Big Sky move to FBS

[SoCalHornetFan1]

While I know that the FBS isn’t a goal for all of our Big Sky Teams but I think it should be evaluated as a long term conference strategy.
We are stacked with solid teams.

 

[superhornet]

Why? In FCS, the conference is guaranteed an auto-bid and a legitimate chance at a Natty. If we moved up as a conference, we'd be relegated to the G5 and defined out of any shot at the bogus CFP. We'd also be forced to up the ante in terms of number of sports and how much we spend on them. We're already having problems with basketball in that regard. Many of our conference mates are in the same boat.

That said, whichever way SD votes on this, he'll have a much better expressed argument, as will Kadeezy, BHF, and a couple of others.

 

[Kadeezy]

While I know that the FBS isn’t a goal for all of our Big Sky Teams but I think it should be evaluated as a long term conference strategy.
We are stacked with solid teams.

I have always said this, and it has been stronger than ever. They need to pawn off UNC on the Pioneer conference, and get commitments for stadium expansion from some of the smaller venues (EWU, who has no money!).

We could get two for ones with PAC 12 and MWC schools.

 

[superhornet]

While I know that the FBS isn’t a goal for all of our Big Sky Teams but I think it should be evaluated as a long term conference strategy.
We are stacked with solid teams.

I have always said this, and it has been stronger than ever. They need to pawn off UNC on the Pioneer conference, and get commitments for stadium expansion from some of the smaller venues (EWU, who has no money!).

We could get two for ones with PAC 12 and MWC schools.

I agree with sending UNC to the Pioneer. They'd have to agree to go non-schollie, but it'd probably be a good fit for them, and going to San Diego probably wouldn't be a huge deal for them after having come to Sac and UCD.

While your point about two-for-ones with Pac-12 and MWC is valid, I think that at least Pac-12 idea would result in a roadie-home setup that would result in a buyout as soon as we complete our trip there. More cash in our pockets, but it would create a hole in the schedule that we'd have to fill with a WAC school anyway.

 

[SoCalHornetFan1]

Yes…. With a few Big Sky Schools that would opt out of an FBS upgrade. I think a couple of the Dakota schools for example might think it’s a great fit as we could move together, fulfill our schedules enough to get our requirements while giving us all a few payday games as well.

Big Sky schools have done it before. Besides PAC12 and Mtn West we would be 3rd TV CFB in the west region.

If they did research with proper planning it would be possible.

 

[BuckeyeHornetFan]

This subject is the big catch-22 and chicken or the egg situation.

The Hornets program will never attract the necessary fan interest and attendance until name schools begin coming to town. Such as Stanford, Cal, USC, UW, etc.

But you can’t get those schools to come here until you’ve got the adequate facilities to support it.

And you can’t get the facilities built w/o increased and consistent revenue.

Round and round we go.

But I know one thing for sure. If the Hornets had a team capable of competing and beating the likes of Stanford, Cal, USC, UW, etc and had a viable stadium to host such a contest the fan turnout would be unlike anything we’ve seen.

As the movie quote goes, “Build it and they will come”.

But Billion dollar question remains — how do they get from here to there?

 

[stingthemgood]

You guys are smoking something. I don’t want any of it.

 

[SoCalHornetFan1]

Gotta be FBS to host any of the schools that will get us a large stadium revenue attendance money. Being FBS scheduling Nevada, San Jose State, and Fresno State would all fill the visitors side of the stadium,

PAC12 avoids mtn west games. Mtn west majority of time does home / away deals with mid west teams / northeastern teams that want the recruiting opportunity in CA.

I think it needs to be built and the revenue comes from being FBS and doing a nice job w scheduling

 

[stingthemgood]

Gotta be FBS to host any of the schools that will get us a large stadium revenue attendance money. Being FBS scheduling Nevada, San Jose State, and Fresno State would all fill the visitors side of the stadium,

PAC12 avoids mtn west games. Mtn west majority of time does home / away deals with mid west teams / northeastern teams that want the recruiting opportunity in CA.

I think it needs to be built and the revenue comes from being FBS and doing a nice job w scheduling

The Athletic Department budget would need to triple to go FBS. We already have one of the smallest ratios of student population vs athletics budget in the country, and the previous student referendums have been of the bait and switch variety. The students aren't paying any more, and the donor levels are the smallest of any California DI institution and still struggle with numbers.

Stop this madness and close this thread. It will NEVER happen.

 

[SoCalHornetFan1]

Gotta have a “can do attitude”! Few years back you probably were saying we will “never have back to back” conference titles. Get some positivity bud!

 

[stingthemgood]

Gotta have a “can do attitude”! Few years back you probably were saying we will “never have back to back” conference titles. Get some positivity bud!

Can we enjoy success of a program without letting it go to our heads?

So you have points to refute what I said then I assume - lay them on me. What am I missing?

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

Gotta have a “can do attitude”! Few years back you probably were saying we will “never have back to back” conference titles. Get some positivity bud!

Can we enjoy success of a program without letting it go to our heads?

So you have points to refute what I said then I assume - lay them on me. What am I missing?

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search

Sac State has the highest athletic budget of any full time Big Sky member.
They offer the most sports and are completely Title IX compliant.

Yes the gym is a joke and the stadium needs to be made permanent/upgraded. Perhaps this is the catalyst that gets the wheels moving?

 

[SoCalHornetFan1]

You can have small goals and enjoy mediocrity, or you can give yourself a challenge to achieve significant growth and build something substantial.

Nevada, UT San Antonio, Central Florida, James Madison, Sam Houston etc.

Many teams have and or are in process of growing into FBS programs.

Yes. Enjoy our current victories. But we should seize the momentum and fundraise to get things started!

 

[stingthemgood]

Gotta have a “can do attitude”! Few years back you probably were saying we will “never have back to back” conference titles. Get some positivity bud!

Can we enjoy success of a program without letting it go to our heads?

So you have points to refute what I said then I assume - lay them on me. What am I missing?

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search

Sac State has the highest athletic budget of any full time Big Sky member.
They offer the most sports and are completely Title IX compliant.

Yes the gym is a joke and the stadium needs to be made permanent/upgraded. Perhaps this is the catalyst that gets the wheels moving?

Circular reasoning for the win! We have the highest budget in part because we offer the most sports (coaching, travel and scholarship costs).

So I'll pose it this way - would you be in favor of cutting 4 programs to move football to FBS? We would have to eliminate several men's programs that are not Big Sky sponsored to maintain Title IX compliance with the scholarship increase brought on by the FB scholarships.

Baseball would need to be gone
Men's Soccer would need to be gone

On the women's side then we would need to cut Rowing and Gymnastics

By my math that would keep us Title IX compliant.

If you cut no sports, you would need to add 2-3 women's sports - and increase the athletic department budget immensely because there aren't really any "west coast" sports left to add.

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

Gotta have a “can do attitude”! Few years back you probably were saying we will “never have back to back” conference titles. Get some positivity bud!

Can we enjoy success of a program without letting it go to our heads?

So you have points to refute what I said then I assume - lay them on me. What am I missing?

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search

Sac State has the highest athletic budget of any full time Big Sky member.
They offer the most sports and are completely Title IX compliant.

Yes the gym is a joke and the stadium needs to be made permanent/upgraded. Perhaps this is the catalyst that gets the wheels moving?

Circular reasoning for the win! We have the highest budget in part because we offer the most sports (coaching, travel and scholarship costs).

So I'll pose it this way - would you be in favor of cutting 4 programs to move football to FBS? We would have to eliminate several men's programs that are not Big Sky sponsored to maintain Title IX compliance with the scholarship increase brought on by the FB scholarships.

Baseball would need to be gone
Men's Soccer would need to be gone

On the women's side then we would need to cut Rowing and Gymnastics

By my math that would keep us Title IX compliant.

If you cut no sports, you would need to add 2-3 women's sports - and increase the athletic department budget immensely because there aren't really any "west coast" sports left to add.

Absolutely,
Cut mens golf, soccer. Baseball needs to stay.
Cut gymnastics, rowing offers too many Title IX counters and is needed.
Or keep Women static and add 1or 2 sports. Swimming, Diving?

You would add 18 football scholarships and 1 or 2 coaches, cant remember, for FBS.

The real question is why is a school this size playing FCS?
Why are athletic donations laughable from a school with over 250,000+ graduates?

FCS is dead, most of the schools closely similar to us have moved up or shuttered. Not to mention no FCS schools to speak of out west. FCS consists mostly of the Bucknell's, Mercer's, West Texas A&M and Stetson's of the world.

 

[stingthemgood]

Gotta have a “can do attitude”! Few years back you probably were saying we will “never have back to back” conference titles. Get some positivity bud!

Can we enjoy success of a program without letting it go to our heads?

So you have points to refute what I said then I assume - lay them on me. What am I missing?

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search

Sac State has the highest athletic budget of any full time Big Sky member.
They offer the most sports and are completely Title IX compliant.

Yes the gym is a joke and the stadium needs to be made permanent/upgraded. Perhaps this is the catalyst that gets the wheels moving?

Circular reasoning for the win! We have the highest budget in part because we offer the most sports (coaching, travel and scholarship costs).

So I'll pose it this way - would you be in favor of cutting 4 programs to move football to FBS? We would have to eliminate several men's programs that are not Big Sky sponsored to maintain Title IX compliance with the scholarship increase brought on by the FB scholarships.

Baseball would need to be gone
Men's Soccer would need to be gone

On the women's side then we would need to cut Rowing and Gymnastics

By my math that would keep us Title IX compliant.

If you cut no sports, you would need to add 2-3 women's sports - and increase the athletic department budget immensely because there aren't really any "west coast" sports left to add.

Absolutely,
Cut mens golf, soccer. Baseball needs to stay.
Cut gymnastics, rowing offers too many Title IX counters and is needed.
Or keep Women static and add 1or 2 sports. Swimming, Diving?

You would add 18 football scholarships and 1 or 2 coaches, cant remember, for FBS.

The real question is why is a school this size playing FCS?
Why are athletic donations laughable from a school with over 250,000+ graduates?

FCS is dead, most of the schools closely similar to us have moved up or shuttered. Not to mention no FCS schools to speak of out west. FCS consists mostly of the Bucknell's, Mercer's, West Texas A&M and Stetson's of the world.

Because it was a commuter school primarily until the last 10 years - and you won't have graduates who care about the Athletic Department and the campus community with the disposable income to help for several more years.

If there was any donor base, an 2,500 seat gym would have happened already.

 

[superhornet]

Outside of the Liberty special request (which was granted) to jump as Indy, a conference invite is required for an FCS program to jump to FBS. That begs the question of landing point. Being in the West, it appears that we would have the same issue we have in the FCS: the number of available leagues. In FCS, we have the Big Sky and the new WAC. That's it. In FBS, we have the Pac-12 and the MWC. While I haven't really heard of very many suggestions that the Pac-12 would expand to accept Sac, I think that such an idea would be ludicrous. That leaves the MWC. The footprint would be quite similar to the Big Sky in terms of distance, replacing OR, WA, and MT with NM, and leaving AZ out. The Sun Belt and C-USA (to which I've never heard any suggestions for Sac) would be too much of a stretch. Accepting the MWC as a landing pad would therefore bring up the question of their accepting us. Taking us alone would make the division breakdown uneven, which would likely prompt a new team for the Mountain Division. The options that pop into my mind would be enticing Colorado back (not likely, IMO) or grabbing one of the Montanas (only the Griz have had any FBS asperations, at least among the fans, that I've seen, though the Kitties may well have some, too). This is certainly possible, and would give us a better shot at bowls than either stretching the Sun Belt/C-USA way out of shape OR going the Indy route. The Indy route is a VERY hard row to hoe unless one's name is Notre Dame.

As far as whole-conference jump, well, that's going to be problematic. SUU is already leaving for the WAC. UNC would probably do the same, though a drop to D-II would probably be a better option for them. Idaho just returned from FBS-land, and may not be interested in going back; actually, both Idaho and ISU would likely jump to the WAC in that case. EWU has the capability to compete, but I've heard rumblings that they don't have the resources. PSU and Weber could probably pull it off if they wanted to. I'm not sure about Davis or Cal Poly. I think NAU could do it. We could easily be looking at a 6- or 7-team conference if the Conference jumps. That might not be enough to make a go of it. A better option might be to tag-team with Montana on a trip to the MWC. But would the MWC membership vote to take us?

 

[SoCalHornetFan1]

SuperHornet- Correct about 6 or 7 teams from big Sky could upgrade to FBS.
The piece missing in your formula would be to pick up 2 teams from MVC like NDSU etc to reach 8 FBS teams to schedule around and a couple of spots for each to get some paydays.
It is within reach!

 

[BuckeyeHornetFan]

You can have small goals and enjoy mediocrity, or you can give yourself a challenge to achieve significant growth and build something substantial.

Nevada, UT San Antonio, Central Florida, James Madison, Sam Houston etc.

Many teams have and or are in process of growing into FBS programs.

Yes. Enjoy our current victories. But we should seize the momentum and fundraise to get things started!

^^ THIS is the correct attitude. With past precedent and relevant examples cited.

I’ll drop this quote from a very popular movie from 2005 because it is more than applicable:

now I come to you with an idea, I put myself on the line, you shoot it down with your negativity.

Your goddamn negativity! I don't need it! I'm an idea man.

I thrive on enthusiasm. Don't take the wind out of my sails.

 

[stingthemgood]

You can have small goals and enjoy mediocrity, or you can give yourself a challenge to achieve significant growth and build something substantial.

Nevada, UT San Antonio, Central Florida, James Madison, Sam Houston etc.

Many teams have and or are in process of growing into FBS programs.

Yes. Enjoy our current victories. But we should seize the momentum and fundraise to get things started!

^^ THIS is the correct attitude. With past precedent and relevant examples cited.

I’ll drop this quote from a very popular movie from 2005 because it is more than applicable:

now I come to you with an idea, I put myself on the line, you shoot it down with your negativity.

Your goddamn negativity! I don't need it! I'm an idea man.

I thrive on enthusiasm. Don't take the wind out of my sails.

Why is everyone on this board living in a dream land? Between Super Hornet thinking he played for the team (after this many years I have come to realization that he must actually believe it) and you guys thinking that money will fall off of trees and scholarship problems will magically resolve themselves if we make this move.

I presented the issues that were in place for Sacramento State to make this mood. Those don’t go away with the power of positive thinking.

I would love the Hornets to grow as a department to where these discussions could be valid. But we can’t even fundraise for a 2500-3000 seat arena that would make any move feasible. Let alone the amount of money that would be needed to handle the scholarship boost, recruiting budget, the upgrades to Hornet Stadium (might think we’d need permanent restrooms and concessions for a conference to take our bid seriously, don’t you?) and many more things we’d need.

Can we rename this board “the land of fantasies?”