The 5 Takeaways from the Coyotes introduction of

first_img The 5: Takeaways from the Coyotes’ introduction of Alex Meruelo Former Cardinals kicker Phil Dawson retires The Arizona Cardinals still are not quite sure what they have in receiver Michael Floyd, but it looks like they’d like to keep him around for just a bit longer.Darren Urban of AZCardinals.com reports the team has picked up the fifth-year option on the 25-year-old wideout.The Cardinals had until this weekend to decide on the option. Had they chosen not to pick it up, the former first-round pick would have become an unrestricted free agent following the 2015 season. Comments   Share   Since being taken 13th overall by the Cardinals in the 2012 draft, the former Notre Dame receiver has shown flashes of excellence but has also been inconsistent.After catching 45 passes for 562 yards and two touchdowns as a rookie, Floyd exploded onto the scene in 2013, catching 65 passes for a team-leading 1,041 yards and five scores.Expected to take another step forward in 2014, Floyd struggled at times, finishing with 47 catches for 841 yards and six touchdowns. He topped the 100-yard mark in just three games. Some of Floyd’s struggles last season can be attributed to the team’s issues at the quarterback position, where injuries forced the Cardinals into using four different passers. In picking up his option, the organization would seem to believe that the 6-foot-3 wideout will rebound from 2014 and get back on track to being one of the better young receivers in the NFL.center_img Derrick Hall satisfied with D-backs’ buying and selling Top Stories Grace expects Greinke trade to have emotional impactlast_img read more

Heres why the outcomes of this weeks European elections are good news

first_img Now there could be space for a liberal or green research champion … Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe The European Parliament’s debating chamber in Strasbourg, France Email According to provisional results published yesterday, the biggest winner is the centrist Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, which would add 40 MEPs to its current 69, whereas the greens would grow from 52 to 69 MEPs. The biggest losers are political groups that have long dominated European politics: the conservative European People’s Party and the socio-democrats, which would lose 36 and 39 seats, respectively. Voter turnout was at its highest since 1994, at about 51%.Liberals and greens will now have more clout to push their already articulate research agendas, says Thomas Jørgensen, senior policy coordinator at the European University Association in Brussels. “You have these research veterans in the Parliament; almost all of them are conservative,” Jørgensen says, alluding, for example, to MEPs Jerzy Buzek from Poland and Christian Ehler from Germany, who have focused much of their careers on research and innovation policy. “Now, there could be space for a liberal or green research champion, giving broad support to research and pushing for climate and sustainability issues.” Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country On international cooperation, Jørgensen expects the new Parliament to support the European Commission’s “open to the world” approach, which seeks to develop scientific collaborations with countries outside Europe and allows nonmembers such as Norway, Switzerland, and Israel to compete in research funding programs in exchange for an association fee. “So many progressive MEPs have been elected on that ‘open society’ ticket”—as opposed to the nationalist and “Europe first” discourses of populist parties, he says.Far-right and euroskeptic parties did score high in countries such as Italy and France, but the predicted populist flood didn’t materialize across the continent. (The two main euroskeptic groups combined would go from 78 MEPs in the outgoing Parliament to 112 after the elections, whereas the European Conservatives and Reformists lost 18 seats.) But scientists and their institutions should remain vigilant about their influence, says Maud Evrard, head of policy affairs at the Brussels-based Science Europe, a group of funding agencies and research organizations.“We’re concerned about academic freedom. We shouldn’t take it for granted,” she says. (In Hungary, the government of Viktor Orbán has taken aim at Central European University, a private institution in Budapest, for instance.) “We will push the Parliament to promote and defend freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and thought” at the national level, Evrard says, as well as evidence-based policymaking.Parliament’s exact balance of power will be decided in the coming weeks; 29 MEPs are not allied to any existing political group yet. At its first plenary session in July, Parliament will then vote to elect the next president of the commission, who is put forward by the European Union’s heads of state and government. They will assemble a new commission, the European Union’s executive arm, including a commissioner for research and innovation to succeed Carlos Moedas from Portugal. The new Parliament will have a chance to grill the candidate for that post—and reveal its science policy inclinations—after the summer. Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) Although populist and euroskeptic parties grew in last week’s elections for the European Parliament, the tsunami that EU supporters feared didn’t happen. That comes as a relief to many scientists, because several of the populist movements now on the rise in Europe appear to have little interest in science, flirt with antiscientific ideas, or have tried to curtail academic freedom.Observers in Brussels expect the new Parliament to continue its policy of defending generous research budgets. But the rise of pro-European Union green and liberal groups—at the expense of the Parliament’s traditionally two dominant parties—could lead to small shifts in science and technology priorities, some say, such as greener policies.The elections’ direct influence on EU science policy is limited because most of the details of Horizon Europe, its next 7-year research funding program, have already been agreed to by the outgoing Parliament and member states. But the new members of Parliament (MEPs) still have to negotiate two big items: the program’s budget from 2021 to 2027, which could be about €100 billion, and rules for the participation of countries outside of the European Union. Next year, Parliament will also examine rules for big public-private partnerships on research and innovation. By Tania RabesandratanaMay. 28, 2019 , 3:55 AM Here’s why the outcomes of this week’s European elections are good news for science Thomas Jørgensen, European University Association DAVID ILIFF (CC-BY-SA 3.0) last_img read more