Here's Thomas Sherrill's idea of what C-USA fields would look like if we colored our fields as Boise St. did. Personally, I like what he did with Marshall, North Texas, and Rice the best. I don't like what he did with UTSA's field at all. Our athletic teams don't use the full-bodied Roadrunner, just the head. Our alumni association uses the full body. I also don't like what he did with our end zone. Our end zone as it is now in the Alamodome looks better than what he chose for us.

I also don't appreciate the smart-ass remark he made about our conference at the beginning. At any rate, might be worth a look for some of you for a bit of amusement...

http://www.underdogdynasty.com/2015/7/22...conference

They are all pretty bad. I might like Rice the best but the lettering would be better in their old English font.

If we ever put M.T.S.U. in the end zone I will stop going.

He also lied about ours. He did not create that logo. That was one of two created in 1998 by the university.

In fact, our radio network has been using it since its inception. See below. You can also see it in the 1999 football media guide on page 212, so at best case what this guy is claiming and done is plagiarism .
http://issuu.com/goblueraiders/docs/2009_football_guide

I like ODU and UTEP. Not a huge fan of what he did with the Rice endzones. The UAB one looks arena league-ish.

I'd like to point out that Charlotte already uses our primary colors on our field, we're ahead of the curve.

HAHAHAHA didn't even use the Tech logo and plus he made a asinine statement. Just because North Louisiana is not a swamp and not full of cajuns doesn't make it Arkansas or Texas

I think UTSA and UTEP boise fields look good. I like USM also but that black field would get hot!

(07-24-2015 11:07 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  If we ever put M.T.S.U. in the end zone I will stop going.

He also lied about ours. He did not create that logo. That was one of two created in 1998 by the university.

In fact, our radio network has been using it since its inception. See below. You can also see it in the 1999 football media guide on page 212, so at best case what this guy is claiming and done is plagiarism .
http://issuu.com/goblueraiders/docs/2009_football_guide

When he said he created that logo my first thought was "I've seen that logo quite a few times since 2004".

We could either have a yellow field that looks like dead grass or a black field that someone could cook eggs on. His version of a black field looked pretty good though.

UTEP looks cool. With basketball courts doing this it won't be long before Football follows.

(07-24-2015 11:41 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  I'd like to point out that Charlotte already uses our primary colors on our field, we're ahead of the curve.

Ahead of the curve? Marshall football has been doing it since 1895, including the field lines. Maybe the telegraph is just now getting to Charlotte.

(07-24-2015 12:21 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  

(07-24-2015 11:41 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  I'd like to point out that Charlotte already uses our primary colors on our field, we're ahead of the curve.

Ahead of the curve? Marshall football has been doing it since 1895, including the field lines. Maybe the telegraph is just now getting to Charlotte.

Please! You know good and well you can't grow grass as green in WV as that shade Marshall uses! If only your colors were brown and tan!

(07-24-2015 01:33 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  

Some pretty Astroturf there!

(07-24-2015 10:55 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  They are all pretty bad. I might like Rice the best but the lettering would be better in their old English font.

The only one I like is UAB's. The others are just ugly and unimaginative.

Sorry I looked at it. Total waste of time. Not worth commenting on.

Pretty garbage and biased article. You can feel the Sun Belt butt hurt coming off it and when you dig deeper you see the guy is a Appy State fan. Surprise surprise. The Tech one was probably subbed out to an idiot from Lafayette. That area is big on the whole "if you live north of I-10 you're from Arkansas" line.

Not our primary color or logo. No way Tech would have a field like that.

If the author spent more than an hour on that, he should be ashamed of himself.

Well those were all pretty terrible.

(07-24-2015 08:30 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Not our primary color or logo. No way Tech would have a field like that.

One of the stipulations for each field is that it can't use the primary logo. Old and Alternate logos are used for all fields.