When the roof fell a little: BYU’s loss to Texas Tech and what it means
There’s a particular kind of silence that settles in the Marriott Center when a win streak finally snaps — the collective inhale of a crowd that thought they had the momentum, followed by the slow realization that the game slipped away. That’s exactly the feeling from BYU’s 72-67 loss to Texas Tech on Jan. 7, 2025: a tight contest that unraveled in a few brutal minutes and left more questions than answers. (deseret.com)
A quick snapshot
- Final score: Texas Tech 72, BYU 67.
- The loss ended BYU’s 14-game home winning streak at the Marriott Center. (espn.com)
- Texas Tech’s trio (Elijah Hawkins, Darrion Williams, Chance McMillian) combined to shoot the lights out and did the damage late. BYU’s defense struggled to close possessions in the final stretch. (deseret.com)
Why this game stings
-
The timing. BYU took a one-point lead with 6:50 to play and then watched Texas Tech score on six of the next seven possessions over about four minutes. That stretch turned a winnable game into a gap BYU couldn’t erase. It wasn’t a season-defining collapse, but it was a reminder: good teams close possessions when it matters. (deseret.com)
-
The three-point dagger. Texas Tech shot over 40% from deep in the second half, and Elijah Hawkins hit six threes en route to a 22-point night. When an opponent’s shooters get hot in a hostile arena, defenses need answers — and BYU didn’t have enough of them that night. (deseret.com)
-
Free throws and finishing. The box score tells part of the story: missed free throws and a relatively cold perimeter night from BYU contributed to the final five-point margin. Those are small margins that add up fast in close conference games. (deseret.com)
Three honest takeaways
-
BYU’s late-game defense needs to be more disciplined under pressure. A good defensive stop or two in that 6:50–3:00 window changes the narrative; instead the Red Raiders found rhythm and BYU lost theirs. (deseret.com)
-
Production from role players matters. Egor Demin flashed playmaking (12 points, six assists) but shot 4-of-12 and still looks like a work-in-progress offensively. When freshmen or secondary scorers are inconsistent, the burden shifts and defenses can key on the top options. (deseret.com)
-
This is a useful reality check — not a derailment. BYU had been riding a wave of confidence at home; losing a close game to a quality Texas Tech squad exposes areas to tighten up but does not erase everything the team has done well. Use the loss to get better, not as proof everything is broken. (deseret.com)
What to watch next
-
How Kevin Young’s squad responds in practice — specifically late-possession defense, switching on screens, and free-throw focus. Those micro-details are the quickest fixes and the ones that flip close games in your favor.
-
Egor Demin’s development. He showed flashes of a facilitator who can create for others; turning those flashes into consistent scoring and smarter defensive reads will pay dividends.
-
Bench scoring and rebounding balance. If the Cougars can get consistent minutes and reliability from their second unit, close games will tilt back their way.
A few bright spots amid the disappointment
-
BYU still competed; this wasn’t a blowout. Fousseyni Traore led the effort and the team had stretches where it looked the part. Those moments are building blocks.
-
The loss provides clearer diagnostic data than a comfortable win would. When things go wrong in specific ways — poor late-game defense, missed freebies, an opponent heating up from deep — coaches and players have precise problems to solve.
Final thoughts
Losing the home streak and a close game to a quality opponent stings — and it should. But it’s also a moment: a reminder that margins are small in Big 12 play and that growth often comes from tightening details. BYU’s season isn’t defined by one loss; it’s defined by how the team learns and adjusts. If the Cougars use this like film study fuel rather than a hangover, the Marriott Center will feel a lot different next time Texas Tech rolls into town. (deseret.com)
Further reading
- BYU’s official game recap. (byucougars.com)
- Deseret News’ three takeaways piece that framed the defensive breakdown and player notes. (deseret.com)
- AP/ESPN recap with box score and play-by-play detail. (espn.com)
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Tom Brady cloned his dead dog — and it reads like a billionaire’s PR move
You know when a celebrity announcement lands and you can’t tell if it’s sincere grief, a flex, or a marketing stunt? Tom Brady’s recent revelation that his current dog Junie is a genetic clone of his late dog Lua checks all three boxes — and then some. The news landed alongside a corporate update from Colossal Biosciences, the biotech firm Brady has invested in, and set off a predictable storm of fascination, skepticism, and ethical hand-wringing. (defector.com)
Why this feels less like a private family moment and more like a brand activation
- Tom Brady’s announcement coincided with Colossal Biosciences’ acquisition of Viagen Pets and Equine — a company that does commercial pet cloning — making the reveal read like a perfectly timed PR play. (statesman.com)
- Brady is publicly invested in Colossal, so his glowing comments about cloning double as social proof for a company aiming to normalize high-profile animal cloning and sell an ambitious public story about “de‑extinction” and conservation. (people.com)
- The optics are weirdly modern-feudal: a billionaire uses cutting-edge biotech to buy back what death took, then makes the purchase part of the company narrative. People notice when private grief overlaps with corporate messaging. (defector.com)
A quick primer: what actually happened (the short version)
- Lua, a pit-bull mix that belonged to Brady’s family, died in December 2023. A blood draw taken before her death was used to preserve her DNA. (people.com)
- Colossal Biosciences — which Brady has invested in — says it used non-invasive cloning technology to create Junie, an animal with the same genetic makeup as Lua. The announcement coincided with Colossal’s purchase of Viagen, a company known for cloning celebrity pets. (statesman.com)
- Commercial pet cloning typically carries high price tags (public reports have cited something like $50,000 for cats or dogs through Viagen), and it’s not cheap or frictionless. (statesman.com)
Science, limits, and the “it’s not the same dog” argument
Genetic identity is not identity-of-experience. Cloning gives you the same genome, not the same life history. Personality, temperament, and quirks result from interactions with environment, maternal conditions in utero, early socialization, and random developmental events — all things a clone will experience differently. Scientists and animal cognition experts have made this clear repeatedly: clones resemble but do not replicate lived personality. (defector.com)
There are also practical realities of pet cloning:
- Success rates for dog cloning have improved since the early, painstaking work (Snuppy in 2005), but cloning remains technically demanding and often involves low yield and surrogate animals. (defector.com)
- The procedure carries ethical questions about the use of surrogates and the fate of embryos and failed attempts, plus animal welfare concerns around the whole process. (defector.com)
The larger story: investors, de‑extinction, and PR theater
Colossal markets itself as a company that can revive extinct species and help conserve endangered ones. Pet cloning is an immediately marketable, emotionally resonant offshoot that also generates headlines and revenue. Having a celebrity investor publicly clone a beloved pet offers three benefits:
- It humanizes and legitimizes a controversial technology.
- It ties a sentimental narrative to a corporate milestone (the Viagen deal).
- It creates cultural conversation — which is cheap PR when coordinated around celebrity announcements. (people.com)
That coordination is why many readers called Brady’s announcement a “brand activation”: the timing and the corporate connection make it hard to read as purely private grief. For public-facing biotech, headlines and cultural cachet can be as valuable as scientific progress, and celebrities are unusually effective at generating both.
Social reaction and cultural vibes
Responses have been all over the map:
- Some people find cloning comforting — a chance to spend more time with an animal that was deeply loved. (people.com)
- Others see it as tone-deaf (given high numbers of shelter animals), ethically fraught, or simply emotionally misguided — a replacement, not a resurrection. Online reactions skewed skeptical and at times outraged. (defector.com)
A few practical questions this raises
- What does a clone cost an average owner versus what Brady likely paid (or leveraged through investment ties)? Public numbers for Viagen services have circulated, but celebrity deals can blur price transparency. (statesman.com)
- How does commercial pet cloning affect shelter adoption rates and resources? If cloning normalizes “buying back” pets, it could have ripple effects in how people view and source companion animals.
- Where do we draw ethical lines between conservation goals and consumerized cloning for grief or vanity? Colossal’s stated conservation ambitions invite scrutiny when the company also markets celebrity pet cloning. (defector.com)
Things to remember
- A clone is a genetic twin, not a memory machine. Expect resemblance, not reincarnation. (defector.com)
- Celebrity announcements that align closely with a company’s corporate milestones should be read with a PR-skeptical eye. Timing matters. (defector.com)
My take
Grief is complicated and people find comfort in different ways. If cloning a beloved pet genuinely helped Brady’s family, that human element deserves empathy. But when the personal becomes entangled with investments and corporate narrative, we should scrutinize the optics and the industry incentives.
This isn’t just a weird rich-guy anecdote — it’s a cultural touchpoint for how emerging biotech will be marketed, normalized, and regulated. Celebrity validation can accelerate adoption, for better or worse, so the conversation we have now about ethics, transparency, and animal welfare matters.
Where to read more
- Defector’s take on the timing, optics, and irony of Brady’s announcement. (defector.com)
- People’s reporting on Brady’s statement and Colossal’s role in cloning Junie from Lua’s preserved blood sample. (people.com)
- Local coverage on Colossal’s involvement and Viagen’s cloning services and pricing. (statesman.com)
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.