AZhoopsMTfootballfan
Well-known member
What about adding Colorado Mines and coach Stitt to the BSC to replace Sac if they are looking for D2 programs?
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Pam State applying to go FBS Independent
- Thread starter dirtysoup
- Start date
I actually think the best add for the Big Sky would be (if they started taking Football seriously) San Diego. Good school, very attractive location, and could really get things going in Football if they wanted to invest more money and time into it.
I hope you’re right that they’re doing things behind the scenes.
rocklobster
Well-known member
And Idaho. They tried this thing, and landed back in the BSC. This is a messed up move, and a lot people in charge are gonna lose their jobs over this.
IdaGriz01
Well-known member
BIG difference in situations. With Washington State right across the border, Moscow / UI has virtually no TV market credibility, and very little drive-in home attendance ... a population of less than 27 thousand, with no :suburbs" to speak of. Sacramento sits in the middle of a metro area of over 2.4 million (more than double the whole state of Montana). Sure, they have a busy pro sports scene, but an FBS football program has at least a chance to attract a following. A better comparison would be Boise State, which has done just fine at the FBS level.
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
Why would you think they aren't and haven't been looking at the future, including changes in landscape and FBS? When they say that FCS is the right place for UM, it's because they have been following and looking at alternatives. Jeez, have some faith in the leadership. They are not asleep. But they are realistic. With money and the right alternative, UM would move, is my view. That being said, I can't imagine the money will ever be there. O'Day would have supporting moving up, if there had been a credible path. I know that. I assume Haslam is the same.
SDHornet
Well-known member
Lots of folks seem to be looking at this pending move through the lens of the past. Lots of things up in the air with the pending House Settlement next week (Dr. Wood indicated that Sac State is opting in) and the new governance model being discussed/negotiated by the power brokers (SEC & B1G) of the college football. College football as we have known it has been changing quite dramatically over the past few years and that trend will probably continue until all the lawsuits, settlements, and possible Federal legislation on the various issues are eventually sorted out. In the meantime, Dr. Wood has positioned Sac State well to take advantage of the current environment.
For us Hornet fans that keep a close eye on things, the notable difference this time around with the stadium/FBS push was the fact that Dr. Wood raised student fees to increase athletic operating budgets and athletic facility improvements that go into effect this fall. Dr. Wood also ran a concurrent PR blitz to generate interest/hype/notability of this current stadium/FBS push. Past efforts were more seemingly hopeful something would just come along and fall in our lap, or that local media would care. Notable difference in approach by Dr. Wood by going out and making noise and being proactive in getting tangible results. Hate on his approach all you want but anyone that lives life knows the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
That said, I agree with the poster that stated this is a high risk - high reward move. The high risk is leaving a stable conference home for football with the known variables for FBS Indy status with a lot of unknown variables.
Monetarily, I'm not overly concerned with our situation. California wastes billions on illegals and other awful policies like a high speed rail to no where, so I couldn't care less on a few million a year being squandered on the only D1 football program in the state capital. The students were always going to fund the significant portion of this push and the new fees will bolster that aspect.
My understanding is that the NIL pledges being touted were contingent on a PAC invite, however I image a significant portion of those pledges remaining with our move to FBS. I think the biggest factor in whether or not those NIL pledges materialize is more dependent on the economy holding up rather than PAC vs MW vs Indy.
Being in the 20th largest media market will go a long way in allowing this move to FBS to be a success. Immediately upon reclassifying as FBS, our media value will see an significant increase so the questions is how much of that potential will be realized sooner rather than later. Given the move away from large TV deals for the non-power conferences, I suspect streaming will play a significant role in getting eyeballs on Hornet football. Once FBS status is approved, Hornet admin needs to be pounding the door of our regional and local media stations that broadcasts our games to get a new contract as well as looking to a streaming partner to get games available via that avenue. All of that will be revenue directly into our coffers without having to share a dime of it to a conference. Ticket prices, merchandise, tailgating, etc will/should see an increase in pricing to generate more revenue.
IMO scheduling will be the make or break factor for this move. '25 is set already, and I would assume Hornet admin is already in discussions with FBS programs for games in '26 and beyond. With phase 2 of the stadium build set for completion before the '26 season, this will go a long way in getting known brands on the schedule in Hornet Stadium. For those familiar with the Sac area fans, you already know that people will show up for what is deemed as "noteworthy" games. Home games against regional peer institutions (Fresno State, Nevada, San Jose State, San Diego State) will sell tickets. If we can even land a home game against a bigger name (former Pac 12 schools) it'll be a financial and PR boon for Hornet football. For those thinking the bigger names won't come, you have to consider that those west coast B1G programs will likely want to stay as regional as possible in non-conference scheduling so I would believe a home and home is a possibility.
Long post, so sorry for droning on. Bottom line is our situation is unique given the current environment of college football compared to other FCS programs looking to make a move to FBS. Our uniqueness is one that, IMO, makes it worth taking the risk on going FBS even if Indy status.
For us Hornet fans that keep a close eye on things, the notable difference this time around with the stadium/FBS push was the fact that Dr. Wood raised student fees to increase athletic operating budgets and athletic facility improvements that go into effect this fall. Dr. Wood also ran a concurrent PR blitz to generate interest/hype/notability of this current stadium/FBS push. Past efforts were more seemingly hopeful something would just come along and fall in our lap, or that local media would care. Notable difference in approach by Dr. Wood by going out and making noise and being proactive in getting tangible results. Hate on his approach all you want but anyone that lives life knows the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
That said, I agree with the poster that stated this is a high risk - high reward move. The high risk is leaving a stable conference home for football with the known variables for FBS Indy status with a lot of unknown variables.
Monetarily, I'm not overly concerned with our situation. California wastes billions on illegals and other awful policies like a high speed rail to no where, so I couldn't care less on a few million a year being squandered on the only D1 football program in the state capital. The students were always going to fund the significant portion of this push and the new fees will bolster that aspect.
My understanding is that the NIL pledges being touted were contingent on a PAC invite, however I image a significant portion of those pledges remaining with our move to FBS. I think the biggest factor in whether or not those NIL pledges materialize is more dependent on the economy holding up rather than PAC vs MW vs Indy.
Being in the 20th largest media market will go a long way in allowing this move to FBS to be a success. Immediately upon reclassifying as FBS, our media value will see an significant increase so the questions is how much of that potential will be realized sooner rather than later. Given the move away from large TV deals for the non-power conferences, I suspect streaming will play a significant role in getting eyeballs on Hornet football. Once FBS status is approved, Hornet admin needs to be pounding the door of our regional and local media stations that broadcasts our games to get a new contract as well as looking to a streaming partner to get games available via that avenue. All of that will be revenue directly into our coffers without having to share a dime of it to a conference. Ticket prices, merchandise, tailgating, etc will/should see an increase in pricing to generate more revenue.
IMO scheduling will be the make or break factor for this move. '25 is set already, and I would assume Hornet admin is already in discussions with FBS programs for games in '26 and beyond. With phase 2 of the stadium build set for completion before the '26 season, this will go a long way in getting known brands on the schedule in Hornet Stadium. For those familiar with the Sac area fans, you already know that people will show up for what is deemed as "noteworthy" games. Home games against regional peer institutions (Fresno State, Nevada, San Jose State, San Diego State) will sell tickets. If we can even land a home game against a bigger name (former Pac 12 schools) it'll be a financial and PR boon for Hornet football. For those thinking the bigger names won't come, you have to consider that those west coast B1G programs will likely want to stay as regional as possible in non-conference scheduling so I would believe a home and home is a possibility.
Long post, so sorry for droning on. Bottom line is our situation is unique given the current environment of college football compared to other FCS programs looking to make a move to FBS. Our uniqueness is one that, IMO, makes it worth taking the risk on going FBS even if Indy status.
Yeah, D2 all the way.
Why does the BSC have to add? We already have dead weight in the conference.
How has that media market played out over the many years in FCS and the BSC? It showed no advantage to programs with little media market.
Ut-Grizfan
Well-known member
And App State, JMU, Costal Carolina, Liberty, Jacksonville State etc. For every FCS team that struggles there is another that seems to do well.
It's different at the FBS level, having or being apart of a large Media Market gives you a better chance to be an attractive option to a Conference looking to improve their media deal, exposure, TV #s etc. Davis was added (I garuntee eventually for Football) partially to help the MWC in their TV deal.
Those are all programs that were in a better situation than Sac and none of them went into the FBS as an independent except Liberty who had the money to control their own destiny. Their athletic budget is up around $60 million a year. Even then and having Freeze for much of that period , they only managed one season with more than 8 wins/less than 5 losses as an independent. BTW Sac State currently spends about $35 million a year. Their sac12 initiative was focused on a war chest for NIL, not permanently funding such an increased athletic budget.
Even UMass entered as a football only MAC member before going independent and is going back to the MAC.
Because we’ll only have 9 full time members and you need at least 10 for scheduling purposes.
Look, it'll obviously be a struggle as an independent. No doubt they'll take their lumps on the field and on the court. And they won't play many home games, but that shouldn't matter since no one attends anyhow. But they will likely get 7 or 8 payday games a year, and without question will bring in more revenue than they do now in the bsc. Then if an fbs league opens up, they'll be the best-positioned program.
HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
Now do the west coast.
IdaGriz01
Well-known member
Personally, I think – IF they have the money to commit to the needed upgrades – an invite from the MWC or Pac-12 will come sooner rather than later. As noted before, Sacramento is a lively sports town and will likely welcome FBS football at home. Because of that, do not assume they will only be able to schedule money games on the road. After some shakedown, I could easily see a big home event with, say Cal-Berkeley or even a Texas Tech.
OrgonGriz
Well-known member
Well I wish Sac luck in this really. It’s not going to be easy for sure.
But I think that if they can at least get into the MWC they could get a PAC invite after they build up a bit more. Or if I’m a few years UNLV makes a move to the PAC or maybe BIG12 that puts Sac in an even better spots in the MWC.
Plus I think we see the FCS money games with the Power conferences go away. The Powers will schedule those games with the Mid Majors. The FCS new “Money games” will be with Mid majors at a much lower amount and putting a nail in the coffin of many programs at the FCS level. I truly think it will be the end of the FCS. The Mids will be the new “FCS”.
Anyone left in the current FCS that can’t somehow make that Mid major jump becomes DII. Unfortunately I think that will include our Griz.
But I think that if they can at least get into the MWC they could get a PAC invite after they build up a bit more. Or if I’m a few years UNLV makes a move to the PAC or maybe BIG12 that puts Sac in an even better spots in the MWC.
Plus I think we see the FCS money games with the Power conferences go away. The Powers will schedule those games with the Mid Majors. The FCS new “Money games” will be with Mid majors at a much lower amount and putting a nail in the coffin of many programs at the FCS level. I truly think it will be the end of the FCS. The Mids will be the new “FCS”.
Anyone left in the current FCS that can’t somehow make that Mid major jump becomes DII. Unfortunately I think that will include our Griz.
Huh? The BSC had nine full time members for years and that enabled a balanced schedule. 8 conf games for all and play every member. Ideal.
SDHornet
Well-known member
Per the Knight-Newhouse website, we were at $45.3M in FY '23. The student fees will kick that to around $50M when fully implemented. It's important to note that the budget covers 21 teams and 585 "student athletes".
