All right. You know what? I'm just gonna, I'm gonna, I'm gonna wing it. Sing it for us. Well, I think I might actually. I can do that. All right. So I'm getting in my car this morning, and I'm really nervous about this talk. So I turn on the radio, and Utah radio sucks, right? So I had to turn on my, I had to turn on my Amazon Prime music thing. And I'm like, I want classic, good old classic rock, right? So I turn it on, I start here. Bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom, bom. I'm sitting in the car, like, yeah. So I'm ready for this talk. So I wish that I had the music, but you know what? Hey, you got that. So this is not a talk about, I walk around a lot, so you don't have to follow me. This is not a talk about Ruby at all. Today, we're going to talk about you guys. This talk is all about, let's see if this works real quick. It's supposed to work on, is talk about you. Okay, let's talk about you. All right, who here is a programmer? Right, who here uses open source code? Right on, who here has contributed to open source code? Nice, who here is a maintainer of open source code? Nice. Well, it's talked about you, right? But first, let's talk about me. My name's Eric Ferry. I emailed Eric, but I'm very commit to that. I work for a company called Consensus. I'm the founder of Codesponsor. I have too many damn avatars, right? But I like Photoshop, so it's okay. I work for this company, Consensus. What we do is we work towards powering the blockchain with Ethereum. I work for a company called Gitcoin. Now, Gitcoin is a platform that allows you to incentivize and incentivize open source development through bounties using ERC-20 based Ethereum tokens. So essentially, you can go to Gitcoin right now, you can grab any one of those and you can get paid that amount in cryptocurrency for working on open source. So what I do for them is I work for a company a company that I built called Codefund. Now, Codefund was, come on. Okay, Codefund is an advertising platform for open source. It's an advertising platform for you guys. Built by developers for developers. If you guys know Rubyler, that's me on the bottom, right? So, yeah, I love Rubyler and I love helping. So my passion, my strong, strong passion is to help open source projects, help open source developers get their support. Now, hold on one sec. I have to go into how do I split screen? Sir, I have developer notes that I have to use. Split, turn mirror off. No, I did not write Rubyler. Arrangement, thank you. All right, guys, I'm going to wing this. I'm gonna wing this, baby. By the way, I've not practiced this talk. So I have no idea how long it's taken, but already I've eaten up best four. Hold on, all right, I'll go back. All right, hold on, it's not really best four. Can you guys see it? Can you see that? That's actually not Bob Ross, who knows who that is?  No, that's, of course, that's me, but who? Prince, thank you, thank you. If I had something, I would give it to you. All right, I work for Consensus. I work with a company called Gitcoin. Gitcoin acquired my company, which is code fund. Used to be code sponsor, helping open source grow through funding, right? So, let's talk about some numbers. Yeah, if you don't mind, you got it. All right, so currently, last year, every year they come out with something called the Octaverse on GitHub. GitHub says that last year there were 25.3 million open source repos, actively maintained open source repos on GitHub. Go ahead. 78% of the companies out there right now use open source, so their company is either fully or partly built upon open source. That was done from studying 2015, go to the next one. Right, so you might recognize some of the companies, right? So, how much do you think the value is that open source is provided and saved money for developers and for companies? Billions, go to the next. 140 billion, that's how much open source is worth. That's how much this labor has been worth. That's how much value, that's what it would cost to replace all open source code with paid code, right? Go to the next. That's 31% of the market share. 31% of software sales are valued at that 140 billion. Okay, go to the next. So, why do we do it, right? There's obviously money in it, but we're not getting the money. So, why do we do it? Let's go, the first thing that you can see is, go ahead. Yeah, I'm just gonna do it, don't stop walking around. Thanks, go away, go away. You're really doing a bad job. Has anybody else realized that he kind of is starting to look like a wizard? All right, why do we build open source? Well, there's the white factor, right? Three main needs, three main needs is need for the fun of the culture. We like committing, we like being part of the society, we like being a part of it. And also, it's a social standing. There's social benefits to it. I benefit socially by committing to open source. I actually can get a job. I can build my name up, it's self-branding. All of this stuff is really great. And so, at the end of the day, what's wrong, right? We're all happy, we're all sitting in the hot tub, we're all like, woo-hoo, awesome. But this is how it starts, right? Open source starts off, you start a new project, and at the beginning, you're like, this is awesome. I put something out there, people are using it, I feel valued, I use it myself. And then a little while later, it's like, okay, it's cool, but you start getting people asking, well, can you make this change? Can you make that change? And you realize that you're not using it as much as you used to, but others are using it a lot more, but you are still the maintainer.  What's wrong with you? And all of a sudden, this has become a full-time job for you, right? So that is not what we like. This makes us very grumpy. So I wanna talk about a certain thing that you've all heard of, the truck factor, the bus factor, sometimes it's called the lottery factor. Basically, an open source project has a certain factor. There was a study done, a commission in 2016, that determined what the truck factor of any open source repository is, based on all these, it's like super, super smart stuff that the first two speakers knew about and I couldn't comprehend. But they determined that of the top 100 most popular, most used open source properties on GitHub have a truck factor, 65% of those have a truck factor of less than two, meaning if two people are hit by a truck, that project is in jeopardy, right?  So imagine that, imagine ReactJS, right? 3JS, truck factor of three. If three people get hit by a truck, that project is in jeopardy. These ones, we talked about TensorFlow earlier, ImpressedJS, NWJS Docker, Bootstrap Express, truck factor of two, two people are the maintainers of this. And you're gonna like this. Okay, Redis, one person. D3, font awesome. View, low dash, socket, semantic UI. One person maintains this. They don't get paid for it. So let's talk about a certain use case, semantic UI. I used semantic UI on version one of Code Sponsor and I ended up pulling it out because it was not maintained. It stopped being maintained. This guy, I can't remember his full name, but his J. Lucic. So just a little bit about semantic UI, if you haven't heard of it, it's similar to Bootstrap. It's an amazing project. It has 40,000 stars on GitHub. But notice also, it has 583 issues, open issues on GitHub, right? So think about how long it might take one person to solve 583 issues. Let's say it takes a half hour each. And then you calculate into that the cost per hour. So I calculated, I believe this will cost him roughly about $40,000 to solve these issues. Personal money, personal time, right? So what happens? Jake Lucic, he says, after spending three years of my life trying to make it work, part-time proprietary work or just plain being broke, I don't think I know of any other way, of any other way that seems reasonable without compromising the software. Unfortunately, that means I have to push back on development so I can find the means to sustain it. Okay? So let's talk about sustainability. And right along the sustainability in my view and a lot of people's views, this question arises. Should open source be free? Ask yourself this, what does that mean? If it costs money, is it open source? Well, we have the godfather of GNU, the Free Software Foundation, Richard Stallman says, when you think about free software, when you think about free open source, think about free speech, not free beer, right? So, what is free speech meaning free beer? Now, look, I know I'm in Utah, right? So I'm gonna change it a little bit and make it so you guys understand. Free Diet Coke. Okay, now I get it, now I get it. All right, free Diet Coke. So, who's paying for the Diet Coke? Right? I'll tell you who's paying for it. He is. It's not free, he's paying for it. He's paying for it through time and he's paying for it through burnout. Okay? It's being paid for, it's just not you. So, we start seeing this kind of stuff. Homebrew, the maintainer of homebrew, is getting frustrated. Gatsby, Kyle Matthews, frustrated. Adam Rekus, babble. People are willing to pay a lot of money for software. They don't wanna donate or anything to open source. Frustrated. Reactive X. Open source is such a strange thing. The open source work I do is clearly the most impactful work I do, but no one wants to pay me to work on it. Yet, I'm asked to speak about it. And the work I'm actually paid to do, no one really wants to hear about it. Right? So, we have to acknowledge something. Now there is a problem in the system. So what happened last year, there was a bunch of really, really smart people who were dedicated to pushing open source forward, got together last year for the very first conference called the Sustain Conference, about 100 people. They wanted to talk about and openly talk about how to help open source software continue to be sustainable. They came out with a report called the Sustain Report. And this key pieces of, the key pieces of OSS, open source software, of which many applications depend on are often supported by small groups of individual contributors with no support or contractual obligation to do so. These projects are being maintained by people who aren't getting paid and not getting paid to do so. So, this has created a landscape which the goodwill of the few can no longer sustain the increasing demands that the ecosystem places on them.  I don't wanna really talk about all of them in this talk, but I wanted to talk about one of them. Using money as an incentive for open source. Now, some of you guys are like, ah, I don't know about that. It just feels dirty, it feels wrong, right? Open source is something where you just give and it's all about giving. Well, you're not giving only you.  Your family vacation is giving, your job is giving. All of that stuff is giving. So, they talked about removing the cultural aversion to money in open source can enable code contributors to keep building software. Now, I want you to note the code contributors. While incentivizing others to take on an equally important but less implicitly rewarding tasks like resolving issues and bug triaging, right?  So, basically this is what it is. Maintainers in the front, contributors in the back. Party in the front, sorry. Business in the front, party in the back. Nobody likes the front, right? I mean, nobody likes the front, but the back is all party. Contributors are partying. They're the ones that do all the fun stuff. Who likes bug fixing? Who likes feature building? Right?  So, last year when I was thinking about this problem, I found this, well, there's a lady called Nadia Eggball. She worked for GitHub. She's no longer working there, but she's still one of the most outspoken, powerful speakers and contributors to open source and open source sustainability. She has a GitHub repo called the lemonade stand. And in this repo, she talks about all of the different ways that we can find funding for open source. And so, last year I started going through this and I'm like, oh, these are interesting. I can categorize them now. The problem I saw with certain ones, actually I'll get to that. Like I said, I haven't practiced. So, I took all of the different sections that she wanted that she had on there and I put them into these different categories. Some of them are a little bit outlier, but more or less. So, we have our donation section. So, anytime you're asking it's a charitable donation. You know, you're asking for money to help support. I need money, please donate. We have support, which is providing support roles and of course the license and usage, the entrepreneur route. So, let's talk about each one real quick. So, the donations include donation buttons, sponsorships, grants and foundations. Now, I want you to think about while I'm going through these, what are you willing to do? Okay, what are you willing to do? And you're gonna realize that you might not be willing to do as much as you thought to get funding. So, on donations charity, some of the good things about that route is, it's a low barrier of entry. You can easily go to PayPal, add a pay me button, go to other places, be able to go to Open Collective and have them put a button on your repo, all that stuff. But all it is is asking for money from other people and you're hoping they do, right? So, it allows the developers to focus on the code. So, you don't need to like change your way of thinking.  The problem with this is it has very little pay out without proper fundraising efforts. So, it's just, don't even raise your hand, who here is actually, think about, have I donated to an open source repo on GitHub? Have I donated? Like one, I've done it, but I did it because I've guilted myself into it, right? Problem also is it may need a larger audience. So, some of these smaller projects that might be 100 stars, 150 stars are not gonna get much at all. Now, I wanna talk, here's some examples of how you can do it. So, Ruby Together is an organization that will help distribute funds. Open Collective you can go to and you'll be able to get, it's basically a, it's an organization, I'm gonna screw it up, but it's an organization where they will handle all the legal stuff, all the financial stuff and you essentially, all the funds go through them and then you treat it as a business and you can actually expend stuff and that's how you get paid. Donate with PayPal buttons or other buttons, also just donate buttons randomly on websites. So, when I started this path, I don't know if any of you know Kent C. Dodds, he's a local guy, freaking cool guy, he has tons of open source projects that he commits to and I have lunch with him often and I asked him, I said, I noticed that you have a donate button on every single one of your big projects on GitHub, I said, how much have you made? Zero, no money. I looked at his cross-end which is one of the most popular repos, he has 55,000 downloads a week, no money. Okay, so, are you willing to go in and do the work for this? So, I made a really cool little chart here, right? I said, okay, well, on the left side you have potential funding. How much funding do you really think you can get for this? Significant life-changing funding that might allow you to focus on it and then on the right side is how much do you have to give up of your coding time? How much do you have to change of who you are and move away from a role of a developer, an open source developer, to something else completely? So, little gain, little cost. Support. So, how am I doing? In support, there are different options so you can write books and create merchandise for your open source projects. You can do training, consulting and services, benefits there is good for marketing, helps keep projects aligned with needs. Other people are asking you like, this is what I need so it keeps you reminded like, oh, this is how they're using it, this is probably how you should keep doing it. Smaller projects don't benefit at all, hardly. Who's gonna wanna buy a book about something that is pretty simple, right? Paid training is rarely in demand and it can distract the court from court development. Again, it's pulling the developer away, okay? So, a great example of this is Trailblazer. Trailblazer is a Ruby framework that competes with Rails. I think it actually goes into Rails but I can't remember.  Premium support, stickers, get the book, right? They are fully entrenched in the support funding side and it works for them. But how much time do you think he has to work on that versus working on the actual code? He is literally going through and building a business, a support business around this project. Okay, again, you're changing, you gotta change it a little bit but there's higher benefits. Are you willing to make this change? Licensing, now I say licensing but it's actually licensing. Any type of entrepreneurial, you know, SaaS, yeah, you get your premium license, SaaS, asking for venture capital, build a business out of it. So, these type of things are great, right? We've seen some amazing projects that have turned incredible funding. They scale very well or successful. It has potential to provide full-time income. Smaller projects, of course, don't benefit. They can distract from core development. Again, what are we willing to do? And finally, it requires an entrepreneurial mindset. Now, let me tell you, I have a company. I hate having a company. I don't like running a company. I'm not that guy. I would rather be behind the code. I think a lot of us are like that. You know, it's the e-myth. We think that because we love doing what we do, we can make a business out of it. And oftentimes, we try and we fail. So, I am doing what I'm doing because I believe in the results. I don't need to explain who they are, all right? They're making a lot of money by offering a premium, a pro version, an enterprise version, and you still probably half this audience uses them. High results, high cost. So, you can see on the top, it says minimal change to maximum change, minimal funding to maximum funding. I think I've hammered this home enough, so I think you guys got it, right? Okay, so. I do, that is like my alter ego right there, right? The problem I've found and the reason why I'm gonna present to you this slide, the next few slides, is because I realize that we don't like to change. We're coders because we love to code. We're coders, we contribute to open source because we feel that we can provide. We feel that what we do is important. We make a difference, but we don't want to change. And I found that if you wanna make an impact in an industry, you don't ask them to do this. You don't ask them to say, okay, turn right 90 degrees.  And as long as the cost of that small change is greater than the benefit of the change's results, it's a no-brainer. So, this brings us to this, advertising. Advertising is kind of a, right? It's not something that we all like, but I understand it. When we talk about raising funds or getting funding for open source, the majority of people think about asking for money. That comes out of what I call the charity budget, right? I have enough money to give $5 a month to something, but if I can give $50 here and get 150 back, I'll do that all day long, right? Charity budget versus marketing budget. Now, the ROI, once there's a return on investment, there is no cap, right? So who's the marketing budget people? Okay, advertisers. Companies that want to talk to you, okay? Those are the people that want to pay for your open source. These are the guys that have the endless budget. They want to basically take their advertising funds and use them not only to help grow their company, bring on more customers, but if they can do that and instead of paying Google or Facebook or whomever was profiling you, they could pay you directly or you through a proxy in a very ethical way, that's the way they'll go. So last year, I put together a company called GitHub. I didn't make GitHub, no. Sorry, GitHub's on my mind. Code Sponsor. Code Sponsor is a platform that allows developers to get one line of code, add it to their readme and their open source projects, and then it would show something like this. I intentionally made it to where it is unobtrusive, highly relevant, it doesn't look exactly like documentation, so it's not deceiving, but it does look like enough of the documentation to not be distracted. But guess what happened when I did this? I'll get there, I'll get there. So I started in June, brought on a couple of people in July. Now this is money I gave out to developers, this is money to developers, in developers' pockets. Look at the trend. In September, 2500, October, 3400, November, 4700. There was no end in sight and understand that probably 50 to 70% of the funds, all funds coming in went right back to the developer. At the end of the day, I lost money when I shut down the company. I didn't make any money. But my goal wasn't necessarily to make money, my goal was to facilitate a way for you guys to get paid, to work on what we all use to build our business, our careers. So, here's some more graphs. Total impressions per day, kept growing, growing, growing, growing, growing, right? Clicks per day.  I had a built-in fraud check that made sure that our advertisers weren't having to pay for traffic, but never did I collect information on anybody. It's called ethical advertising, no gathering traffic, no profiling, no remarketing, no cookie setting, none of that. Your data is your data. I just wanted to provide a way to help.  I had paid out $11,000 to open source developers. So you can see on this chart, it takes minimal effort, it is that one degree of change for that significant amount of funding. And the best part is, the best part is, I was able to help everybody. It's self-regulated. The more popular repository, the more traffic they would get, the more traffic they would get, the more clicks they would get, the more clicks they would get, the more money they would get. So you are now incentivized, not only to work on the source for all of your other reasons, but you're great. But you're also getting paid, and the better it gets, the more you get paid. It's a great system. Okay, so what happened? I love this slide. What happened? GitHub said no. They said no, we don't do that, we don't allow that. So frustrating, so frustrating because I knew that this is a way that we could really help a lot of people. And I said no, it's against our policy. I understand. So now, I'll come back to the very topic that we started off with. The very topic is, why funding open source is hard? Okay, I am so passionate about this topic. And so passionate about open source funding and sustainability, and it's so frustrating when you know that it's likely not gonna happen. Why is it not gonna happen? The reason is we need to change. We're gonna need to start wearing a whole bunch of hats. Right? So I named these, so, Bega Lo Per Fundusus, right? And then we've got the developer SwaggaSupportus and then the developer Vernure MarkaSupportusus, right? We gotta become that instead of a developer. Or they need to change. The reason they need to change it because they own open source. They're the ones that we have all chosen collectively as a community to say, open source belongs to you. They're a private company. Sorry, I'm kinda calling them out here, and I'm okay with it. I've been holding this back for months. Um, they're a private company. We all choose to use them for open source. It's great. They provide a great service. Wonderful service, and it's free for open source developers. It's great. But we do not control those readme's. We do not control what content goes on those readme's. And when they finally said no, it went back and forth three times through the legal department. No. On that final time I said, okay, at least please tell me you're doing something about this problem. So, right now I'm running a company called Codefund. I'll go to the last slide here. Right now I'm running a company called Codefund. Codefund is a reincarnation of Codesponsor. Codefund is a great company that helps very few people, right? Very few people can benefit from Codefund. The reason is is because regular advertising, not GitHub-based advertising, regular advertising, we cannot have everybody throw ads on every single site, because we cannot regulate that. We can't control any type of quality. On GitHub we could. On any platform we could, but not regular. So, if you have an open source project, or if you have a popular blog, or if you have an application that is used by developers, Codefund is there to help you. We wanna help you get funding. But unfortunately, my role, as I want, is to help as many people as possible. But, right now I can't. So, I'm gonna be going to the sustained conf this year in London, and I'm gonna complain a whole bunch, and we're gonna figure this out. That's my talk. Any questions? So, the question is, what about Bitbucket? That's a great question. Who here uses, who here goes to Bitbucket on a daily basis? Who here goes to Bitbucket to use, aside from their own software, on a daily basis? Not one hand. Next question. Todd, get loud, same thing. I reached out to him, I asked him, would you be willing? They said, not now. But the problem is this, guys. We can all say, yeah, we're gonna do it, we're gonna do it, but we're not gonna do it. Because it's too hard. It's too hard to change. We're not gonna get ever a bit moved over. And all of a sudden, now we're gonna have two platforms that we have to go to search for open source. It's not gonna happen. Yeah, let's talk about that later. There are different ways that we can do it. The basic attention token is one idea. There are a whole bunch of different things that are happening. One, which is a licensing platform, which is called Deco Network. Deco.network, they are working really hard to provide a way to move your code off of GitHub, move it onto this place, and now it becomes a licensed, you have a dual license built in software. But you have to move all your code over there, but it's all blockchain, it's all blockchain based. Your code's on the blockchain and it is, I don't understand at all. But there are ways, right? But again, how much is the developer willing to change? Anybody else? I agree. I agree. So let me ask you this. Now, talk is over, so I'm gonna rant a little bit, but no, I actually, I won't talk about this. But yeah, there are different, there's a whole bunch of different ways that we can solve this problem. Yes, yeah, it really depended. I actually had a calculation that could basically determine based on programming language and stars, how much you're gonna generate on average. So on average on GitHub, average click-through rate on an ad was approximately 8%, or sorry, 0.8%. So eight in a thousand people will click on that ad when they visit it, of that. So then you just calculate basically how many, how many impressions you're getting and all that stuff. But so here, let me explain it. December, I sent out 62 payments to eight different countries using four different forms of payment, right? So I sent some to Brazil. I sent some to London. I sent some to China. I sent some to just all over the place. And it was just growing and growing and growing. And that's actually what led me to talk to consensus and to get coined because I'm like, look, I gotta move this away from fiat currency. I gotta do something where I can do this programmatically because everybody's getting small amounts of money, but nobody's getting like these huge ones. Now, for example, Codefund is still running and certain projects, one project actually got paid $3,000 this month. So it's still beneficial to a very small amount of people but just not everybody. Yeah, so honestly, the real solution here is not advertising. It's not me at all. The real solution here is GitHub needs to do something about it. GitHub needs to make a way to support open source through funding on their platform, allow advertisers to pay GitHub. Look, GitHub, I'm giving you money. I'm telling you how to do your business. I'm gonna pay for that. But if they could turn that and make it so that there could be a controlled situation where there would be a donation base or not a donation, but an advertising platform for them, they can get paid, but also the developers get paid. You're gonna have to ask them. Your gang is called? No, no, so again, I love GitHub. I almost wore my GitHub shirt but I gained a lot of weight in the last month's time. I don't look as good as the first speaker. I can't speak for GitHub. I can't, well, so I have speculation. So my idea is that the problem when you introduce advertisers, so I empathize with GitHub, right? I empathize with their situation. One, if they said I can do it, then who do they have to say no to? All of a sudden, now GitHub becomes this great big ad spam place and then everybody's gonna get off it. It's happened before. It happened to SourceTree, SourceForch, right? They don't want that to happen. Plus, it's not part of their business model. I don't blame them. They're doing a great job. Yeah, so let's talk about, I agree, but it's not gonna happen. But let's talk, so I'll tell you, sorry, are you guys okay with me talking a little bit longer? Yeah, you have five minutes. Okay. You all have to stay in your chair. Um, so what I thought, the direction I'd like to take my company, and you guys tell me yes or no if this is a good thing or not. What we'd like to do is say, okay, well GitHub will continue to own open source, but take an idea like read the docs where they have a very simple way for a developer to put their documentation on a different website. It's controlled by a different entity, and then allow the developer to turn around and add plugins to that, write plugins for it. It becomes a documentation hub where any developer can go to find documentation for open source, but then there you can ask for people to create videos. You can incentivize videos. You can place ads there, but it's all modular, module-driven. So we would create the framework, and then you all would create what you want on that, and then every developer would have their free site where they could get their own funding path and be able to add anything that they want to that. That's kind of my goal. That would get that, I mean, that's the 5%. That's probably not 1%, it's probably 5%, because you'd sign in through GitHub, and then after that you just place a link at the very top saying, hey, if you want to go to my docs, click here. That's the best thing I can think of instead of them changing. Yeah, yeah, they don't work. They work for a select few. Patreon works well if you are willing to go out and ask for money, beg for money, plead for money. Who's paying for it? I don't know. Right, so where does money come from? Here's the dilemma with Patreon and with those issues.  Tomorrow everybody take out a dollar, everybody pass that dollar to the right, take the new dollar, put it in your wallet. That is what's happening right now on the donations.  So that's why it doesn't work. There's no funding source there. Yeah, I'll just say advertisers are most interested in JavaScript developers. Just think about all the big SaaS companies out there. When I started, I got my client list by looking at Heroku add-ons page. It's like right there, I gotta reach out to all of these people right there. Most of them wanted JavaScript developers, but that's just, it depends, it really depends on, don't do it for the moment you're working on open source to get paid, it's just not worth it. You're never gonna make enough unless you raise funds, build a business, you know, I wouldn't think of it that way. All right, let's have lunch.


Hey Anthony congratulations. I wanted to ask you about what was more gratifying for you the eight for 113 or the block to lead the way on the game winning touchdown. I mean the win was the most important for sure but um yeah I mean I like getting in the block and kind of being a part of everything you know. And I also wanted to ask you about the 601 yards of offense no warren moon run and shoot offense ever put up those numbers for for this franchise before how crazy was it to see this offense move up and down the field like that. Yeah I was so excited for the whole offense and the team and I mean we're never satisfied as an offense so we just got to keep going and keep improving and think everyone's find the way to step up and find their role and make place for this offense. So we just got to keep rolling. Anthony when when John who goes out does do certain parts of the playbook go out to or were you guys able to kind of keep the whole offense intact and you and and swam able to handle everything in there. Yeah no we we prepare each week that everyone can do any role that we have in the offense so um yeah whether it's Jeff me. Yeah everyone's able to kind of step up and pick up that role like no matter what happens at the game because you know that's bound to happen in football so we're all ready to step up at any point. Anthony sorry if you talk about this earlier but how does this team how was this team able to kind of keep its poison such pressure packed situations like it did at any regulation and then again and over time. Yeah I mean we've been in this those same situations over and over again and have executed and have won the game so I think just trusting our guys and never feeling like we're out of it. Everyone always always in tune and we've practiced that situation multiple times so just being able to execute it and get the job done. And what is the feeling obviously a lot of pressure in those positions and then when you win on a walk off which doesn't happen very often what what is kind of the euphoria like when when you see Derrick cross the goal line and you know his game over. Yeah I mean we were we were thrilled I mean everyone jumping around everyone celebrating so it was a tough week of work short week short short turnaround so we're just excited to get that win and go on to win next week. What was the reaction in the huddle when the Wildcat was called at the five yard line because we were all stunned. No I mean we yeah we always have different types of plays to give the defense different looks so I mean we've been practicing weekend week out so I mean there was no consternation so we just kind of went ahead and had to execute. They have a bow player. Anthony do you. Does it feel like in a game like this that you're putting up big numbers I mean are you aware of that and and knowing that you know you'll do whatever it takes to win how gratifying to have that kind of performance in a game like this. Yeah I mean I'm just focused on I'm focused on winning the game and whatever I can do to help is that's kind of the job and the role I see and yeah if I end up catching the ball if I end up having to make blocks I mean that's just kind of the role I have to embrace and I'm just excited that we got the win.