Green Otaku

It's just a wild proposition that I'm surprised passed. UCLA in moving to a new conference that pays more, and Cal is going to make less. How is that UCLA's problem? Does UTSA have to pay UTEP since they share the same board? Seems like extortion to me.

I still can't believe that passed. 😂

They also have a $6.9 billion endowment. I think they'll be ok.

2018 is the last time they re-did the turf. https://meangreensports.com/news/2018/5/14/Apogee_Turf_Project_Underway

For those saying it wasn't a mess let's not forget what happened when we played out of conference. For the last two years we didn't beat an fbs ooc opponent. 2021: SMU 35-12 Missou 48-35 Liberty 35-26 Miami (OH) 27-14 2022: SMU 48-10 UNLV 58-27 Memphis 44-34 Boise St. 35-32 In fact you'd have to go back to 2018 to see the last time we beat an FBS team ooc. 0 bowl wins against other FBS teams too. The reason we looked better in conference was because CUSA is very weak.

I remember there being the same sentiment at the away game at Berkley from those that traveled to that game. Many stories of very friendly and inviting Cal fans. Good fanbase over there.

Thanks for the info. I always thought those logos were painted on. I looked at the other AAC newbies that had home games and none of their "A" logos had the black/dark turf. I'm assuming that turf will fade in the sun to the right color over time, did we just put the logos on really late? Yes, the white on the field looks much better in your pic then it did on gameday.

There's still a lot of season to play. Measured, but expecting success and accountability is how I look at things. The criticism Morris got was warranted, that was an unacceptable way to play. We are locked into him for this season, so we need to see how things progress. I hope he turns it around. However if things continue like this the AD needs to send a serious message that this is not acceptable.

Are you referring to Tulane's stadium? If so they are outdoor.

Did they re-pellet the field before this game or something? Off the top of my head I think there are different types of turf with some more expensive options. I'd have to look it up though.

There's not really much else I can say about the game that hasn't already been said, but is it just me or is our gameday presentation as bad as how we played yesterday? Why did our field make the white numbers/letters/logos look muddy/dirty? Our shade of green turf looks very drab on TV. Compare that to how crisp and clean Tulane's field looked. Also what is with those patches behind the American logo? Did we just cut out the CUSA one? Outside of the visuals there is just a very casual unfocused air around UNT games. The band didn't play on 3rd downs, or played after a Cal 1st down. The stadium announcer is very bland. It's like we don't know what to do.

I'll never understand people getting hyped up every offseason, but especially this one that had zero evidence of how we would play one way or the other. You'd think adults would have some kind of rational thinking skills.

I saw this tweet and didn't think too much of it. Until I saw this article. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/aztecs/story/2023-09-01/san-diego-state-sdsu-aztecs-mountain-west-conference-realignment-acc-stanford-cal-smu-merger-pac-12 I'd suggest reading the whole thing, but the meat of the article is: So we can guess that there must be other things going on we don't know about. The PAC 2 was likely trying to get the top half of the AAC, and if I had to guess they wanted Memphis, Tulane, USF, ECU, and 2 others. Maybe we sneak in with the others, but Aresco might have done us all a real solid by refusing to split up the conference.

Word on the AAC board is that some of the eastern schools weren't interested in the long travel to WSU/OSU and told Aresco not to go any further in pursuing them.

The MWC deal is done after 2025, meaning it would be similar to the PAC where teams pay no exit fee.

The ultimate plan would have been to add those two as a foothold in the west. Then add in someone along the lines of SDSU, CSU, BSU, AFA, and FSU to ease travel and gain a bump in media rights cementing us as the best of the rest.

Because it didn't come off as not really trying or serious. Having a zoom meeting instead of meeting in person like the MWC seems like a lack of commitment. The MWC were bold and open about meeting with those two schools. The optics did not look good for the AAC.

Anyone else not a fan of the American logo being black? All of the other letters on the jersey are white with a black outline, the logo on the field is also white.

I talked about that process here: The process isn't as easy as just saying make it happen.

This. Is this just some type of damage control by posters here? Getting those 2 would have been a huge plus for the AAC, and a possible path to scrape the top of the MWC and become even stronger. People can't be this unaware right?

Not for this short of notice IIRC. 27 month period of notice, and every other program has given over a 12 month notice. They paid $18m, so how much should SMU pay for 10 months?

People that are saying this isn't a big deal forget that if the MWC takes the PAC name they will have written autonomy and a piece of the CFP money by name. Those things will need to be voted out for them to lose it, and the process of that is difficult and unclear. Another possibility is that the PAC intends to poach who they like, if they have found a suitable media deal. We don't know what Luck has been working on, but I would guess they have a few scenarios worked out and now that Cal/Stan have left they will proceed with those.

Well.. this post didn't age well.

I've had so many discussions like this on this board. So many posters were sure that we had the leverage/money to grab those schools. I told everyone nothing is assured, and that we didn't know if ESPN was willing to spend the $$$ necessary.

Uh... isn't that not a good thing? Doesn't "kicking the tires" mean to put minimal effort?