menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Smith has been fired
Page: 5 of 7
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 5:17 PM
Diamond Cat wrote:expand_more
I loved Solich so not hitting him over the head here. As many of you mentioned, Frank was involved in a widely known incident involving alcohol. He did not lose his job (thank God).

The University has a history in making that decision. It would seem to indicate Smith was treated more harshly than others (selective enforcement).

So it has to be the affairs, etc.? The response letter from Elliott is a must read.

How about these statements:

"The reprimand related to coaches toasting in the offices after home victories. Finally, the coaches were toasting with Bourbon provided by your husband to Coach Smith in his office."

"We have numerous other incidents of OU faculty and staff drinking alcohol in offices, OU facilities and on campus. For instance, an OU Associate AD invited Coach Smith to the office of a distinguished faculty member - Dr.(insert name) - offered a glass of bourbon to the Associate AD and Coach Smith and all three drank the alcohol in the faculty member's office."

Popcorn being consumed now.
He also implies OU has motivation to get rid of Smith then redacts the reason.

The part about the girl not being a student is laughable though. Oh yeah, I met this girl at an Athens establishment but it never came up that I was the football coach and she was a student.

Costco doesn't have enough popcorn for this.
mail
spongeBOB CATpants
12/18/2025 5:28 PM
Front page headliner of The Athletic as of 5:26. Somebody mentioned at one point that they thought the university wouldn't think this would get much attention lol its making waves at this point. I got people texting me left and right that pay no attention to Ohio football.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
12/18/2025 5:28 PM
It's not super clear to me why people here are so focused on the alcohol.

Our 40-something coach, one of the highest paid employees at the university, had an ongoing relationship with an undergrad. Does anybody actually believe his attorney's letter that he didn't know that?

His lawyer may well be right that there's no explicit policy against that, and maybe in the end that'll be enough to get Smith paid out.

But at minimum that shows really, really, really poor judgment on Smith's part.

Remember that the goal of the lawyer releasing this letter is to try and own the narrative. That means this is the best possible spin they can put on the situation. It's not a coincidence the reference to a four month relationship with an undergrad is a sentence, but there's two paragraphs about drinking bourbon with high level people at the University.

And there seem to be a lot of people who are burying the lede the way Smith's lawyer intended.

Sure, Lane Kiffin is doing the same thing. Do we have any desire to be like LSU and Lane Kiffin as an institution?
Last Edited: 12/18/2025 5:35:07 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 5:35 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
It's not super clear to me why people here are so focused on the alcohol.

Our 40-something coach, one of the highest paid employees at the university, had an ongoing relationship with an undergrad. Does anybody actually believe his attorney's letter that he didn't know that?

His lawyer may well be right that there's no explicit policy against that, and maybe in the end that'll be enough to get Smith paid out.

But at minimum that shows really, really, really poor judgment on Smith's part.

Remember that the goal of the lawyer releasing this letter is to try and own the narrative. That means this is the best possible spin they can put on the situation.

It's not a coincidence the reference to a four month relationship with an undergrad is a sentence, but there's two paragraphs about drinking bourbon with high level people at the University.
Four out of five clauses that the university used to prove cause involve alcohol. If people are talking about it, ask the univ., lol.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
12/18/2025 5:38 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
Four out of five clauses that the university used to prove cause involve alcohol. If people are talking about it, ask them lol.
OJ Simpson was charged with burglary in 2007, too. Doesn't mean those are the allegations about him people should be focused on.
mail
person
GoCats105
12/18/2025 6:18 PM
BryanHall wrote:expand_more
Just to lay it all out, as far as I can tell right now. . .

The letter from the University states the following as their rationale:

1. Smith had an extra-marital affair/
2. Smith had a relationship with an undergrad.
3. Smith had a relationship with a 41 year old woman.
4. He was witnessed at the OU Inn -- which I think is University property -- by a football player's parents. He seems to have acknowledged this to the AD.
5. He was intoxicated at a public event where he was representing the University.

The response to that letter from his lawyer claims:

1. There was no extra-marital affair because he was separated from his wife.
2. Smith had a relationship with an undergrad for 4 months.
3. He didn't know she was an undergrad.
4. There's no policy against that.
5. He also had a relationship with a 41 year old woman, and the parent of a football player saw him with that woman at the OU Inn.
6. He was living at the OU Inn
7. He wasn't drunk at any events.

I think that's the full range right now.
There has to be more to this story, because this all right here is basically he said/she said and makes it even the sillier that OU hasn't announced more. Unless he was drunk while coaching a game, which would definitely be something. What image are they trying to protect?
If there was more to the story why wouldn't they disclose it? It does them no good to wait to disclose more later.
Oh I agree with you. The more this news slowly trickles out instead of ripping the band aid off the worse it looks for OU, IMO.
mail
person
L.C.
12/18/2025 6:32 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
Oh I agree with you. The more this news slowly trickles out instead of ripping the band aid off the worse it looks for OU, IMO.

IDK. The more that leaks out, quite possibly it will look worse for both parties. It certainly seems on it's way to an ugly lawsuit that will tarnish a lot of people.
Last Edited: 12/18/2025 8:34:34 PM by L.C.
mail
person
GoCats105
12/18/2025 6:34 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 7:05 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Four out of five clauses that the university used to prove cause involve alcohol. If people are talking about it, ask them lol.
OJ Simpson was charged with burglary in 2007, too. Doesn't mean those are the allegations about him people should be focused on.
How did that case work out for the accusers, I forget.


(Just kidding...I get your point, but that was a fastball down the middle)
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 7:43 PM
WOUB reports on relationship policies. Interesting read.

https://woub.org/2025/12/18/ohio-university-fires-brian-s... /
mail
person
Cats5
12/18/2025 8:17 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
WOUB reports on relationship policies. Interesting read.

https://woub.org/2025/12/18/ohio-university-fires-brian-s... /
I have a feeling the school might’ve jumped the gun a little.
mail
person
boydhallbobcat
12/18/2025 8:42 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
Also, why wouldn't the University put all the reasons why he was being terminated in his termination letter? Why would they just include "the tip of the iceberg?"
mail
OhioCatFan
12/18/2025 8:51 PM
boydhallbobcat wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
Also, why wouldn't the University put all the reasons why he was being terminated in his termination letter? Why would they just include "the tip of the iceberg?"
That's a very good question. My guess is too many lawyers and too few PR people involved in the decison making.
mail
person
DC_United47
12/18/2025 8:57 PM
RufusCat09 wrote:expand_more
I’m not usually a “let the players pick their coach” guy but in this era if you DON’T then the players are gone…and then you have to pay to get new players….so maybe we should just “hire Hauser” like the said!
mail
OhioCatFan
12/18/2025 9:00 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
So far everything I've heard over the last few months from reliable sources has been consistent with what's been released so far, but why the University is allowing it to all drip out so slowly is beyond me. Another poster used the analogy of "ripping off the bandaid." I think that's appropriate -- endure a little intense pain and have it over with; rather than having continuing pain over, weeks, months, or even years. In fairness, in my reflective moments, I think the university is trying to tell Smith that he should go away quietly by not revealing everything at once, but he doesn't seem to be getting the hint.
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 9:02 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
Also, why wouldn't the University put all the reasons why he was being terminated in his termination letter? Why would they just include "the tip of the iceberg?"
That's a very good question. My guess is too many lawyers and too few PR people involved in the decison making.
Perhaps they were in a rush to get him out the door in order to have a new coach in by the time the portal opens, and further claims had yet to be fully investigated. Even if not, they definitely felt this was enough to proceed.
mail
OhioCatFan
12/18/2025 9:05 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
Also, why wouldn't the University put all the reasons why he was being terminated in his termination letter? Why would they just include "the tip of the iceberg?"
That's a very good question. My guess is too many lawyers and too few PR people involved in the decison making.
Perhaps they were in a rush to get him out the door in order to have a new coach in by the time the portal opens, and further claims had yet to be fully investigated. Even if not, they definitely felt this was enough to proceed.
That's also possibly a factor, IMHO.
mail
person
mid70sbobcat
12/18/2025 10:23 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
So far everything I've heard over the last few months from reliable sources has been consistent with what's been released so far, but why the University is allowing it to all drip out so slowly is beyond me. Another poster used the analogy of "ripping off the bandaid." I think that's appropriate -- endure a little intense pain and have it over with; rather than having continuing pain over, weeks, months, or even years. In fairness, in my reflective moments, I think the university is trying to tell Smith that he should go away quietly by not revealing everything at once, but he doesn't seem to be getting the hint.
To be honest I hope Smith and his attorney pursue a lawsuit. He was cited for alcohol use on university property yet Gonzalez' husband provided in on at least one occasion. And as far as I know a sexual relationship with anyone of legal age is not a crime. Instead of maybe hundreds or even thousands of people being aware of this "horrible" behavior now the entire USA and worldwide will see the dysfunctionality that exists at our alma mater. So, we may as well terminate any of the assistant coaches who also drank alcohol on University property with Smith.
Last Edited: 12/18/2025 10:24:30 PM by mid70sbobcat
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 10:32 PM
mid70sbobcat wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
So far everything I've heard over the last few months from reliable sources has been consistent with what's been released so far, but why the University is allowing it to all drip out so slowly is beyond me. Another poster used the analogy of "ripping off the bandaid." I think that's appropriate -- endure a little intense pain and have it over with; rather than having continuing pain over, weeks, months, or even years. In fairness, in my reflective moments, I think the university is trying to tell Smith that he should go away quietly by not revealing everything at once, but he doesn't seem to be getting the hint.
To be honest I hope Smith and his attorney pursue a lawsuit. He was cited for alcohol use on university property yet Gonzalez' husband provided in on at least one occasion. And as far as I know a sexual relationship with anyone of legal age is not a crime. Instead of maybe hundreds or even thousands of people being aware of this "horrible" behavior now the entire USA and worldwide will see the dysfunctionality that exists at our alma mater. So, we may as well terminate any of the assistant coaches who also drank alcohol on University property with Smith.
An enterprising reporter might submit an FOIA request for the personnel files of the other staff members to see if they were also reprimanded for Bourbongate.
mail
person
mid70sbobcat
12/18/2025 10:43 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
Could this come down to a court determining if OU's employment clauses and its enforcement of them were sufficiently well-crafted to sustain scrutiny with regard to vagueness and/or adhesion to current pubic standards? I suppose case law could also figure in.

Additional reading:

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-...

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...

Agree that the 41-year-old would not seem to be a problem, so is this a factual dispute about what Smith said about what someone may have observed at the OU Inn?
From what I've been told the incidents referred to in the prez's letter are just the tip of the iceberg. If this goes to court, or if there is a settlement, the facts will come out and this will get even more messy. As others with more legal training then I have said, under Ohio FOI law there is no way that the university can keep this all under wraps. The university appears to have been trying a "modified, limited hangout." If they had remembered their watergate history they would have known that often doesn't work out too well.
Since you seem to be in the know, and you don't have to get specific, but is everything that has been reported so far everything that you've been told? Checking off boxes essentially? I'm only asking because in small towns like Athens, rumors spread like wildfire and it's hard to tell what's true and what isn't. I'd be curious to know if what you've heard is dead on with what has been reported so far (from either OU or Smith's attorney).
So far everything I've heard over the last few months from reliable sources has been consistent with what's been released so far, but why the University is allowing it to all drip out so slowly is beyond me. Another poster used the analogy of "ripping off the bandaid." I think that's appropriate -- endure a little intense pain and have it over with; rather than having continuing pain over, weeks, months, or even years. In fairness, in my reflective moments, I think the university is trying to tell Smith that he should go away quietly by not revealing everything at once, but he doesn't seem to be getting the hint.
To be honest I hope Smith and his attorney pursue a lawsuit. He was cited for alcohol use on university property yet Gonzalez' husband provided in on at least one occasion. And as far as I know a sexual relationship with anyone of legal age is not a crime. Instead of maybe hundreds or even thousands of people being aware of this "horrible" behavior now the entire USA and worldwide will see the dysfunctionality that exists at our alma mater. So, we may as well terminate any of the assistant coaches who also drank alcohol on University property with Smith.
An enterprising reporter might submit an FOIA request for the personnel files of the other staff members to see if they were also reprimanded for Bourbongate.
With my Undergrad degree from Ohio in Probability & statistics I'd bet against any of the remaining coaches being called on the carpet for this kind of alcohol abuse. Long live the CI!
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 10:51 PM
Obi Wan Kenobi speaks:
https://x.com/drridpath/status/2001759965896200503?s=46&t...
mail
Mike Coleman
12/18/2025 11:17 PM
For any Posties or WOUB peeps lurking here, quote Ridpath now. I've been doing this shit for 35 years.

https://www.ohio.edu/experts/expert/b-david-ridpath
mail
OhioCatFan
12/18/2025 11:45 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
For any Posties or WOUB peeps lurking here, quote Ridpath now. I've been doing this shit for 35 years.

https://www.ohio.edu/experts/expert/b-david-ridpath
This is probably going to force the university's hand, and they will have to rip off the band-aid. This is a direct result of their limited, modified hangout. This approach, championed by my distant relative H. R. Haldeman, seems to be alive and well at OHIO.
mail
Mike Coleman
12/19/2025 12:20 AM
Isn't Ridpath the guy who brought down Bobby Pruett?

His emails are in the inbox or OU students. OU says he is an expert.

Seriously, has he ever been wrong?

https://www.ourmidland.com/news/article/Ex-Marshall-Direc...
mail
person
SBH
12/19/2025 7:45 AM
Disappointed in all parties here. It's becoming increasingly difficult to be a college sports fan.

Disappointed, too, that no one has linked to the classic Seinfeld scene where George Costanza is confronted by his boss for having sex with the cleaning lady, on his desk. "Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? 'cause, I gotta tell you, if there were any mention of that rule in the employee manual..." This was my immediate thought when I heard the affair was with an undergrad.

Stupid on Smith's part. Poor decision making by the student. But a really bad look for the administration. Did anyone ever sit down with Smith and urge him to clean up his behavior...people are talking, etc.? If this goes to court, it's going to be highly embarrassing.
Showing Messages: 101 - 125 of 165
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



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