Hey 69....it wasn't directed at any one person (except those using a K) as midpelled university names should be reserved for Suc St and Stanfraud. I think criticizing Cal is no different than anyone who buys a home with mortgage. Cal has some of the wealthiest donors in the country, but not the kind like Oregon has in Uncle Phil (nor do I have that uncle darned it). Based on earnings and revenue however, Cal can afford it. The debt number is high, but not without merit for their program. Now if we did that at Davis...ouch...even if only a minuscule fraction of the total.

Whether the profit comes from TV or not, ESPN and Fox games are worth more than P12 Network games, and paydays down under help too. Those are all things that are a result of money spent. The SAHP was only about $150 million and privately funded (separate from the $321 million Memorial project).

Tweaks to an unsafe and century-ish old facility don't work. Besides, Cal plays P12 Division 1 football brother, not Intramurals. The concern over Cal's athletic debt is more created by academics and newspaper writers. I agree Division 1 sports cost too much, but they are also generating the revenue. With good business decisions following a plan, its no issue any more than academic costs to attend college which is high at schools that don't have athletic debt or costs.

One thing that has always appalled me here is the hatred towards other UC's, most notably Cal. I know it sucks Davis is the backup school but really? We hold our own academically and socially. Having degrees from both I enjoy the atmosphere of both, athletics included. They are different but nonetheless "mine." Both also need to pick up their game in certain areas, but neither deserves the spurn of the other. We are more partners than not, in fact, there's no way we aren't.

Cal also ran a $9 million profit in football and I think around $2 million in basketball. Not too shabby. Keys to remember at Cal were the stadium was mandated legally due to earthquake retrofitting and it was either retrofit or build anew elsewhere. Building elsewhere (likely off campus) would have either cost more or resulted in less ticket sales and thus less revenue. Yes the debt is there, but there was no other choice to retain its largest athletics revenue source. Loose football and they'd have lost other sports too.

Extreme non-excitement around the program and Dykes not lasting past 2017 (even if he had a great season in which case he'd have left as fast as if he had a crap season) were the culprits. He was the cousin no one cared to invite but couldn't find a reason to not have at Christmas dinner. Clearly, some donor money felt it was time to cut losses and instead of waiting for the cousins parents to divorce next year decided to facilitate the separation in advance.

And Hawkins isn't really someone who played for Bama with a coaching staff chalk full of former and future name brand head coaches. He will transfer to a place like Cal that had had success with grad transfers and a proven receiving corps.

all good points...but the question is can we even be mediocre as a Big Sky if we have to beg for basics like computer software. Hearing that up above was painful.

Could we raise more interest and investment ($) if we were stepped up?

Money.

We've been behind forever. We (Aka the ENTIRE UC Davis Football community) need to realize without it no coach can make us competitive.

I truly hope the FBS/FCS question is actually evaluated in a few to several years. A few hundred die hard "Aggie Pride" types can't fund even an FCS program alone. You need the general university community at a minimum and the regional community ideally to be at play.

I know some will call me out, but honestly, at a big time school like UC Davis is now, the students and community it attracts don't really care about playing "Generic Multi-Directional State College." Need evidence? There's more buzz when we play a body bag away game at "University of Heard Of Before" with a near certain lopsided outcome.

I'm not saying FBS is the answer, but has it seriously been evaluated if it just might be a more successful model at UCD? I don't think so...in my opinion it's simply been rejected as it's not "The Aggie Way" and too "Big." Well, we (including EVERYONE here) sure are loving BIG now aren't we?

Hopefully he can lecture on "student section tactics during football games"

Great hire and couldn't agree more with everyone.

But....if he's ultra successful and proves the Colorado experience was a fluke, does he resist a promotion back to FBS and an at least 7-10x pay raise in 3-5 years? Looks like TOP pay at FCS level is around $400,000 total pay (salary + bonuses + other fees). Curious to see Hawks full contract.

If so, is the program left in a place where "next" can continue the progress?

Does anyone know if he has to teach basket weaving? I know some time ago there was talk of the coaches being full time coaches and not splitting time as faux academic educators.