I spoke with a few members of the Athletics staff about the logo. What the lemon CA represents is the only true "letter logo" UC Davis has had. A lot of the credit actually goes to baseball because the primary horse head in the C logo doesn't look great on hats, so Coach Vaughn went with the lemon CA, which has a lot of tradition. The other letter logo that has been on hats as been the interlocking UCD that baseball has worn, but the university is trying to get away from "UCD" and instead toward the proper UC Davis and the interlocking UCD has never been an official logo. I am a huge proponent of history, but we need to be sure that the use of the lemon CA does not revert to people (especially alums) calling us the "Cal Aggies," which we are not.
what does the lemon A represent. It’s clearly California Aggies. Is the distinction not shortening it to Cal?
Personally I think we should be called Davis and have a Detroit tiger D on the baseball caps.
Let’s lose that UC association altogether, just kidding... sort of
Cal Davis, UC Davis, Cal Aggies, I can't find myself having a strong preference. If we become a top 25 fcs program and hoops go dancing every other year then people can call is whatever they want.
Though really, what's wrong with just Davis? The script on the helmets looks fantastic
The thing I don't like about "Cal Davis" is that it sounds like someone's name rather than a school. I hear Cal Davis and I think Cal Worthington....(and his dog, Spot.) UC Davis is fine. Love the throw back logo. Even have a couple of caps with it. I am not a real baseball historian, but someone once compared it to the hat worn by the Chicago American Giants of the Negro Leagues. I like it better on the caps than the horse in a horse-shoe logo.
I also like Davis. Simple. Davis is kind of our own thing, and ppl often call us Davis anyway. I would love to see this branding and frankly I like the way Berkeley does it on their website: https://www.berkeley.edu
The two font wordmark is clean and professional looking and I'm totally fine with it appearing related to UC Davis Health Systems and such. It just doesn't really fit for things like apparel and Athletics branding.
Also, these days its of extreme importance that text and branding look legible on a very small screen. So far the only branding the University has that meets that criteria is the new Athletics font, the CA, the mustang head silhouette alt logo, and ironically the two font wordmark.
I actually kinda like the mustang horseshoe logo idea but it's just too busy for the times and could really use a simplification, which would help for its recognizability on Athletics uniforms as well. Mozilla Firefox actually is a good reference for that; they realized their logo was too complex so they flattened out the colors and made the features more pronounced so it looks familar but better on mobile
Realistic expectations: We will show some offensive firepower and not be shut out. Maybe even keeping pace, with some of their star players out. In the second half, their athleticism will wear our defense down, and they start racking up the score
Actual expectations: BIGGEST UPSET OF THE YEAR LET'S GO AGS
Game notes up. They haven’t fixed the DB section of depth chart listing safeties as cornerbacks and vice versa.
And Roland Ocansey still listed at 2345 lbs.
This doesn’t present an image of competence.
Someone should tell them that they may have a bigger audience used to better product this week.
They should proof read the game notes more thoroughly than tweets. And make the same mistake three weeks in a row?
Jake Parks not listed despite starting first two games. Sad.