Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Sacramento State joins MAC as football-only school
Page: 2 of 2
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,631
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 2/18/2026 11:09 AM
STVCastle wrote:expand_more
Why plant our flag out west? Because the MAC is long overdue to adapt and change with the times. I hope you've noticed that everyone else (especially in the G6) is changing with the times. Everyone else is changing the look of their respective conference. What are we doing? Just trying to get by.
I understand the point you are making I just completely disagree. I don't care if other G6 conferences are doing stupid things, that doesn't make me want to join them. You make it seem as though these conferences have flourished with free flowing money since senseless expansion. The G6 is floundering, maybe we try something different and do the thing that the vast majority of fans want in their college sports experience - Compelling matchups of regional rivalries while controlling costs and preserving the student athlete experience. Why not be the one conference people can look to as a throwback to the good old days while the other conferences travel across the country for their dumb matchups no one cares about.
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 351
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 2/18/2026 11:10 AM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
I honestly love the move. MACtion plants a flag out west. This also leads to the discussion of creating a west coast pod and bringing in 2 more schools. I would love to hear everyone's thoughts on 2 schools we can add to the conference.

Just off the top of my head and not doing research, the first two schools that jump out to me are Northern Arizona and Weber State. If schools like Eastern Washington or Northen Iowa are open I wouldn't mind those two as well.
You're reading way too far into this. Sac St was desperate to establish themselves in FBS as quickly as possible. The MAC gave them an insane "this is what it will take offer" and they accepted it. It's only for 5 years and I'll be surprised it lasts any longer.

And all that is a good thing. Why do you want to place our flag out west? Conferences are about a shared identity, history, and regional rivalries with neighbors. How is playing Eastern Washington every couple of years exciting to you? I can handle this for what it is, a 5 year cash grab, but it should not be any type of vision for the conference.
Why plant our flag out west? Because the MAC is long overdue to adapt and change with the times. I hope you've noticed that everyone else (especially in the G6) is changing with the times. Everyone else is changing the look of their respective conference. What are we doing? Just trying to get by.

I'm taking a wait and see approach to this. By Year 3, 2028, if the MAC doesn't even try to go out west again for expansion, then this is confirmed to be a cash grab and a bust. Also, confirmation that the MAC has no real plan in place to develop as a conference.
If they really wanted to do this, they should have formed an alliance with the new world PAC. They were DESPERATE for scheduling flexibility, and for the most part both conferences shared the same philosophy on keeping regional ties and rivalries together. (Texas State not withstanding)

It should also be noted that the Sac State deal is only for 5 years. Nothing has been mentioned beyond that.
We're all noting that this deal is for 5 years. That's why I said if by Year 3 there's no real commitment by the MAC to expand out west again, then this deal with Sac State is just a cash grab with no long-term plan in place. We're just repeating the same mistake we made with UCF when they took a pit stop in the MAC.

If you're the MAC, adapt (with an actual plan) or die. If they have no plan, then we might as well fan the rumor flames of "Ohio to the Sun Belt" asap. I'm tired of having no plan in place and being stuck in a conference that's just trying to get by. That strategy just won't cut it 10 years down the road. We need to stop pretending it will cut it.
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 351
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 2/18/2026 11:17 AM
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
Why plant our flag out west? Because the MAC is long overdue to adapt and change with the times. I hope you've noticed that everyone else (especially in the G6) is changing with the times. Everyone else is changing the look of their respective conference. What are we doing? Just trying to get by.
I understand the point you are making I just completely disagree. I don't care if other G6 conferences are doing stupid things, that doesn't make me want to join them. You make it seem as though these conferences have flourished with free flowing money since senseless expansion. The G6 is floundering, maybe we try something different and do the thing that the vast majority of fans want in their college sports experience - Compelling matchups of regional rivalries while controlling costs and preserving the student athlete experience. Why not be the one conference people can look to as a throwback to the good old days while the other conferences travel across the country for their dumb matchups no one cares about.
For the longest time until now, the MAC has been that conference that kept geographic integrity intact. Answer me this: Where has that gotten us? The bottom of the barrel, struggling to compete even with the likes of C-USA.

Our business model is terrible. The MAC's strategy for promoting and marketing itself hinges on the novelty of playing on Tuesday and Wednesday nights, and that ESPN lets us do that. Where's the long-term vision in that?

I totally understand where you're coming from too, Andrew, but it's an Old School way of thinking that won't compute when we get to the 2030s. The MAC may not even exist if they don't make the specific changes they need to make.

I'm not thrilled about adding Sac State, but it is what it is.
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,631
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 2/18/2026 12:02 PM
STVCastle wrote:expand_more
Our business model is terrible. The MAC's strategy for promoting and marketing itself hinges on the novelty of playing on Tuesday and Wednesday nights, and that ESPN lets us do that. Where's the long-term vision in that?

I totally understand where you're coming from too, Andrew, but it's an Old School way of thinking that won't compute when we get to the 2030s. The MAC may not even exist if they don't make the specific changes they need to make.
Maybe I am slow, but I think you're gonna need to spell out specifics of how our approach has been less successful than the Sun Belt or American or whatever. Am I missing something that shows they are crushing us, and they owe it all to geographic expansion? Few people actually care about these conferences in any widespread way, they are just the conference their team happens to be in. Some of our fans will tune in to Toledo & BG but will a North Texas fan tune in to UAB and Navy battling? I don't see it. None of us G6 conferences will have national relevance, the goal should be getting your members' fan bases interested in the conference at large. I think a small thumbprint achieves that best.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,809
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 2/18/2026 12:11 PM
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
Our business model is terrible. The MAC's strategy for promoting and marketing itself hinges on the novelty of playing on Tuesday and Wednesday nights, and that ESPN lets us do that. Where's the long-term vision in that?

I totally understand where you're coming from too, Andrew, but it's an Old School way of thinking that won't compute when we get to the 2030s. The MAC may not even exist if they don't make the specific changes they need to make.
Maybe I am slow, but I think you're gonna need to spell out specifics of how our approach has been less successful than the Sun Belt or American or whatever. Am I missing something that shows they are crushing us, and they owe it all to geographic expansion? Few people actually care about these conferences in any widespread way, they are just the conference their team happens to be in. Some of our fans will tune in to Toledo & BG but will a North Texas fan tune in to UAB and Navy battling? I don't see it. None of us G6 conferences will have national relevance, the goal should be getting your members' fan bases interested in the conference at large. I think a small thumbprint achieves that best.
Originally, the AAC largely built their platform on being the conference of large metropolitan areas (Memphis, Houston, Cincinnati, Orlando, etc.). You could have called it the Airport conference and it would have made more sense than the American. It's not hard to see how that would have been attractive to media providers. They've mostly stuck to that after realignment grabbing North Texas (DFW), UTSA (San Antonio), Charlotte, and Rice (Houston). It's a mess of a conference but they at least have an identity. Grabbing Army because you already had Navy just made sense.

The Sun Belt took a little bit from what the MAC did and basically made it better. They still play on Tue-Thurs, but they made those games happen in October where the weather is still optimal. But they also negotiated that they didn't want the entire conference playing those nights, so you still have Saturday home games to build your fan base. Rather than flooding the market with Sun Belt games, it's one or two "games of the week" more or less.

The MAC completely sold out for MACtion in November. There was a time last year where I checked and I'm pretty sure there was only one Saturday MAC game. The rest of the conference played on Tues-Thurs.
Last Edited: 2/18/2026 12:12:49 PM by GoCats105
ExCat21
General User
EC21
Member Since: 9/29/2014
Post Count: 1,243
person
mail
ExCat21
mail
Posted: 2/20/2026 4:22 PM
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
I honestly love the move. MACtion plants a flag out west. This also leads to the discussion of creating a west coast pod and bringing in 2 more schools. I would love to hear everyone's thoughts on 2 schools we can add to the conference.

Just off the top of my head and not doing research, the first two schools that jump out to me are Northern Arizona and Weber State. If schools like Eastern Washington or Northen Iowa are open I wouldn't mind those two as well.
You're reading way too far into this. Sac St was desperate to establish themselves in FBS as quickly as possible. The MAC gave them an insane "this is what it will take offer" and they accepted it. It's only for 5 years and I'll be surprised it lasts any longer.

And all that is a good thing. Why do you want to place our flag out west? Conferences are about a shared identity, history, and regional rivalries with neighbors. How is playing Eastern Washington every couple of years exciting to you? I can handle this for what it is, a 5 year cash grab, but it should not be any type of vision for the conference.
I'm fully aware of the 5 years, however, there is opportunity to build a MACtion West. Plus I like the ballsy move of our Commish to set the standard on what it would take to join the MAC if other schools who are desperate to move up would want to follow.

I could be wrong, but with the addition of two extra teams, it might allow us to have one or two more Saturday games in November. I hope the Commish would negotiate that in future contract language.

As much as I desire history and region like you, I also don't want us to get left behind. A potential October/November game in California sounds amazing too. The thought of winning on Cali soil and attracting West Coast recruits does something to my soul to say the least. A Cali market with decent exposure helps putting a dent in losing the Chicago market. That's why I hope we build and go after Colorado, Washington or Arizona markets next with 2 additional teams. That would put an end to the "cash grab" thoughts.
Last Edited: 2/20/2026 8:36:01 PM by ExCat21
bobcatgrad
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Nagoya, Japan
Post Count: 348
mail
bobcatgrad
mail
Posted: 2/20/2026 11:54 PM
Pretty good interview with the Commissioner with a sports talk show in Sacramento called Sactown Sports.

https://youtu.be/QUhvDgQTy-s
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 351
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 2/21/2026 9:37 AM
bobcatgrad wrote:expand_more
Pretty good interview with the Commissioner with a sports talk show in Sacramento called Sactown Sports.

https://youtu.be/QUhvDgQTy-s
First time in a long time I've heard from Dr. Steinbrecher. I'd like to believe what he says in this interview.

Also, would've liked to hear anything from him concerning the MAC Tiebreaker Policy stupidity that occurred last year...
MedinaCat
General User
MC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Lakewood, OH
Post Count: 749
person
mail
MedinaCat
mail
Posted: 2/23/2026 7:08 PM
Hopefully it’s a COD payment on July 1st.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/sacrament... /#
SBH
General User
SBH
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,670
person
mail
SBH
mail
Posted: 2/24/2026 7:35 AM
I heard that Ohio originally voted against the Sac State deal. We only agreed after Sac State kicked in the travel costs.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,663
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 2/24/2026 10:36 AM
SBH wrote:expand_more
I heard that Ohio originally voted against the Sac State deal. We only agreed after Sac State kicked in the travel costs.
Did the vote have to be unanimous? If not, do you know if there were any "no" votes, and if so, which schools?
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,655
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 2/24/2026 12:35 PM
SBH wrote:expand_more
I heard that Ohio originally voted against the Sac State deal. We only agreed after Sac State kicked in the travel costs.
Makes sense. I would've voted no to an unconditional addition as well. I would be surprised if every team didn't.

There is no downside for us once they cover travel and receive no money. They took the worst part of the deal and are now paying us to go there and beat them. People act like we had a dozen offers on the table and we told Penn State to kick rocks. It's just another game on the schedule where we don't have to pay an FCS team to come here. Instead a former FCS team is gonna pay us to go to California. This isn't going to ruin our BCS chances. Our poll numbers aren't gonna take a hit.

For the MAC as a whole, we now have a little leverage in possible additions. Maybe for WKU, maybe a fee waiver doesn't look so bad. MTSU - you wanna revisit? If they want to bring in another FCS team - YSU, Montanas, etc - the $5M FBS fee... hey, we got you. We have an $18M piggy bank - what they do with it - and I hope they collectively decide to use it to grow the product and the conference - is the only question. It makes these decisions a little easier, and these discussions financially feasible. A little $18M ace we didn't have four weeks ago.

The only people who view any aspect of this negatively are worried about what time the nursing homes turn off the communal TV.
cbarber357
General User
C357
Member Since: 9/10/2012
Location: Pickerington, OH
Post Count: 1,151
person
mail
cbarber357
mail
Posted: 2/24/2026 6:25 PM
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
I heard that Ohio originally voted against the Sac State deal. We only agreed after Sac State kicked in the travel costs.
Makes sense. I would've voted no to an unconditional addition as well. I would be surprised if every team didn't.

There is no downside for us once they cover travel and receive no money. They took the worst part of the deal and are now paying us to go there and beat them. People act like we had a dozen offers on the table and we told Penn State to kick rocks. It's just another game on the schedule where we don't have to pay an FCS team to come here. Instead a former FCS team is gonna pay us to go to California. This isn't going to ruin our BCS chances. Our poll numbers aren't gonna take a hit.

For the MAC as a whole, we now have a little leverage in possible additions. Maybe for WKU, maybe a fee waiver doesn't look so bad. MTSU - you wanna revisit? If they want to bring in another FCS team - YSU, Montanas, etc - the $5M FBS fee... hey, we got you. We have an $18M piggy bank - what they do with it - and I hope they collectively decide to use it to grow the product and the conference - is the only question. It makes these decisions a little easier, and these discussions financially feasible. A little $18M ace we didn't have four weeks ago.

The only people who view any aspect of this negatively are worried about what time the nursing homes turn off the communal TV.
Yeah, knowing the details there is no downside for us, it’s all upside.
bobcatgrad
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Nagoya, Japan
Post Count: 348
mail
bobcatgrad
mail
Posted: 2/27/2026 7:35 PM
I was curious about our California 'Cats on the roster with a potential road game this year against Sacramento State. I hope we can talk with the commissioner to see if we can't make it happen this year for Rodarte and Poulos's sake in particular because of the potential to get family and relatives to come and watch them play. :)


1. Max Rodarte WR (Grad. Stud.) Sacramento, Calif.

2. Nick Poulos QB (Grad. Stud.) Granite Bay, Calif. (26 miles away)

3. Derek Reagans DT (Sen.) San Francisco, Calif. (94 miles away)

4. Tigana Cisse OL (Grad. Stud.) Oakland, Calif. (95 miles away)

5. Sandro Malicevic OL (Sen.) Saratoga, Calif. (128 miles away)

6. Rashad Perry WR (RS Fres.) Fresno, Calif. (184 miles away)

7. Joseph Marsh DE (RS Jun.) Simi Valley, Calif. (383 miles away)

8. Hype Grand QB (RS Fres.) La Puente, Calif. (404 miles away)

9. Delaney Crawford WR (RS Sen.) Fontana, Calif. (430 miles away)
Last Edited: 2/27/2026 7:41:05 PM by bobcatgrad
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,655
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 3/2/2026 2:30 PM
bobcatgrad wrote:expand_more
I was curious about our California 'Cats on the roster with a potential road game this year against Sacramento State. I hope we can talk with the commissioner to see if we can't make it happen this year for Rodarte and Poulos's sake in particular because of the potential to get family and relatives to come and watch them play. :)


1. Max Rodarte WR (Grad. Stud.) Sacramento, Calif.

2. Nick Poulos QB (Grad. Stud.) Granite Bay, Calif. (26 miles away)

3. Derek Reagans DT (Sen.) San Francisco, Calif. (94 miles away)

4. Tigana Cisse OL (Grad. Stud.) Oakland, Calif. (95 miles away)

5. Sandro Malicevic OL (Sen.) Saratoga, Calif. (128 miles away)

6. Rashad Perry WR (RS Fres.) Fresno, Calif. (184 miles away)

7. Joseph Marsh DE (RS Jun.) Simi Valley, Calif. (383 miles away)

8. Hype Grand QB (RS Fres.) La Puente, Calif. (404 miles away)

9. Delaney Crawford WR (RS Sen.) Fontana, Calif. (430 miles away)
I think we need the home game, but that is very nice and thoughtful and very un-BA of you lol

Their stadium is pretty ass, even for a HS field from what I've heard, playing on 15 year old turf... don't think that new $250M beauty is quite ready.
https://sacobserver.com/2024/10/sacramento-state-stadium-... /
Victory
General User
V
Member Since: 3/11/2012
Post Count: 2,518
person
mail
Victory
mail
Posted: 3/3/2026 3:40 PM
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
I think we need the home game, but that is very nice and thoughtful and very un-BA of you lol

Their stadium is pretty ass, even for a HS field from what I've heard, playing on 15 year old turf... don't think that new $250M beauty is quite ready.
https://sacobserver.com/2024/10/sacramento-state-stadium-... /
I am not exactly sure of the exact context of the need for a home game but it seems to me that a prospective in conference game with them could be anything. We'll get 4 home games and 4 away games assigned by the MAC and we won't play 4 teams. We'll have 6 home games overall and 6 road games no matter what the MAC assigns.

With 13 teams and there being protected rivalries I assume we'd play Miami 100% of the time, and since there is no real way to do pods with 13 teams there is no real reason to protect a rivalry with Ball State as we kind of got handed in the pod system, I'd guess Miami is OUr only protected game. Which means if our chance to play the other teams is kept equal we'd play the other teams at home 7 out of 22 years and on the road 7 out of 22 years. But the reality is that even if we only have one rival that some teams, like the Michigan schools, probably have 2. This means we'd end up playing those teams with 2 slightly less than 14 times in 22 years and the others slightly more. Any actual repeating schedule cycle, if such and thing ever tried to exist in the MAC office's mind after UMass joined, would be much longer than 22 years and even the MAC can't be that stable so trying to actually plan one at this point is likely pointless.

Since, the general rule is that you play most teams something close to 2 out of 3 years there is going to be a sort of general home, road, DNP, home road, DNP, type of pattern for the MAC to try to keep to keep things fair that necessarily has to break every once in a while. To keep the existing patterns in the MAC going as best they could Sac. St. probably pretty much takes up where NIU was in the kind of sorta existing rotations.

Our recent history with NIU, and this is even more less of a predictor than it otherwise could be because of pandemic year, divisions changing to pods changing to the craziness of 13 teams that mean any long term planning has changed for several reasons, is three of our last 4 games vs. NIU, including last year were at home with DNPs in 2024 and 2021. So the best way to keep the best balanced cycles with other MAC schools is my best prediction is that we play at Sac. St. in 2026. That is just an inclination and far from a predication. As I said, with an odd number and different numbers of protected rivalries any cycle we think we see is required to break every so often.
Last Edited: 3/3/2026 3:42:23 PM by Victory
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,655
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 3/4/2026 9:23 AM
Victory wrote:expand_more
I think we need the home game, but that is very nice and thoughtful and very un-BA of you lol

Their stadium is pretty ass, even for a HS field from what I've heard, playing on 15 year old turf... don't think that new $250M beauty is quite ready.
https://sacobserver.com/2024/10/sacramento-state-stadium-... /
I am not exactly sure of the exact context of the need for a home game but it seems to me that a prospective in conference game with them could be anything. We'll get 4 home games and 4 away games assigned by the MAC and we won't play 4 teams. We'll have 6 home games overall and 6 road games no matter what the MAC assigns.

With 13 teams and there being protected rivalries I assume we'd play Miami 100% of the time, and since there is no real way to do pods with 13 teams there is no real reason to protect a rivalry with Ball State as we kind of got handed in the pod system, I'd guess Miami is OUr only protected game. Which means if our chance to play the other teams is kept equal we'd play the other teams at home 7 out of 22 years and on the road 7 out of 22 years. But the reality is that even if we only have one rival that some teams, like the Michigan schools, probably have 2. This means we'd end up playing those teams with 2 slightly less than 14 times in 22 years and the others slightly more. Any actual repeating schedule cycle, if such and thing ever tried to exist in the MAC office's mind after UMass joined, would be much longer than 22 years and even the MAC can't be that stable so trying to actually plan one at this point is likely pointless.

Since, the general rule is that you play most teams something close to 2 out of 3 years there is going to be a sort of general home, road, DNP, home road, DNP, type of pattern for the MAC to try to keep to keep things fair that necessarily has to break every once in a while. To keep the existing patterns in the MAC going as best they could Sac. St. probably pretty much takes up where NIU was in the kind of sorta existing rotations.

Our recent history with NIU, and this is even more less of a predictor than it otherwise could be because of pandemic year, divisions changing to pods changing to the craziness of 13 teams that mean any long term planning has changed for several reasons, is three of our last 4 games vs. NIU, including last year were at home with DNPs in 2024 and 2021. So the best way to keep the best balanced cycles with other MAC schools is my best prediction is that we play at Sac. St. in 2026. That is just an inclination and far from a predication. As I said, with an odd number and different numbers of protected rivalries any cycle we think we see is required to break every so often.
I meant we need the home game as in we need to not play there on shit turf 3,000 miles from home. Not that we literally need to fulfill a schedule gap.
D.A.
General User
DA
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,198
person
mail
D.A.
mail
Posted: 3/4/2026 6:06 PM
Week zero...Sac State, home or away. Me likey. Gives us some rest with an extra bye week in the MAC season and gives us a warm up to the 'huskers. Also helps he MAC start the Sac State Era with a bang right out of the shoot.
Victory
General User
V
Member Since: 3/11/2012
Post Count: 2,518
person
mail
Victory
mail
Posted: 3/5/2026 9:42 AM
D.A. wrote:expand_more
Week zero...Sac State, home or away. Me likey. Gives us some rest with an extra bye week in the MAC season and gives us a warm up to the 'huskers. Also helps he MAC start the Sac State Era with a bang right out of the shoot.
We don't meet any conditions to play on Week 0 as far as I know.
Victory
General User
V
Member Since: 3/11/2012
Post Count: 2,518
person
mail
Victory
mail
Posted: 3/14/2026 2:22 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
The Athletic Department just announced in a email:

"Season ticket renewals will launch this week, the MAC will release our 2026 football schedule at the end of February/beginning of March, and before you know it, we’ll be back in Peden Stadium for Coach Hauser’s first season at the helm of our Bobcats."

Needless to say, there probably isn't time to attempt to move a whole bunch of games. I except an undesirable solution with a lot of fan screaming about it. My personal expectation is deletion of using the bye the week prior to a team starting MACtion. I expect to see multiple teams playing a Sat/Thur/Tue or Wed sequence and several teams forced to play on Thur. Oct 29 to again play on Tues. Nov 3. I doubt ESPN will allow the MAC to not play on Nov 3rd or anything like that. Then there are BYE weeks for everyone throughout the conference season.
I expect that the MAC won't meet that deadline for the schedule release. I also predict that we will see 3, or maybe even 4, MACtion games in November featuring Sac State with many of them in Sacramento. OHIO finishing the season at Sac State would be interesting!
I think that we can safely say that you are already right about this. I certainly hope, and still certainly believe, that during the several weeks of negotiating the terms with Sacramento State that SOMEONE somewhere in the MAC office or some Athletic Department considered the scheduling difficulty of 13 teams, with limited bye week options, on short notice and considered options were thrown out to discuss and prepare an plan. I realized it almost immediately and it isn't my job. If somehow they didn't then that would be an significant display of incompetence.
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 351
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 3/14/2026 5:35 PM
Despite how we may feel about Sac State, I want our Ohio Bobcats playing those Hornets, either there at Sacramento, or in our backyard in Athens.

We could show others across the nation we can play in Big City California and do well.
Showing Messages: 26 - 46 of 46



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)