Johns Hopkins 2020

[51percentcorn]

Let’s see ...

19 Seasons

18 NCAA tournament bids

7 Final Fours

4 National Championship Games

2 National Championships

0 Major Off-Field Scandals

So Doc trots these out very so often to combat a notion that the program is off. Of Course, with the sole exception of the tournament appearances - virtually every stat was compiled in the first eight years (2001-2008) vs the last 11 years - let's review 2009-2019 from memory
2009 - quarterfinal appearance - to date worst playoff loss in program history to UVA
2010 - NCAA first round - a new worst playoff loss in program history to Duke
2011- program rebounds a bit in regular season - quarterfinal appearance - completely outclassed by Denver
2012 - Program ends Klockner curse - becomes #1 in the polls - promptly smacked down by UNC very next week - dope slapped twice by Maryland - 6 goal loss to Terps in NCAA quarterfinals
2013 - missed tournament and while not a "scandal" per se - rolling suspensions of every sophomore, junior and senior on the team qualifies as "something" and if Daniels had cancelled the season like he initially thought to - then you would have had a "scandal" big time
2014 - great win at Klockner in first round of NCAA's - 8 goal loss to Duke in quarters except for '09 and '10 would have been worst loss in play-off history
2015 - the one shining moment - often forgotten is the fact that joining the BIG is the only reason Hopkins made the NCAAs AND what is not commonly known is that the 2016 issue with Tinney started in 2015 and I have been told that if Bernlohr had allowed Tinney's goal with 30 seconds left and Hopkins had won in OT then Hopkins would have played Denver without double nickels - scandalous?
2016 - no Tinney as we know for off the field stuff - injuries galore - embarrassing first round loss to Brown - tied for worst ever?
2017 - embarrassing first round loss to Duke at home - worst ever?
2018 - quarters appearance - made Duke sit up and take notice in the third quarter - still lost by 5
2019 - Trailed 10-2 at halftime to a team that did not average 10 goals per game for the year in NCAA first round - gave up 16 - lost by 7

So first 8 years
2 quarterfinal appearances
6 Final Fours
4 Title Games
2 Ships

Last 11 years
1 Final Four
5 quarterfinals
4 NCAA First rounds
1 Missed Tournament

With the exception of 2015 - the closest losses in the tournament was 5 goals to Duke and maybe Denver?
2009/2010/2014/2016/2017 - would all qualify as the worst playoff loss in Hopkins history if taken individually - total goal differential in those 5 games EXCEEDS 40

There's a big difference - Grand Canyon sized difference. If you are comparing Hopkins to all other 60/70 odd DI programs than yes there are approximately 50-60 schools that would love to make the tournament 11 times out of 12. But that is not supposed to be what Hopkins strives for. We are the school playing Division I lacrosse because of its historical significance to the school and we DO have 9 NCAA titles and 44 total in the other forms. The question to me is what has changed since approx. 2009 and is there anything Hopkins can do about it. IMO - Petro has NOT really changed - he has tried to soften his most aggressive tendencies IMO but he is essentially the same guy. There are 3 things I can identify that might matter:
- Seth Tierney is not the OC - I don't put alot of stock in this one personally
- The ascension of other major Division I schools - big reason - can't control that one - only hope to devise strategies to combat it best you can
- Early Recruiting - Huge issue IMO - absolutely incontrovertible fact that deterioration in overall and especially tournament performance coincided a great deal in timing with Hopkins filling up its entire classes with the youngest possible players - the NCAA helped Hopkins here

[a fan]

The question to me is what has changed since approx. 2009 and is there anything Hopkins can do about it.

Your tuition went up by $14K in that time span.

That increase is $4K more than UMaryland's total in State tuition.

Meanwhile, how many full scholarships have been added to Division I lacrosse schools, in total?

[HopFan16]

The question to me is what has changed since approx. 2009 and is there anything Hopkins can do about it.

Your tuition went up by $14K in that time span.

That increase is $4K more than UMaryland's total in State tuition.

Meanwhile, how many full scholarships have been added to Division I lacrosse schools, in total?

This isn't unique to Hopkins (it also doesn't account for inflation). Lots of other competitors have seen the same or even bigger increases in tuition. Duke is one. They've done pretty well for themselves in the last 10 years despite that.

Not really sure what the point is re: in-state tuition. If that's the most important factor for a recruit and their family then you're never going to be able to compete with that no matter what your private tuition is. That hasn't changed from the pre-2009 days.

[Matnum PI]

ONE

19 Seasons
18 NCAA tournament bids - Most recent 2019.
7 Final Fours - Most recent 2015. Before that 2008.
4 National Championship Games - Most Recent 2008. Before that 2003.
2 National Championships - Most Recent 2007. Before that 2003.

Before 2008, it was jaw dropping to see JHU go two consecutive seasons without playing in the Final Four. (In their history, it happened twice: '90-'91 and '97-'98.) Now it is the norm. Why?

Look at Syracuse's numbers and, not coincidentally, you'll see very similar numbers. UVA, same thing. From 1978 until 2009, 5 teams, SU, JHU, UVA, Princeton, and UNC won every National Championship. From 1992 until 2009, 4 teams, SU, JHU, UVA, and Princeton won every National Championship. Then, in 2009, Tierney left Princeton to go to Denver. With Tierney, a flock of "west" high school players, some Canadians, a bunch of "east" hs players who smelled something interesting going on, and the beauty of Colorado, Denver became an all-but-instant contender. In 2010, as a strangely under-performing ACC school, Duke got serious and won their first National Championship. In 2012, Loyola won a National Championship. And once Loyola won a national championship, the flood gates opened. From 2010-2019, Duke won 3, UVA won 2, UNC won 1, Loyola won 1, Denver won 1, Maryland won 1, Yale won 1. In the past decade, the lacrosse landscape has changed dramatically. The days of JHU, SU, UVA, and Princeton could not be smaller in lacrosse's rearview mirror. Bottomline, discussing pre-2010 JHU is fun, nostalgic, and... irrelevant.

TWO

The critical path to National Championships are (1) Recruits and (2) Performance of these recruits. And, in the end, the head coach is explicitly responsible for both.

I know numerous people who run highly profitable businesses. In some cases, they stumbled upon a product or service with high demand. In other cases, it's a family business that was simply handed to them. And, in both cases, the business owners appear to be highly competent business people. When, very often, the business could be making $10 million annually and, instead, it's making $5 million. But to an outside observer, we just see the $5 million and say, Wow. What a talented guy.

Similarly, some times a business owner runs a business seemingly competently. Until the business is tested. It's when issues arise in a supply chain or with competitors or customers or etc. that the competency of the business owner is truly tested. For decades, for a handful of teams, lacrosse life was relatively easy. But, since 2010, things have changed dramatically. Petro was and is being tested. Desko was and is being tested. And, based on their team's performances, they've struggled.

THREE

Since 2010, Petro has gone to the Final Four once and Desko has gone once. Alternatively, Maryland's John Tillman has gone to 7 of the last 9 Final Fours. This is super-impressive. Maryland's John Tillman is a great coach. Maryland was in a better position than UVA when Tiffany took over so he hasn't had the same immediate success as Tillman but, in his third season, in 2019, Tiffany won the National Championship. Apparently, Lars Tiffany is a great coach. Charley Toomey built Loyola lacrosse and is a great coach. Mike Pressler built Duke lacrosse. John Danowski took over where Pressler left off and has created a powerhouse. Bill Tierney built Princeton lacrosse and then built Denver Lacrosse. Kevin Corrigan built Notre Dame Lacrosse. These are great coaches because they have demonstrated that they are capable of creating and growing the value of a program.

FINAL

JHU and SU are two obviously great programs. Based on the JHU and SU lacrosse brands alone, these two programs are going to garner top recruits. i.e. So much of JHU's and SU's success has little to nothing to do with the person coaching the team. None the less, in the past decade, JHU and SU have seemingly, to be kind, underperformed. Petro and Desko are obviously two highly competent coaches. But, in the past decade, their results have been less-than-optimal. And programs like JHU and SU deserve better. Petro, as arguably the best player to ever play at JHU, is a pleasant reminder of JHU's golden age. And Desko, due to his connection to Coach Simmons, is a pleasant reminder of SU's golden age. And nostalgia is wonderful. But for lacrosse fans, especially high school blue chip players who are evaluating which college to attend, there are numerous other factors more important than nostalgia. Like Maryland and UVA before them, JHU and SU need better head coaches.

[Sagittarius A*]

I think that the coaches you mentioned would all do better but I think we’d have about zero chance of getting them to Homewood. We might have an outside chance of getting Tillman. We might be able to get Marr from Albany. We’d probably have a decent chance of getting Nadelen away from Towson. Or Hop could roll the dice on an assistant somewhere. It’s worth taking some chances at this point. I’m not very optimistic about a FF in 2020.

[Matnum PI]

It doesn't need to be one of these coaches. As for Marr, when he has Thompson or Fields, Albany is great. Otherwise, not so great. The point is that the current coaches, who have been underperforming for a decade for two programs with fanbases that have substantially higher expectations than what's being delivered are strangely still the coaches. It's strange...

PS It's just one player, but when Connor Shellenberger decommitted from JHU and committed to UVA, this should've inspired Hopkins to do some serious soul searching.

[HopFan16]

PS It's just one player, but when Connor Shellenberger decommitted from JHU and committed to UVA, this should've inspired Hopkins to do some serious soul searching.

Completely disagree with this. Maybe they should do some soul-searching, but it has nothing to do with one recruit. He grew up in Charlottesville a stone's throw from Klockner. It was a miracle he ever committed to Hopkins in the first place. That JHU was apparently his second choice after Virginia actually says more good about Hopkins recruiting than it does bad. Petro immediately followed that up by poaching Brendan Grimes—arguably a top 3 player in the 2020 class—from Ohio State. Not to mention Shellenberger was only one year after Epstein, the #1 commit in his class. So he was bookended by two top top top-tier recruits. Petro nearly nabs the top player three years in a row and THAT's what should lead to soul-searching?

I think that the coaches you mentioned would all do better but I think we’d have about zero chance of getting them to Homewood. We might have an outside chance of getting Tillman. We might be able to get Marr from Albany. We’d probably have a decent chance of getting Nadelen away from Towson. Or Hop could roll the dice on an assistant somewhere. It’s worth taking some chances at this point. I’m not very optimistic about a FF in 2020.

Not going to get into the specifics of whom they should hire until there is actually a real decision to make but I will offer this: Notre Dame can keep Corrigan.

[DocBarrister]

ONE

19 Seasons
18 NCAA tournament bids - Most recent 2019.
7 Final Fours - Most recent 2015. Before that 2008.
4 National Championship Games - Most Recent 2008. Before that 2003.
2 National Championships - Most Recent 2007. Before that 2003.

Before 2008, it was jaw dropping to see JHU go two consecutive seasons without playing in the Final Four. (In their history, it happened twice: '90-'91 and '97-'98.) Now it is the norm. Why?

Look at Syracuse's numbers and, not coincidentally, you'll see very similar numbers. UVA, same thing. From 1978 until 2009, 5 teams, SU, JHU, UVA, Princeton, and UNC won every National Championship. From 1992 until 2009, 4 teams, SU, JHU, UVA, and Princeton won every National Championship. Then, in 2009, Tierney left Princeton to go to Denver. With Tierney, a flock of "west" high school players, some Canadians, a bunch of "east" hs players who smelled something interesting going on, and the beauty of Colorado, Denver became an all-but-instant contender. In 2010, as a strangely under-performing ACC school, Duke got serious and won their first National Championship. In 2012, Loyola won a National Championship. And once Loyola won a national championship, the flood gates opened. From 2010-2019, Duke won 3, UVA won 2, UNC won 1, Loyola won 1, Denver won 1, Maryland won 1, Yale won 1. In the past decade, the lacrosse landscape has changed dramatically. The days of JHU, SU, UVA, and Princeton could not be smaller in lacrosse's rearview mirror. Bottomline, discussing pre-2010 JHU is fun, nostalgic, and... irrelevant.

TWO

The critical path to National Championships are (1) Recruits and (2) Performance of these recruits. And, in the end, the head coach is explicitly responsible for both.

I know numerous people who run highly profitable businesses. In some cases, they stumbled upon a product or service with high demand. In other cases, it's a family business that was simply handed to them. And, in both cases, the business owners appear to be highly competent business people. When, very often, the business could be making $10 million annually and, instead, it's making $5 million. But to an outside observer, we just see the $5 million and say, Wow. What a talented guy.

Similarly, some times a business owner runs a business seemingly competently. Until the business is tested. It's when issues arise in a supply chain or with competitors or customers or etc. that the competency of the business owner is truly tested. For decades, for a handful of teams, lacrosse life was relatively easy. But, since 2010, things have changed dramatically. Petro was and is being tested. Desko was and is being tested. And, based on their team's performances, they've struggled.

THREE

Since 2010, Petro has gone to the Final Four once and Desko has gone once. Alternatively, Maryland's John Tillman has gone to 7 of the last 9 Final Fours. This is super-impressive. Maryland's John Tillman is a great coach. Maryland was in a better position than UVA when Tiffany took over so he hasn't had the same immediate success as Tillman but, in his third season, in 2019, Tiffany won the National Championship. Apparently, Lars Tiffany is a great coach. Charley Toomey built Loyola lacrosse and is a great coach. Mike Pressler built Duke lacrosse. John Danowski took over where Pressler left off and has created a powerhouse. Bill Tierney built Princeton lacrosse and then built Denver Lacrosse. Kevin Corrigan built Notre Dame Lacrosse. These are great coaches because they have demonstrated that they are capable of creating and growing the value of a program.

FINAL

JHU and SU are two obviously great programs. Based on the JHU and SU lacrosse brands alone, these two programs are going to garner top recruits. i.e. So much of JHU's and SU's success has little to nothing to do with the person coaching the team. None the less, in the past decade, JHU and SU have seemingly, to be kind, underperformed. Petro and Desko are obviously two highly competent coaches. But, in the past decade, their results have been less-than-optimal. And programs like JHU and SU deserve better. Petro, as arguably the best player to ever play at JHU, is a pleasant reminder of JHU's golden age. And Desko, due to his connection to Coach Simmons, is a pleasant reminder of SU's golden age. And nostalgia is wonderful. But for lacrosse fans, especially high school blue chip players who are evaluating which college to attend, there are numerous other factors more important than nostalgia. Like Maryland and UVA before them, JHU and SU need better head coaches.

In the past ten years, only John Danowski has won more than one national championship, and one of those was won with a fifth class.

Neither Petro nor Desko are the “hot new coaches” of college lacrosse. Those days are long over. Both achieved amazing success when they were the new coaches on the block. Still, they both get more than their share of talented recruits.

For Petro, I think time has passed by his outdated defensive scheme. If he is willing to modernize his defense, then I think Hopkins can compete and win national championships again.

DocBarrister

[DocBarrister]

I don't think Tierney, Corrigan, Toomey, Danowski, etc. are good fits either. the point is that they built programs. The value that they created for their programs is clear and undisputed. Taking over a thriving business in a thriving market and watching it continue to make money doesn't necessarily speak to the greatness of a business owner. It speaks to the greatness of a situation. With this in mind, post-2010, what has Petro or Desko done to demonstrate their creating value? Keep in mind, we're heading into 2020. They've had 10 years since 2010. I get it. He's Petro. But when does nostalgia take a back seat to reality?

In terms of finding new coaches, they don't need someone to, so to speak, build a program. They need someone who understands the 2010 landscape, how to coach in 2010. Now, 2020. I believe that the right coach looks much more like Tillman and Tiffany (and how they relate to their players, relate to the game) and they do not look so much like Petro and Desko. JHU and SU are suffering. Yes, JHU will pick-up top players. As will SU. The JHU and SU brands are excellent. But it's not enough. They're getting some great players but they're not winning the recruiting game let alone the actual lacrosse games.

Petro revived the Cornell program in the late 1990s. He brought national championships back to Hopkins. Neither Hopkins nor Syracuse will ever be “glamour” or “fun” schools like Duke, Virginia, Penn State, or Notre Dame. SU and Hopkins are both great lacrosse schools, but lacrosse players have lots of options these days.

Hopkins has truly underperformed in one main area in the past decade: defense. Coach Brian Kelly at Notre Dame was basically forced several years ago to stop calling plays on offense and hire a top notch offensive coordinator to truly take over the offense (that guy just got fired recently, but that’s another story). I have been saying this a long time ... I think Petro would really benefit from hiring a true defensive coordinator who can modernize his defense and manage the defense for him.

DocBarrister

[HopFan16]

Worth remembering that Desko is significantly older than Petro.

Petro belongs more to the Toomey-Tillman-Tiffany group—who all played in the late 80s—than he does the Tierney, Danowski, Desko, Corrigan crew. Danowski was a head coach at Post before Petro or anyone else from that group was even in college. He's still coaching/recruiting pretty well. He got his Blue Devils to a Final Four last season in his 13th year leading the program at the ripe age of 65.

Would also nitpick with the implication that Hopkins and Syracuse have fared exactly the same on the recruiting trail. That's not really been the case.

I think Petro very much understands the modern landscape. I'm not sure people realize how good of a recruiter he is. The fact that he's now quite active on Twitter suggests he's adapting to how kids communicate these days. He has two kids who are now in high school and on the recruiting circuit themselves. This doesn't seem like the issue to me. Xanders just said it a few days ago—the kids still love the guy.

None of that should prevent a change from being made when the time comes. I just don't buy that any of this has much to do with routinely getting blown out in the first round of the playoffs in recent years.

As much as this will pain a lot of you to hear, I think Doc—while perhaps not entirely correct—is at least closer to getting at the heart of the issue. The big guy might want to take a quick drive downtown and talk to John Harbaugh about how he's turned his Ravens team into a juggernaut. (Short answer: He gave up any semblance of ego, deferred to what the analytics were saying, and hired an excellent offensive coordinator who tailored the system specifically to fit his existing personnel, aka Lamar Jackson. There's probably a lacrosse analogue in there somewhere.)

[Matnum PI]

I don't think Tierney, Corrigan, Toomey, Danowski, etc. are good fits either. the point is that they built programs. The value that they created for their programs is clear and undisputed. Taking over a thriving business in a thriving market and watching it continue to make money doesn't necessarily speak to the greatness of a business owner. It speaks to the greatness of a situation. With this in mind, post-2010, what has Petro or Desko done to demonstrate their creating value? Keep in mind, we're heading into 2020. They've had 10 years since 2010. I get it. He's Petro. But when does nostalgia take a back seat to reality?

In terms of finding new coaches, they don't need someone to, so to speak, build a program. They need someone who understands the 2010 landscape, how to coach in 2010. Now, 2020. I believe that the right coach looks much more like Tillman and Tiffany (and how they relate to their players, relate to the game) and they do not look so much like Petro and Desko. JHU and SU are suffering. Yes, JHU will pick-up top players. As will SU. The JHU and SU brands are excellent. But it's not enough. They're getting some great players but they're not winning the recruiting game let alone the actual lacrosse games.

[Matnum PI]

In the past ten years, only John Danowski has won more than one national championship, and one of those was won with a fifth class.

And that's part of the new landscape. The days of P'ton, SU, SU, P'ton, SU, SU, JHU, P'ton, SU, etc. are gone.

For Petro, I think time has passed by his outdated defensive scheme. If he is willing to modernize his defense, then I think Hopkins can compete and win national championships again.

While true, I think it's more than this. I think being a coach has a lot of similarities to being a father. (And i don't think it's a coincidence that Breschi and Tiffany had "father stuff" going on when they won their National Championships.) And what it means to be a good father in 2020 is very different from what it meant to be a good father in 1990. Realities have changes, expectations have changed. And, metaphorically, I think Petro is an old school dad. Over the years, I think he's become more approachable, more vulnerable (e.g. Breschi, Tiffany), more human. But I think, at his core, he's an old school dad. And, with obvious exceptions, you always love your dad. But, objectively, not all dads are created equal. Some do a better job of helping their child reach their full potential and play nicely with their siblings while some aren't as good at this. I'm old. I love Petro and Desko. But I'm also a realist. In 1999, I might not say this. But in 2020, I feel relatively comfortable saying that there are qualitatively better coaches than Petro and Desko.

[MDlaxfan76]

Not going to get into the specifics of whom they should hire until there is actually a real decision to make but I will offer this: Notre Dame can keep Corrigan.

[Matnum PI]

Petro belongs more to the Toomey-Tillman-Tiffany group—who all played in the late 80s—than he does the Tierney, Danowski, Desko, Corrigan crew. Danowski was a head coach at Post before Petro or anyone else from that group was even in college.

This is true, in terms of age. But only in age. He's very different than Tiffany and Tillman in how he relates to the kids.

Would also nitpick with the implication that Hopkins and Syracuse have fared exactly the same on the recruiting trail. That's not really been the case.

I think Petro very much understands the modern landscape. I'm not sure people realize how good of a recruiter he is. The fact that he's now quite active on Twitter suggests he's adapting to how kids communicate these days. He has two kids who are now in high school and on the recruiting circuit themselves. This doesn't seem like the issue to me. Xanders just said it a few days ago—the kids still love the guy.

Agreed about the recruiting and the twitter, He's better than Desko. but that's not saying a lot.

[a fan]

This isn't unique to Hopkins (it also doesn't account for inflation). Lots of other competitors have seen the same or even bigger increases in tuition. Duke is one. They've done pretty well for themselves in the last 10 years despite that.

Not really sure what the point is re: in-state tuition. If that's the most important factor for a recruit and their family then you're never going to be able to compete with that no matter what your private tuition is. That hasn't changed from the pre-2009 days.

My point is simple. It's expensive to attend Hopkins. If you don't think that some blue chip recruits are affected by price......okay.

[Matnum PI]

MD kids going to College Park over JHU. VA kids going to VA over JHU. There's something to it. But, in terms of explaining JHU's under-performance in the past decade, it seems relatively tangential.

[Matnum PI]

In terms of recruiting, I fully understand that this is isn't the best metric but it's not meaningless. In our Fantasy League Draft, we have a couple of coaches who aren't exemplar pickers but, overall, the picks are pretty good. Also, it's only players on the O side of the ball. For the D players, we pick "team D"s. With this said, there are 20 teams and the first JHU kid picked was the second to last pick in the 2nd round. Owen Murphy. The JHU D was picked 2 picks later. Both by a die hard JHU fan who doesn't necessarily vie for the crown. JHU didn't show it's face again until the middle of the 4th round, Jacob Angelus. Ian Krampf and Quinn Chambers in the middle of the 6th round. (Chambers being grabbed by the die hard fan.) And that's it. I dunno. Based on this, it's hard to praise Petro's recruiting skills. Again, this is far from a full proof metric but it seems odd that JHU had so few pieces of gold. Is this year's freshman class just not a stellar class? Or, maybe, just not stellar on the O side of the ball?

[HopFan16]

Is this year's freshman class just not a stellar class? Or, maybe, just not stellar on the O side of the ball?

Ding ding ding. Check back next year.

This isn't unique to Hopkins (it also doesn't account for inflation). Lots of other competitors have seen the same or even bigger increases in tuition. Duke is one. They've done pretty well for themselves in the last 10 years despite that.

Not really sure what the point is re: in-state tuition. If that's the most important factor for a recruit and their family then you're never going to be able to compete with that no matter what your private tuition is. That hasn't changed from the pre-2009 days.

My point is simple. It's expensive to attend Hopkins. If you don't think that some blue chip recruits are affected by price......okay.

Of course some recruits are affected. But Hopkins was an expensive school in 2009. The economics of private vs. in-state tuition has not drastically changed. If you're looking for the changing variables that might explain why we're getting blown out in the first round of the playoffs, that's not the one. We know Hopkins is not for everyone—it never has been nor will be. Just as Duke is not for everyone and Yale is not for everyone.

Maryland is also not for everyone. For kids in-state, tuition is obviously one advantage it has. But that's just one element. I'd be confident wagering that we lose more recruits to Duke, Yale, UVA (out of state), Penn, Princeton, Michigan (out of state), and Notre Dame than we do to Maryland.

[a fan]

MD kids going to College Park over JHU. VA kids going to VA over JHU. There's something to it. But, in terms of explaining JHU's under-performance in the past decade, it seems relatively tangential.

The difference between where Hopkins or Syracuse is, and where some fans want them to be, is two, maybe three recruiting misses over four years.

I have a hard time believing that top recruits' families are so across the board wealthy that tuition is irrelevant to the conversation.

If Xanders is reading this----wanna do an interesting annual article that is recruiting related?

Hold exit interviews for top ten teams' graduating seniors every year. Ask them about how they arrived at their short list of schools , and what made them choose their final school.

Steak dinner says easily half will say money was a factor.

[a fan]

The economics of private vs. in-state tuition has not drastically changed.

I just told you that Hopkins raised its tuition by $14K in ten short years, and you think the economics of private versus public hasn't changed in that time?

An extra $56K for that Hopkins degree in ten short years is just no big deal?

Okay. If you say so.