significant debt, become overweight or over-stressed which lowers our quality of life and increases our reliance upon healthcare and other subsidized services. Until there is a fundamental change upon the philosophy and actions of the average American in a large quantity these issues will only become worse and worse.

Because in this instance there are three parties that came to an agreement based on the inclusion the individual mandate. The government wanted to expand coverage, alter regulation of insurance (issuance, caps, etc.), and lower cost in part by reducing reimbursement rates. Insurers agreed because the individual mandate will expand their risk pool. Health care providers agreed because the individual mandate will reduce losses incurred from treating those will no ability pay (i.e. the uninsured). If the individual mandate is removed from health care reform, the whole thing necessarily falls apart; all the good aspects that enjoy wide bipartisan support go away. I understand that many of the opponents that find the mandate particularly egregious are standing on a principle of the scope of government, but essentially, it seems insane to me that their argument boils down to wanting to protect the theoretical person who has the ability to obtain health insurance but doesn't want to. Also, it is conveniently ignored that this theoretical person is suddenly in the market for health care the moment they have a health emergency, which quickly becomes the financial burden of the insured in the per-reform system. Lowering costs by reimbursing less is a myth, private companies require a certain level of profit to maintain operations, if you lower their income they will have to make up for it in some way, either reduced quality, staffing or reduction in services. A big part of the problem is the reduction of reimbursements, less dollars from the government for the same services means that the charitable care that many health systems do will be reduced or eliminated.

What's strange is that you sound concerned about salt regulations . . . but not about government ordered rape. Put another way, you sound concerned about the left looking over your shoulder but unconcerned about the right ramming instruments into your orifices. Why is that? Tribalism? I will be sure and inform rape victims that I meet that the government telling me to buy something is equal to their physical assault. Great choice of words.

Absolutely untrue. I am your average wage-earner, middle-class non-poor guy, and I just want affordable healthcare. Like every other industrialized nation has. Like every nation that we perceive as our peers have. Like every human should have, whether they're rich or poor, middle class or legal non-resident. Deregulation doesn't drive down costs, it does the opposite - without regulation, nothing is to stop healthcare companies from forming monopolies by gobbling up smaller providers and, once they've done so, creating whatever price they want. Deregulation doesn't create some price-competition utopia, that's a line of BS the companies and their GOP cronies are feeding to keep the cash flowing from your pocket to theirs. Your doomsday scenario in your fourth paragraph is belied by the healthcare models in the rest of the modern world. Healthcare isn't perfect everywhere else - it's just affordable everywhere else. Everywhere but here. And no sane person wants "fast, cheap" healthcare. They want good healthcare. Period. That's not asking too much. The thing you miss about the regulation is the cost of regulation, tell a small rural hospital that they have to abandon their paper based methods, buy and implement electronic medical records, develop systems to maintain HIPAA compliance, have to convert to a new coding standard over the next few years which will require system changes, staff training and changes and they simply can't afford the changes so they sell out to a larger company. I work for a regional health system and we just finished integration with one such hospital, are looking at a second, and have 3 others within an hour of us that have sold out to our competitor in town in the past 2 years. The changes in regulation on healthcare aren't creating competition other than for the large companies to swallow the smaller ones. And when you talk about the other industrialized countries and their affordable health care, go compare the income tax rates of said countries to the US, most are between 35-50% compared to the US which is between 28-30 depending on where you look. I'm sure if I gave an extra 5% of my income along with everyone else we could funnel it to healthcare and create the appearance that it has become affordable, but yet I now take home less so I can't afford the stuff that I really need to spend my money on. You can call it "affordable" all you want, but the truth is you want subsidized healthcare.

In reality this isn't really a debate on healthcare, it's a debate on the powers of government and the impact of our capitalist economy. Many people say they want "affordable" heathcare, but this isn't true. They want cheap healthcare for the poor, subsidized by the government, or ultimately the larger earning taxpayer. Congrats on making it, now I need you to pay for the "less fortunate" that can't afford healthcare. Others say healthcare costs are out of control, here's a novel thought, healthcare companies want to make money, many are non profit and are sneaking by on 2-3% margins. Yes there are some others that are for profit and make 6-7%, but those are few and far between. The government payouts for services are driving up the cost of insurance and out of pocket costs for healthcare. Regulation on the industry forces an archaeic model of med schools that impose significant barriers to those wishing to enter the market. If you want a capitalist system, then healthcare is going to cost a lot and quality will vary significantly. If you want a single payer model it will eliminate competition and drive even further the consolodation of the market into mega corporations that run hospitals trying to make more money. Hundreds of locally run hospitals will be forced to either shutter their doors or align with larger companies the way things are going. But this isn't limited to just healthcare, it is hitting almost every industry in America. There is a saying in business, you can have it fast, cheap or good, and you can pick 2 of the 3, but cannot get all 3. People may desire all 3, but it just isn't possible.

Heard isn't an option, he is a DB unless he moves back to RB at some point.

Here's why this really, really sucks. There has been a focus on recruiting the southeast for the upcoming year, and a lot of relationships were with Raymond, with him gone a lot of the relationships built with the kids going into the senior class are now gone. With a fairly large amount of scholarships for 2013 this really hurts.

Warfield has I think 4 DUI's under his belt, I don't imagine he will become the DB coach. http://dcs-inmatesearch.ne.gov/Corrections/InmateDisplayServlet?DcsId=70124&showInmateImage=true