Gameday Thread: Baylor Returns to Waco to Face Kansas State

I'd love to see 2nd teamers play the majority of the 4th quarter of a game because we're up so much.

I'm not holding my breath.

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

Kansas State is 13 points away from being the first 6-0 team in the country. They are 2-4.

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) October 4, 2025

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

---

My question is what is the objective of the game?

This isn't figure skating where you get a technical and artistic score. A well played loss, is a loss. A sloppy win is a win. One week to the next has zero correlation. So, I don't see the value of most of the "style point" discussions for college football. Either you figure a way to win or you don't.

But, I also don't believe in luck. Luck is someone stepping up and making a play on one side or the other. Sometimes it only takes one more play on one side or the other like on Saturday. Baylor stepped up and won. Period.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

---

My question is what is the objective of the game?

This isn't figure skating where you get a technical and artistic score. A well played loss, is a loss. A sloppy win is a win. One week to the next has zero correlation. So, I don't see the value of most of the "style point" discussions for college football. Either you figure a way to win or you don't.

But, I also don't believe in luck. Luck is someone stepping up and making a play on one side or the other. Sometimes it only takes one more play on one side or the other like on Saturday. Baylor stepped up and won. Period.

---

Luck is your opponent mismanaging the game clock late in the 4th.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

---

My question is what is the objective of the game?

This isn't figure skating where you get a technical and artistic score. A well played loss, is a loss. A sloppy win is a win. One week to the next has zero correlation. So, I don't see the value of most of the "style point" discussions for college football. Either you figure a way to win or you don't.

But, I also don't believe in luck. Luck is someone stepping up and making a play on one side or the other. Sometimes it only takes one more play on one side or the other like on Saturday. Baylor stepped up and won. Period.

---

Luck is your opponent mismanaging the game clock late in the 4th.

---

Yeah, the other side of the ball had nothing to do with that, right? You cannot breakdown situations into little compartments after the fact. Nothing happens in a vacuum, the venue, opposing team D or O, the other coaches, injuries, etc all play into it.

Sorry, don't buy into the cherrypicking of what went right or wrong. More of a holistic approach, did we accomplish the misssion? We won, we accomplished the mission.

boognish_bear said:

---

Kansas State is 13 points away from being the first 6-0 team in the country. They are 2-4.

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) October 4, 2025

---

Which indicates they are a better team than their record suggests.

historian said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Kansas State is 13 points away from being the first 6-0 team in the country. They are 2-4.

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) October 4, 2025

---

Which indicates they are a better team than their record suggests.

---

Not unlike Baylor in 1978, that started 0-5 losing to UGA by 2, Kentucky by 4, OhioSt by 6, SWC Champ UH by 2, and SMU by 7 (21 points total), but ended up being the first BU team to beat both UT and A&M in the same season, both by blowouts.

We had the honor of having Mike Singletary and Jim Grobe in the @BULetterwinners Lounge on Saturday. Two great men! pic.twitter.com/kgSqkBGcVb

— David Wetzel (@coachdwetzel) October 6, 2025

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

---

My question is what is the objective of the game?

This isn't figure skating where you get a technical and artistic score. A well played loss, is a loss. A sloppy win is a win. One week to the next has zero correlation. So, I don't see the value of most of the "style point" discussions for college football. Either you figure a way to win or you don't.

But, I also don't believe in luck. Luck is someone stepping up and making a play on one side or the other. Sometimes it only takes one more play on one side or the other like on Saturday. Baylor stepped up and won. Period.

---

Luck is your opponent mismanaging the game clock late in the 4th.

---

That certainly helps, but you still have to go and make a play. On the pick-six, it's easy to say they shouldn't have been passing, and I'd agree. But on that play, we had our best blitz of the game and forced Johnson into a bad decision. He literally had two choices on that play -- get sacked for a huge loss or try to force the ball somewhere. He chose No. 2 and the rest is history thanks to a really nice play by Redding.

FLBear5630 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

---

My question is what is the objective of the game?

This isn't figure skating where you get a technical and artistic score. A well played loss, is a loss. A sloppy win is a win. One week to the next has zero correlation. So, I don't see the value of most of the "style point" discussions for college football. Either you figure a way to win or you don't.

But, I also don't believe in luck. Luck is someone stepping up and making a play on one side or the other. Sometimes it only takes one more play on one side or the other like on Saturday. Baylor stepped up and won. Period.

---

Luck is your opponent mismanaging the game clock late in the 4th.

---

Yeah, the other side of the ball had nothing to do with that, right? You cannot breakdown situations into little compartments after the fact. Nothing happens in a vacuum, the venue, opposing team D or O, the other coaches, injuries, etc all play into it.

Sorry, don't buy into the cherrypicking of what went right or wrong. More of a holistic approach, did we accomplish the misssion? We won, we accomplished the mission.

---

I think it's fair to critique specific aspects of the team and lament weaknesses that put you in a bind game after game after game. But I'm never going to qualify or apologize for a win.

Winning's not easy. An no one lucks into it. You have to make more plays than your opponent to do it. When we win, I'm going to celebrate it and hope that we're able to play cleaner and better the next time out.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

I think you're right. But I don't think complaining is necessarily all bad. Some fans, me included, care about the manner in which the team went out and won or lost. There have been games we lost where I was nonetheless pleased because it appeared we played at our full potential. Sometimes I'm more pissed in the games we win. I do care about the manner in which we compete because I also have biases, which is not necessarily fair I guess. I just hate, absolutely detest defenses that are too weak to stop anybody MORE than I love offenses that are high octane and mostly unstoppable. Not saying this bias is worth a hill of beans. but it's there.

PartyBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Nice way to massage the numbers. This athletic department is funny.

Now go to the part that this is the worst stretch of big 12 opponents in the history of the program and it feels different. The schedule has been absolutely terrible.

But tbf, if they beat Tcu on the road that would start to change things

---

It's the schedule we've played. And it's been comparable to most of our peers, who have not been as successful over that same stretch.

Either way, winning eight of your last nine conference games and 10 of your last 13 games overall is a good thing.

The doom and gloom here doesn't match the results. And it's weird.

I understand it to a degree because we're really frustrating to watch and fans can almost never go into a game feeling confident that we will win. But the results are what they are. And at the end of the day, you play to win the game.

I agree that the TCU game is a big one. But even if we win that one, most fans will just be waiting for the next loss to jump off the wagon again.

That's why I started the thread I did a week or two ago about program expectations. At some point, we need to agree on a set of expectations and standards and stop complaining if/when those are met.

---

Those folks will complain if we beat TCU just like with every other win.

---

---

My question is what is the objective of the game?

This isn't figure skating where you get a technical and artistic score. A well played loss, is a loss. A sloppy win is a win. One week to the next has zero correlation. So, I don't see the value of most of the "style point" discussions for college football. Either you figure a way to win or you don't.

But, I also don't believe in luck. Luck is someone stepping up and making a play on one side or the other. Sometimes it only takes one more play on one side or the other like on Saturday. Baylor stepped up and won. Period.

---

I agree that winning is the objective. But for me, the manner in which a team does it does matter as it reflects areaas of opportunity and whether we are progressing or digressing. For example, beating an FCS team 14-10 is a win, yet it would set off alarm bells.

You seem to be cut and dry ( a win is a win). I'm not.

whitetrash said:

---

historian said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Kansas State is 13 points away from being the first 6-0 team in the country. They are 2-4.

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) October 4, 2025

---

Which indicates they are a better team than their record suggests.

---

Not unlike Baylor in 1978, that started 0-5 losing to UGA by 2, Kentucky by 4, OhioSt by 6, SWC Champ UH by 2, and SMU by 7 (21 points total), but ended up being the first BU team to beat both UT and A&M in the same season, both by blowouts.

---

In other words, slow starters. Sound familiar?

canoso said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

historian said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Kansas State is 13 points away from being the first 6-0 team in the country. They are 2-4.

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) October 4, 2025

---

Which indicates they are a better team than their record suggests.

---

Not unlike Baylor in 1978, that started 0-5 losing to UGA by 2, Kentucky by 4, OhioSt by 6, SWC Champ UH by 2, and SMU by 7 (21 points total), but ended up being the first BU team to beat both UT and A&M in the same season, both by blowouts.

---

In other words, slow starters. Sound familiar?

---

There was so much more parity in 1978. Yes 1 team totally dominated each conference annually but the rest of us were similar in teams across all conferences

Be the difference in Sawyer’s last 3 home games.#SicEm pic.twitter.com/MoEbQg1X47

— Baylor Athletics (@BaylorAthletics) October 6, 2025

i love having a single player that the whole fanbase really can't say anything negative about….its been awhile

Bearsalwayswin said:

---

i love having a single player that the whole fanbase really can't say anything negative about….its been awhile

---

I think it was about a week ago some poster said we don't appreciate Sawyer enough. I agree. He is a bad ass on the field... and seems like a great person with great priorities off the field. Lucky to have him.

The more college games I watch each weekend the more I appreciate what we have in Sawyer.

boognish_bear said:

---

Be the difference in Sawyer’s last 3 home games.#SicEm pic.twitter.com/MoEbQg1X47

— Baylor Athletics (@BaylorAthletics) October 6, 2025

---

I still would love to hear from the folks at ESPN exactly why a game on ESPN-plus needs to be scheduled at 11am or any particular time. Just let the teams pick the time.

NFL draft analyst for The Athletic

#Baylor TE Michael Trigg (6033v, 250v) is one of the most talented pass-catchers in this class. Big-time body control and ball skills (can see his basketball background).

These plays happened back-to-back on Saturday (the one-handed grab!👀) pic.twitter.com/bxFn4uj40V

— Dane Brugler (@dpbrugler) October 6, 2025

End of the week awards for week 6 🏆 pic.twitter.com/msfE21zUID

— Barstool Big 12 (@BarstoolBig12) October 6, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

End of the week awards for week 6 🏆 pic.twitter.com/msfE21zUID

— Barstool Big 12 (@BarstoolBig12) October 6, 2025

---

The obvious solution is to raise ticket prices....

canoso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

End of the week awards for week 6 🏆 pic.twitter.com/msfE21zUID

— Barstool Big 12 (@BarstoolBig12) October 6, 2025

---

The obvious solution is to raise ticket prices....

---

Night games and alcohol on campus. Problem solved.

Michael Trigg is the best TE in the Country. NFL Scouts are RAVING about him to me every week. pic.twitter.com/cZJsmiaiIS

— Robert Griffin III (@RGIII) October 6, 2025

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

---

Good points, it looks to me that 11 was spying the QB. Which could have left one man uncovered. Blitz of the LB to that side AND a spy on QB leaves you with a numbers issue.

I thought it was a pretty well designed formation and play, the Blitz was a good call for that situation. And he did a good job getting there.

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

---

Good points, it looks to me that 11 was spying the QB. Which could have left one man uncovered. Blitz of the LB to that side AND a spy on QB leaves you with a numbers issue.

I thought it was a pretty well designed formation and play, the Blitz was a good call for that situation. And he did a good job getting there.

---

Inside of the 10 yard line, the field is so compressed that the time the QB has to make a read is cut in half. Sending a blitz and having a spy is the right call there against a guy like Avery. He is unlikely to get through any reads and will likely pull it down and run. kSU can complain all they want, but their QB is very unlikely to pick up that TE crossing the field and much more likely to pull it down and run 99% of the time. This was the right call IMO

BUATX2000 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

---

Good points, it looks to me that 11 was spying the QB. Which could have left one man uncovered. Blitz of the LB to that side AND a spy on QB leaves you with a numbers issue.

I thought it was a pretty well designed formation and play, the Blitz was a good call for that situation. And he did a good job getting there.

---

Inside of the 10 yard line, the field is so compressed that the time the QB has to make a read is cut in half. Sending a blitz and having a spy is the right call there against a guy like Avery. He is unlikely to get through any reads and will likely pull it down and run. kSU can complain all they want, but their QB is very unlikely to pick up that TE crossing the field and much more likely to pull it down and run 99% of the time. This was the right call IMO

---

I think it was a good and right call. That TE pass they are complaining about being open was non-issue as it took forever to develop and the D was designed so he didn't have time. I think the K-State Coach is full of ***** There was no way he was making that throw in that situation.

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

---

Good points, it looks to me that 11 was spying the QB. Which could have left one man uncovered. Blitz of the LB to that side AND a spy on QB leaves you with a numbers issue.

I thought it was a pretty well designed formation and play, the Blitz was a good call for that situation. And he did a good job getting there.

---

The corner to the boundary side (Thornton) is the one who looks lost to me. The field-side corner appears to be playing straight press man on the wideout, Bobby picks up the running back in the flat and Redding (I think) checks the fullback.

Given that the Thornton, who starts in almost a single high safety look, appears confused from the get-go as to what his responsibility even is on the play, I'm going to guess that he was supposed to stick with the tight end to keep him from getting a completely free release.

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

---

Good points, it looks to me that 11 was spying the QB. Which could have left one man uncovered. Blitz of the LB to that side AND a spy on QB leaves you with a numbers issue.

I thought it was a pretty well designed formation and play, the Blitz was a good call for that situation. And he did a good job getting there.

---

The corner to the boundary side (Thornton) is the one who looks lost to me. The field-side corner appears to be playing straight press man on the wideout, Bobby picks up the running back in the flat and Redding (I think) checks the fullback.

Given that the Thornton, who starts in almost a single high safety look, appears confused from the get-go as to what his responsibility even is on the play, I'm going to guess that he was supposed to stick with the tight end to keep him from getting a completely free release.

---

Would love to get someone that knew the play call and assignments. He looked like he was spying the QB, to the point of staying that the same depth as the QB. When the QB went back, he went back. When he went right, he came forward and went left. Classic spy technique.

Would love to hear from someone that actually knows the Staffs comments on this play.

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Chris Klieman made it sound like this is the one play he really wishes Kansas State could do over against Baylor.

“We had a touchdown. They cut (Garrett) Oakley loose and we missed a blitz. We had somebody ID the blitz and we missed it. If we block that we have a touchdown.” pic.twitter.com/WI2qQiNz7k

— Kellis Robinett (@KellisRobinett) October 6, 2025

---

The tight end was unguarded. It's a good thing we put some rare pressure on Johnson or that's an easy TD.

---

Couple of things there.

First, that is the nature of the blitz. Blitz has to get there before QB can find the open man. There will be an open man if you blitz. What was the old Phil Bennett quote on Blitzing? "When you Blitz all you know is someone's band is going to get to play..." Baylor got home on this play before the QB could execute.

Second, you can do this on every game. A block here or a cut there. Hell, you why not just say if our WR was just 2/100ths of a second faster? "If" is what losers say. Finish. That is the nature of football, he who Finishes the play, wins.

Third, execute and shut up. (Not you, the K-State coach).

---

They only had three players out on routes on that play, and we weren't rushing nine guys. Someone busted assignment, which happens way too often with our defense. If you watch, we have two guys go with the only wideout as he crosses the formation and no one takes the tight end, who had been killing us all game.

It was a really good, effective blitz, so no harm, no foul. But if it hadn't gotten home, that would have been an easy six.

We need our backend guys to have a better idea of what their assignments are and to do a better job of executing those assignments. That's been an issue all year. Hell, it's been an issue for several years now.

---

I don't think I agree with you after watching the replay several times.

The mesh cleared the zone for the TE, but he was not the target. The CB on the Right looked like he had deep outside third and the left side CB took away the slant. The TE cleared crossing close to the WR, looked very Leach-ish in design. However, the QB was looking to the other side of the field opposite the blitz. Look at the CB, he was reading the QB before he bailed deep.

I think that was the design. K-State had a nice play design, but the TE was not #1 or even #2. Looked like the slant was #1, which was taken away. The #2 was deep outside third, that QB did not look back to the TE at all. If the TE was the target, the QB would not turn his shoulders like he did. Bet next week he does...

No issues, just a different read. I think it was a a high risk/high reward call. I like the blitz. This is the type of conversation I love, would much rather do this than ***** about Dave...

---

I think two things can be true.

1. The running back and wide receiver are the first and second reads on that play, and Avery Johnson, as a pretty unpolished passer, is likely never making it to his third read -- even with a clean pocket.

And 2. It was not our defensive design to leave one of the three players out for routes on that play completely unguarded.

Those are the types of attention to detail things that cost you over time, and we've seen it cost our defense time and time again.

---

Good points, it looks to me that 11 was spying the QB. Which could have left one man uncovered. Blitz of the LB to that side AND a spy on QB leaves you with a numbers issue.

I thought it was a pretty well designed formation and play, the Blitz was a good call for that situation. And he did a good job getting there.

---

The corner to the boundary side (Thornton) is the one who looks lost to me. The field-side corner appears to be playing straight press man on the wideout, Bobby picks up the running back in the flat and Redding (I think) checks the fullback.

Given that the Thornton, who starts in almost a single high safety look, appears confused from the get-go as to what his responsibility even is on the play, I'm going to guess that he was supposed to stick with the tight end to keep him from getting a completely free release.

---

Would love to get someone that knew the play call and assignments. He looked like he was spying the QB, to the point of staying that the same depth as the QB. When the QB went back, he went back. When he went right, he came forward and went left. Classic spy technique.

Would love to hear from someone that actually knows the Staffs comments on this play.

---

Thomas is spying Johnson from the MLB spot.

As best I can tell, we rushed six, spied one and had four guys with coverage responsibilities. It was well-designed schematically. Someone just got lost. Fortunately, it didn't matter because the blitz worked and the guys picked up the first two reads.

But we have too many plays where 10 guys do the right things and one is doing his own thing. And it frequently does cost us.