Chelsea icon Vialli predicts Morata golden boot

first_imgChelsea Morata can win Premier League golden boot, says Chelsea legend Gianluca Vialli Nizaar Kinsella Click here to see more stories from this author Chelsea correspondent Last updated 2 years ago 17:44 10/19/17 FacebookTwitterRedditcopy Comments(0) Alvaro Morata Chelsea Stoke City Chelsea Morata Premier League Romelu Lukaku Sergio Agüero Harry Kane EXCLUSIVE: The ex-Blues forward has backed the striker to beat rivals to the goalscoring honour in his first season at Stamford Bridge Gianluca Vialli has backed Alvaro Morata to fend over Sergio Aguero, Harry Kane and Romelu Lukaku in his race to become the Premier League’s top goalscorer this season.Morata 8/1 to be PL top scorerMorata, who has scored seven goals in 2017-18, sat out Chelsea’s 2-1 defeat over Crystal Palace at the weekend due to a hamstring injury but made his return against Roma on Wednesday. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Lyon treble & England heartbreak: The full story behind Lucy Bronze’s dramatic 2019 Liverpool v Man City is now the league’s biggest rivalry and the bitterness is growing Megan Rapinoe: Born & brilliant in the U.S.A. A Liverpool legend in the making: Behind Virgil van Dijk’s remarkable rise to world’s best player The 24-year-old is wearing Chelsea’s No.9 shirt as he did as Juventus and Vialli, Chelsea’s former player-manager who also wore the No.9 shirt for both clubs, has been impressed with Spain forward’s start to life in west London. “I’ve got no doubts that Morata can be there or thereabouts and win the competition as the most prolific striker in the Premier League,” Vialli told Goal. “He has got a different style. He is not Diego Costa, there’s only one Diego Costa in terms of being able to be effective and aggressive at the same time.”He’s not Lukaku because he hasn’t got the physique of Lukaku but he is probably more effective in front of goal because Morata only needs a couple of opportunities to score. Lukaku normally is always there, which is a great asset for a striker but he might need two or three chances to convert one goal.Alvaro Morata GFX“I think Morata is likely more technical as well. Aguero, Gabriel Jesus, there’s so many great strikers in our league and that makes everything so entertaining.  That’s why I think the Premier League is the most enjoyable league in the world.”Vialli won the Champions League and Serie A with Juventus, while at Chelsea he led the team to five cup successes ahead of Roman Abramovich’s big-money takeover in 2003. The 53-year-old moved to English football from Italy but he doesn’t think that the £58 million striker is having any problems in showing his aggression in the Premier League. “I think that Morata is quite aggressive,” he added. “Maybe not when he tackles but he is aggressive in his runs, he is always moving around and looking for the ball. Yes, he might have to adapt a little bit to the physical side of the game because in Spain and Italy, referees are much more receptive to a striker falling on the ground.”I know Morata very well because he was at Real Madrid but he also played in Italy for a number of seasons. He is a very talented striker, I like the fact that he runs a lot. For me, that’s something that a lot of strikers don’t do enough but Morata works really hard for the side. Alvaro Morata Chelsea 2017“He has got a very, very effective understanding, an empathy if you like, with some of the players in the side. He makes forward runs and he knows where to run in order to receive some of the quality balls from Azpilicueta, for example, or Hazard or Fabregas.”So he is very good and the fact that he played in Spain and Italy before he came to the Premier League has given him enough experience for how to play the game and to know what to do to become an immediate hit in the Premier League.”He is scoring goals but I am sure that Antonio [Conte] wants more because he always demands more but I am sure that he is extremely happy with Morata’s performances so far.”last_img read more

Barca’s Deulofeu joins Watford on loan

first_imgTransfers Barcelona’s Deulofeu joins Watford on loan through end of season Thomas Floyd @thomasfloyd10 Last updated 1 year ago 05:16 1/30/18 FacebookTwitterRedditcopy Comments(1) Gerard Deulofeu Barcelona Getty Transfers Watford Barcelona Premier League Primera División The Spain international is returning to the Premier League after sealing a temporary move Barcelona attacker Gerard Deulofeu has completed a move to Watford on loan through the end of the season.The 23-year-old returns to the Premier League just seven months after Barca triggered their buy-back clause to sign him from Everton. He previously played for the Toffees on loan during the 2013-14 season before making a permanent move to Goodison Park in 2015.Deulofeu has struggled for minutes at Barca this season despite the summer sale of Neymar to Paris Saint-Germain, starting 10 of 17 appearances in all competitions. He has played just nine minutes since the end of November, and the recent addition of Philippe Coutinho from Liverpool figured to further limit his minutes. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Lyon treble & England heartbreak: The full story behind Lucy Bronze’s dramatic 2019 Liverpool v Man City is now the league’s biggest rivalry and the bitterness is growing Megan Rapinoe: Born & brilliant in the U.S.A. A Liverpool legend in the making: Behind Virgil van Dijk’s remarkable rise to world’s best player The Spain international’s loan runs through June 30, Barca announced on Monday, with Watford covering his salary and a potential add-on of €1 million.He joins a Watford side that recently hired Javi Gracia to replace Marco Silva as manager. The Hornets sit 10th in the Premier League but are just four points clear of the relegation zone.Deulofeu, who also has had loan stints playing for Sevilla and AC Milan, scored five goals in 62 Premier League contests for Everton. He has one goal in four caps for Spain since debuting in 2014.last_img read more

A Home Playoff Game Is A Big Advantage — Unless You Play

NBA59.9+9.864.5+13.9+4.1 The NBA and NFL have the biggest regular-season home advantages, improving a team’s chance of winning by 10 and 7 percentage points, respectively. And those benefits grow even larger in the playoffs, ballooning to as high as 14 percentage points for NBA teams. NFL home teams gain almost 5 extra points of win probability in the playoffs — again, after controlling for the fact that better teams tend to get more postseason home games.In baseball and hockey, on the other hand, playing at home doesn’t get you nearly as much help. MLB teams win about 54 percent of home games whether it’s the postseason or not (so much for last licks!), and while NHL teams do a bit better at home in the regular season (55 percent), they actually see their advantage decrease slightly in the playoffs.In general, home advantage is a subject that deserves more research, simply because we’re still not entirely sure what combination of factors actually cause it. Some, like crowd noise, are obvious, while others are written into the sport’s rules (home hockey teams have the right to make the final line change before the puck drops, giving them a consistent edge in matchups). Other phenomena, like the home team getting preferential treatment by officials, still need further study. But numbers like the ones in the table above show that each sport brings its own weird nuggets to the overall topic of home-field/court/ice.Either way, after their loss Tuesday night, maybe the Rangers and their fans will take solace in being the latest case study for a fascinating natural experiment. (Probably not.) What’s home-field/court/ice worth in the postseason? LEAGUEWIN PERCENTBOOST*WIN PERCENTBOOSTPLAYOFF DIFF. NFL57.1%+7.064.7%+11.8+4.8 NHL55.1+5.155.3+4.8-0.3 When the Ottawa Senators traveled to New York to take on the Rangers in Game 6 on Tuesday night, it was fair to think the series would probably head back to Ottawa for a Game 7. The Senators got drubbed in the series’ first two contests in New York, and the nervously raucous Madison Square Garden crowd was hoping to give the Rangers a key home-ice edge in an otherwise tight series. The problem with this thinking, though, is that home-ice advantage is not much of an advantage in the NHL — and it has proven even less important in the playoffs.And so, the Rangers’ 4-2 loss at home (and playoff elimination) provided just the latest in a string of home-ice disappointments this postseason. So far, home teams are exactly .500 (33-33) in 2017, their worst playoff showing since 2012, when teams actually had a losing record at home at 39-47. Hockey home-ice isn’t actually the disadvantage that record would imply, but it’s also not the game-changer we’re used to seeing in other sports like football and basketball, where home teams have been very spoiled over the years.To measure the strength of each league’s home edge, I gathered data on every regular-season and playoff game since 2000, tracking how often the home team won. I also used our Elo ratings1Or, in the case of the NHL,’s Simple Rating System (SRS). to calculate an “expected” winning percentage for each game — based on the quality of the two teams — had the matchup been staged at a neutral site. (This isn’t important for the regular season, because every team is scheduled for roughly equal home and road games. But in the playoffs, better teams are rewarded with more home games, a factor for which we must control.)Comparing home teams’ actual winning percentages to what we’d expect on neutral ground, we can see how much of a boost teams get by being at home in each sport. We can also see how that boost changes from the regular season to the playoffs — if indeed there is a change. HOME TEAMS IN REG. SEASONHOME TEAMS IN PLAYOFFS MLB54.0+4.054.2+4.0+0.0 Percentage point change from home team’s expected win percentage at a neutral location. In the playoffs, better teams are awarded more home games, so expected home win percentage is higher than 50 percent.Source: read more

Investigators Think They Know Who Killed Eleven Girls Around Galveston In The

first_img Share Listen X To embed this piece of audio in your site, please use this code: In the 1970s, in and around Galveston, teenage girls started going missing – sometimes in pairs. Many of their bodies would turn up in swamps, marshes and bodies of water in places like Clear Lake and Texas City.Those murders — along with a cluster of others over the years along Interstate 45 between Houston and Galveston — have led to the area being dubbed “The Texas Killing Fields.”Now, more than 45 years later, two local investigators are focusing on nearly a dozen of those cases, most of which happened in the 1970s. Of those eleven murders, there’s only been a conviction in one case, but a federal court ruling cast serious doubt on whether the right man went to jail.Lise Olsen and Fred Paige agree. Olsen is an investigative reporter for the Houston Chronicle, and Paige is a former homicide detective from Galveston. Working together, they think one man may be responsible for those crimes, and they’re asking for the public’s help in solving the case.Now, as a new true crime documentary series called The Eleven debuts on the A&E network focusing on the crimes, the Galveston District Attorney’s office has reopened two of the cases. Houston Matters producer Michael Hagerty revisits the story of the eleven murders, the investigators who theorize one man is behind them all, and our conversation with the man they’re focusing on. MORE: Texas Prisoner Responds To Theory That He’s Responsible For Galveston Serial Murders (Houston Matters, Aug. 22, 2017)How You Can HelpPaige and Olsen have established an email address and tip line for anyone with information to contact them at: or 832-387-5382.Michael HagertyLise Olsen, investigative reporter for the Houston Chronicle, and Fred Paige, a former Galveston homicide detective, think they know who committed 11 unsolved murders in and around Galveston during the 1970s.Who Are The Eleven?1. Collette Wilson, who disappeared from Alvin, Texas in June of 1971. 2. Brenda Jones, who disappeared from Galveston in 1971. 3. Rhonda “Renee” Johnson and… 4. Sharon Shaw, who both disappeared from Galveston on Aug. 4, 1971. 5. Debbie Ackerman and… 6. Maria Johnson, who both disappeared from Galveston on Nov. 15, 1971. 7. Gloria Gonzales, who disappeared in October of 1971 (her body was found near Wilson’s). 8. Kim Pitchford, who disappeared in January of 1973. 9. Georgia Geer and… 10. Brooks Bracewell (aka “the Dickenson girls,” who both disappeared in September of 1974) 11. Jane Doe, (perhaps), whose bones were found off FM 2004 in Brazoria County in 1980 (she was likely killed in 1975). 12. Suzie Bowers, who disappeared from Galveston in 1977.MORE: Examining a String of Murders From Houston to Galveston (Houston Matters, March 17, 2015)Edward Harold Bell in a 1978 booking photo and a more recent TDCJ mugshot.A Suspect Under Their NosesThe first clue as to who might be responsible for these crimes can when Paige was digging through some old documents related to one of the cases. He was in Texas City, where one set of bodies was found. And he stumbled across a confession letter that had been written in the late 1990s by a Texas prison inmate. It had never been publicized.“The first time I saw that letter,” Paige said, “I basically said, ‘He’s your guy. This is our guy right here.’”That guy was Edward Harold Bell, who was (and still is) serving a prison sentence for killing a man in the 1970s. To verify the confession letter, Paige went digging through old newspaper archives from the Chronicle and the Houston Post.It turns out the letter contained details related to the cases that were never made public. Plus, other evidence seems to point circumstantially — but not yet definitively — to Bell, such as witnesses saying the saw two of the missing girls getting into a van matching the description of one Bell owned. Also Ed Bell lived fairly close to where many of these bodies had been found.“I’m convinced he did it,” Paige said. “Could I prove it in a court of law? No.”‘Eleven Went to Heaven’As for Ed Bell himself, does he stand by that confession letter? Bell granted Lise Olsen an interview from prison and wrote her some letters where he talked about the women he said he killed.AUDIO: Excerpts from Lise Olsen’s Prison Interview with Edward Harold Bell (Houston Chronicle)“We end up looking at eleven because he writes in a letter to me that there were ‘eleven who went to heaven,’” Olsen said. “He provides the names of four of those girls, and he provides initials and hair color and years of most of the rest of the girls.”MAP: The Eleven ‘Who Went to Heaven’ (Houston Chronicle)Looking for WitnessesNow, the investigative work of Olsen and Paige is to determine if Bell is telling the truth about all this. They’re trying to find witnesses who were never interviewed at the times of these murders, investigators who worked on the cases back in the 1970s or anyone who knew Bell or his wife at the time.What about Bell himself? Does he stand by the things he wrote and told Lise Olsen? As of publication of this story, our request for a prison interview with him is still pending. However, he’s told Olsen he was brainwashed into killing the women.They Deserve AnswersWhether Edward Harold Bell is ever proven guilty or not, finding the answer is what continues to drive Fred Paige and Lise Olsen.“Well, I guess it’s in my DNA, but who doesn’t want to solve a mystery?” Paige said. “Seems like we keep moving forward. We keep connecting some dots, but we still haven’t found that one loaded gun or whatever that’s going to put Bell away and say conclusively that this guy killed the girls that we believe he did kill.”Olsen wants to provide the victims’ families some answers after all these years of waiting.“I don’t like the idea that somebody can claim credit for eleven unsolved murders and never have to pay a price,” she said. “These are lost girls who never got a chance to grow up, who were robbed of their lives. And they deserve justice. All these people deserve answers, and so if it’s in our power to give them answers, I’d really like to do that.”center_img 00:00 /12:31last_img read more

Week Ahead Trump Aims To Dismiss Russia Probe As Partisan Can He

first_imgPool/Getty ImagesPresident Trump, seen in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, lashed out in a series of tweets at the FBI after the guilty plea of his former national security adviser in the Russia probe.A day after Michael Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser, was ensnared — and apparently flipped — in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, another story leaked: “Mueller Removed FBI Agent From Russia Probe Over Anti-Trump Messages.”Coincidence?In a week when Republicans are trying to get a tax overhaul bill to the president’s desk for the first piece of major legislation he would sign (more on that below), that story gives the White House a much-needed talking point, as the president is again being threatened by the Russia investigation. In response, Trump and his allies are undertaking an all-out effort to undermine Mueller’s work — and the FBI itself.The Russia investigationMentioning the anti-Trump texts on ABC’s This Week Sunday, Chris Ruddy, the CEO of the conservative site Newsmax and a Trump friend, said Mueller represents an “existential threat” and is racking up charges at “lightning speed. … You get a picture that this group is out to get the president.” (Remember, Ruddy told PBS NewsHour back in June that Trump was considering firing Mueller, which the White House denied at the time.)The president took up the charge during a weekend tweetstorm. He criticized the FBI, saying its “reputation is in tatters,” and he painted a conspiratorial picture of the anti-Trump texts: “Now it all starts to make sense!”Report: “ANTI-TRUMP FBI AGENT LED CLINTON EMAIL PROBE” Now it all starts to make sense!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 3, 2017He even defended Flynn, alleging a “double standard.” Expect Trump supporters this week to dig in and claim the texts are just the tip of the iceberg, that they prove the sentiment is endemic among Mueller’s team.Serving its political purpose: Of course, the irony here is that Mueller removed the investigator months ago upon learning of the texts. But that pro-Trump talking point is already serving a critical purpose — to muddy the waters, keep Trump’s base on board and insulate the president from further political damage.Building a case of obstruction: Democrats are moving in another direction this week, raising a big charge against the president: “I think what we’re beginning to see is the putting together of a case of obstruction of justice,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on NBC’s Meet the Press.“I think we see this in the indictments, the four indictments and pleas that have just taken place, and some of the comments that are being made. I see it in the hyper-frenetic attitude of the White House: the comments every day, the continual tweets. And I see it, most importantly, in what happened with the firing of Director Comey, and it is my belief that that is directly because he did not agree to lift the cloud of the Russia investigation. That’s obstruction of justice.”What did the president know and when did he know it? Another weekend Trump tweet raised new questions about obstruction when he indicated he knew Flynn lied to the FBI before he fired then-Director James Comey.I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 2, 2017Remember that Trump fired then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates (the stated reason was because she wouldn’t defend his travel ban) after she told White House counsel Don McGahn that Flynn had lied to the vice president about his conversations with the Russian ambassador.And remember that after Comey was fired some months later, he submitted in testimony — under oath — that Trump asked him to let “Flynn go” in a Feb. 14 meeting. Perhaps realizing the potential damage of Trump’s tweet, his personal lawyer, John Dowd, took ownership of it. “My mistake,” he claimed in an interview with Axios. “I’m out of the tweeting business.”Yates testified before Congress that she told McGahn that the FBI interviewed Flynn Feb. 24, but declined to tell him how Flynn did. Dowd told NPR’s Tamara Keith in an email Sunday that in Yates’ meeting with McGahn:“No accusation of lying had been lodged or conveyed to WHC [White House counsel] by Yates, Justice or FBI. Just that F [Flynn] told the agents what he told VP.”Dowd said in the email that there was “no accusation of lying.” But, let’s follow the logic: if Yates told McGahn that Flynn had said something untrue to the vice president, and Yates told McGahn that Flynn said the same untruth to the FBI, how does it follow that McGahn didn’t know that Flynn made false statements to the FBI?In response to a follow-up question seeking clarification, Dowd replied:“No, it does follow. Yates NEVER said he lied. That’s the point.”That’s not much more clarifying. For the record, Trump hotly denies that he “asked Comey to stop investigating Flynn.” He claimed in a tweet Sunday was Comey who was lying:I never asked Comey to stop investigating Flynn. Just more Fake News covering another Comey lie!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 3, 2017Well, someone’s not telling the truth. And we haven’t heard the last of the Mueller investigation.Can Trump get his win on taxes?Evan Vucci/APPresident Trump holds an example of what a new tax form may look like during a tax-policy meeting at the White House with Republican lawmakers.Now that the House and Senate have each passed their own versions of a tax bill, they have to be reconciled. Republicans plan to set up a conference committee, where differences in the two bills will be worked out. And there are some significant differences:-First, the Senate bill makes tax cuts for individuals expire after 2025 to comply with requirements to keep the deficit under control. The House bill makes them permanent;-The bills have entirely different tax brackets;-The House bill eliminates the estate tax and alternative minimum taxes, while the Senate bill just rolls those back;-The Senate bill officially ends enforcement of the Obamacare requirement that most Americans carry health insurance.Those are just the highlights. However, Republican leaders promise they will move quickly to work things out and get President Trump the final tax bill, with a bow on it just in time to tuck under his Christmas tree.‘Conference in name only’? Democrats have blasted Republicans for voting on the Senate bill just hours after the final text was worked out late Friday, which followed a closed-door meeting where the bill was changed to win over holdouts. Some revisions were literally written out long-hand in the margins, affecting major policy like how small businesses are treated in the tax code.Any handwriting experts out there? I’d like to know what this says before they call for a vote. This is absurd.— Senator Bob Casey (@SenBobCasey) December 1, 2017Democrats warn that the GOP will race through this final part of the legislative process, too. Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden was quoted by the New York Times predicting “a conference in name only.”Sexual harassment allegations keep piling upAlex Wong/Getty ImagesRep. John Conyers, D-Mich., is expected to decide this week if he will resign from Congress amid a sexual harassment settlement agreement and other harassment allegations.Heading into the weekend, another Democrat came under scrutiny. Nevada freshman Rep. Ruben Kihuen was accused by a 2016 campaign aide of making sexual advances that forced her to quit her job, as reported by BuzzFeed. House Democrats’ campaign chair, Rep. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have called on him to resign.Does Conyers resign? Party leaders’ reaction to Kihuen was a sharp contrast to how much slower they were to call on Rep. John Conyers to resign. And his future could be decided this week. (The Michigan Democrat settled with a woman who said she was fired for refusing his sexual advances, and there have been accusations of verbal abuse and unwanted physical contact.) The 88-year-old Conyers went into the hospital last week for stress as his original accuser went public. Conyers’ lawyer said he would decide his future in the next few days, while also saying that his client is facing a double-standard.What about Franken? Conyers’ lawyer asked why Pelosi and others have called on Conyers to resign, but not Minnesota Democrat Al Franken, a white Democrat. Franken is accused of groping by several women and forcibly kissing at least one. Franken has apologized, but says he doesn’t remember many of the alleged incidents. Conyers continues to deny all wrongdoing. House lawmakers will further examine questions about taxpayer-funded secret settlements this week.Trump goes to “Floribama” to campaign for MooreScott Olson/Getty ImagesRoy Moore, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Alabama, is getting a boost from President Trump, who unlike other Republicans, is backing his Senate bid despite sexual assault allegations.Republican leaders look wearily to Alabama, just over a week before voters will decide whether to send Roy Moore to the Senate, as he faces numerous allegations including sexual assault against teenage girls. President Trump is going to all but campaign for Moore on Friday, four days before the Dec. 12 special election. Trump’s holding a rally in Pensacola, Fla., and while it won’t officially be a rally for Moore, it’s in the Mobile, Ala., media market. Trump has given voice to Moore’s denials, while thrashing his opponent, Democrat Doug Jones.Could Trump lay the groundwork to undo protections for federal lands — and open them up to development?President Trump is expected to shrink the size of the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase national monuments Monday during a trip to Utah. Depending on what side of the Trump administration’s review of public lands national monuments you fall on, this is either the latest example of the U.S. government breaking a promise to Native American tribes, many of whom supported the 1.3 million Bears Ears National Monument, or it’s one about an overreaching federal government.Many conservative counties in rural Utah opposed both the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase national monument designations, because they restricted future development like mining on federal public land.The law is grey at best when it comes to whether the president has the authority to shrink or abolish a large, protected national monument. Under the Antiquities Act of 1906, only Congress can do that. But when the administration started its review, officials suggested the law needs to be tested. Sixteen presidents — from Obama to George W. Bush — have used the act to create public-lands monuments. Trump’s decision in Utah today could very well set a precedent for future presidents to undo protections for public lands and other wild areas.— Kirk Siegler, NPR national desk reporterHow’s this for a stocking stuffer?Pool/Getty ImagesPresident Trump and first lady Melania Trump at the annual national Christmas tree lighting ceremony Thursday.Congress needs to come up with funding by Friday to avoid a government shutdown. Expect another short term, likely two-week, continuing resolution that expires Dec. 22. That could mean quite the pre-Christmas week between government funding and taxes.The Washington Post reports that Trump has told allies that a shutdown could be good for him politically.Flashback: “Our country needs a good ‘shutdown’….”either elect more Republican Senators in 2018 or change the rules now to 51%. Our country needs a good “shutdown” in September to fix mess!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 2, 2017Copyright 2017 NPR. To see more, visit Sharelast_img read more

Flappy Bird Is Coming Back But It Will Be Less Addictive

first_img This hands-on workshop will give you the tools to authentically connect with an increasingly skeptical online audience. 1 min read Enroll Now for Free May 15, 2014 Free Workshop | August 28: Get Better Engagement and Build Trust With Customers Now This story originally appeared on CNBC Flappy Bird is making a comeback.The popular mobile app, which was pulled from app stores in February, will return in August, Flappy Bird creator Dong Nguyen told CNBC on Wednesday. The game will include multi-player capabilities and be less addictive, Nguyen said.At its peak, Nguyen said he was pulling in $50,000 a day from the mobile-gaming sensation that had more than 50 million downloads, but that ended when he decided to remove the app after noticing people were too addicted to playing it. While he still is making a profit from in-app ads, he said it’s “not much,” adding that he feels a lot of pressure from all the fame, fortune and success he has had.Nguyen told CNBC’s Kelly Evans that he would rather people spend their time doing more productive things rather than attempt to guide a cartoon bird through pipes to rack up a high score. Still, Nguyen said he doesn’t regret creating the game.The app developer said he has more apps in the works, including a game that has “a guy jumping from building to building.”last_img read more