I feel like I am driving by an auto accident on the other side of the freeway, I cannot look away from what Sac State Football is doing.

We are observing two dramatically different approaches to building a winning football program within the same market . . . I am not sure Sac has the right or wrong approach, but i think we can observe and replicate the good decisions they make while hopefully avoiding the bad.

You still don't get it. Everything has changed in college football. The Dion Sanders effect is real. Right now across summer sports camps around the country guess which school is generating buzz in both football and basketball? And this is before all the changes and results from all this infusion of Top Tier D1 talent. Watch what SacSt does this fall, they are going to be very good. Think about basketball...Shaq, Mikey Williams, etc. blowing up the gym for the home opener. I'll bet they triple their profits at the turn and merchandise next year.

What my main question is how can we use this to our benefit?

Next year, this time SACST is going to be everyone's darling. I could see SACST winning it all in football and then become a hot bed for transfers. A Big impact to their basketball program. How many ESPN clips are they going to show of Shaq at SACST? The amount of free publicity is going to bring more eyeballs to the Sacramento area including us. I want to grab some of those eyeballs.

If their application for a waiver allowing them to join FBS without a conference goes through there will be no “all” for Sac to win, they’ll be ineligible because they are transitioning, Thats why they aren’t listed in preseason FCS polls.
No one outside of the Sacramento area will notice how they do.
i think that is a poor strategy, they should have gone FBS next year. Maybe they’ll be rejected, hope for that, if you’re a Sac fan.
Having a good regular season record against a fairly weak schedule and no post season glory doesn’t prove anything. They had a good run in the Big Sky a few years ago, no one cares without the post season. Their schedule doesn’t equate to an FBS schedule.

It seems we hold differing perspectives #GoAgs

When I say win it all I am talking about more than the championship. What did Dion win at Colorado? People would say nothing. But I bet if you ask the local businesses if they like the excitement and local revenue its bringing in you'd think they won the title. Dion is acting like a beacon to all the former players who have nothing to do and would love to learn under Dion. So they are going to start brining in a lot of names. This will happen at SACST too.

Let's not kid ourselves NorCAl football has always been neglected. What do we have, Stanford and Cal? Eh, you have to be really lucky to get into either school because those schools never really represented the local populations. They are world elite. Whereas UC Davis and SacSt I look at as the inland blue collar schools that have academic standards but are not proud enough to not roll up our sleeves.

Thinks about this Sacramento has multiple high school football powers in the city. The #1 QB in this years class goes to Folsom High school. Not one local program is even under consideration. Look at Napa High school, there are two of the top HS basketball players in the nation and neither are considering Davis or Sac.

I love the direction we are going. But I'm not opposed to what SACST is doing either.

I still love you man. ;)

Right back at ya! :100:

I agree completely that everything has changed in college sports - not just football. Unfortunately, it's not settled yet, nor will it be for the foreseeable future. Schools have to make the best plans they can, but they better stay nimble enough to adapt as the uncertainty continues. IMHO, Sac State, by their own admission, has embarked on an all-or-nothing course that leaves them vulnerable as the environment continues to change. They've gone so all-in on this strategy, they probably CAN'T alter course if the ground shifts in an unexpected direction.

My second worry about Sac State is that it has a poor record for retaining successful coaches. Just recently, Troy Taylor left for Stanford after 3 years, while Mark Campbell (women's basketball) left for TCU after just 2 years. Even a well-regarded Andy Thompson was hired away after just 2 so-so seasons. Add in Brandon Marion's own coaching history - not staying anywhere more than 2 years. What happens when he leaves in 1 or 2 years,...and takes coaches and players with him? I doubt Sac State will be able to sustain their program. Nor will conferences be lining up to invite them in. Conferences want well-built programs, not 1 or 2 year wonders (again IMHO).

That's assuming he's as successful as you're sure he will be. The Deon Sanders Effect didn't kick in until the 2nd year at both Jackson State and at Colorado, despite remade rosters. And Brandon ISN'T Deion...he doesn't have Deion's cachet. Even established coaches have had rough first seasons. Nick Saban was 7-6 his first year at Alabama. Kalen DeBoer was 9-4 his first year at Alabama. If he's as hugely successful as you think he'll be, Sac St. won't be the next big thling, it's in danger of becoming the next cautionary tail.

I get where you are coming from. I mean there has never been any real highly competitive college sports in NorCal pretty much ever. That doesn't mean the area doesn't produce top talent. I think SACST is smart - they know they are sitting on a gold mine of talent in the SAC area. They need to find a way to make it a destination place for high quality players across the nation.

Trust me, do you know how many California kids want to stay in California and play football? A ton. But they have traditionally only had limited options: Stanford (good luck), Cal (good luck), USC (good luck), UCLA (good luck), Fresno st, San Diego St, and San Jose St. I mean that's pretty much it. The largest state in the union with some of the best high school students athletes in the nation have those options in state. I think with NIL there is going to be really good kids who find out chasing the money like Rashida who is from Pittsburg did at Florida and Miami may not work out and those kids want a second chance to play football close to home.

Check out SACST transfer list of incoming: https://www.on3.com/college/sacramento-state-hornets/transfer-portal/wire/football/

Now lets say SACST and Davis become D1 football teams. That is over 150 new opportunities for CA kids to keep playing football close to home.

I've always said, Davis is a sleeping giant when it comes to sports. We have the academic reputation, we have the endowment, we have the small town, and we are located right outside the state capital. I mean talk about advantages.

Folsom, Granite Bay, and Grant should all be Davis feeder schools. Davis should be at those high schools every day and let them know they have an opportunity to continue to play at Davis.

I think SACST and Davis can both benefit from moving up in level of competition. We are natural rivals. If start getting local kids to stay home Davis,and SACst will benefit.

I'm not talking just football and basketball, but baseball, softball, soccer, etc. Look at our top local athletes:


Harper Peterson (Whitney High School): A 6-foot-3 senior forward with guard skills, Peterson averaged 14.4 points, 8.2 rebounds, 2.0 assists, 2.0 steals, and 1.5 blocks per game. She led Whitney to two section championships and is committed to Stanford University.
AOL

Ella Skryzniarz (Vista del Lago): A junior guard who averaged 21.4 points, 8.4 rebounds, 2.4 assists, and 2.9 steals, Skryzniarz led her team to its first section championship and a 23-9 record.
AOL

Kaia Diederichs (Colfax): A versatile junior guard who contributed 12.5 points, 4.9 rebounds, 2.8 assists, and 3.2 steals per game. Diederichs also excels in soccer and flag football, showcasing her multi-sport prowess.
AOL

Ryder Lyons (Folsom High School): A five-star quarterback and Gatorade California Player of the Year, Lyons threw for 3,011 yards and 46 touchdowns while rushing for 585 yards and 14 touchdowns in 2024. He is considered one of the top recruits in the 2026 class.
Wikipedia

Kingston Lopa (Grant High School): A 6-foot-5 safety committed to the University of Oregon, Lopa was ranked 22nd in California and played a pivotal role in Grant's state championship run.
MaxPreps.com

Jericho Johnson (Armijo High School): A 6-foot-4, 300-pound defensive lineman ranked 13th in California, Johnson recorded nine sacks in the 2022 season and holds offers from top programs like Miami and Alabama.
MaxPreps.com

AB Hernandez: A junior athlete who set a meet record in the triple jump and long jump during California's track-and-field championships. Her performance led to a temporary rule change by the California Interscholastic Federation to ensure fairness in competition.

deleted

Funny thing about all the talent in NorCal, specifically Sacramento. It doesn't transition well to the next level, at least in women's basketball, which I follow pretty closely. I can't speak to other sports specifically, but based on a gut feeling, I started tracking WBB commits beginning with the 2024 recruiting class (so small sample size).

The 17 NorCal D1 commits from the 2024 cohort averaged 8 minutes a game as freshman. The 5 who were recruited to majors, averaged 10.2 mpg, mostly due to Jordan Lee (St. Mary's - Stockton/Texas) who played in 30 games, with 3 starts, averaging 21.2 mpg on a very good Texas team. Lee (#9) ,and Morgan Cheli (#11 - Mitty/UConn) were both 5-star recruits per ESPN Top 100; Kamryn Mafua (#56) and Harper Peterson (#87) were 4 -stars). In addition to Lee:

• Morgan Cheli played in 21 games, averaging 13.3 mpg for national champion UConn.
• Harper Peterson (Whitney) only only played in 9 games, averaging 3.5 mpg for a weak Stanford team.
• Kamryn Mafua (Folsom) played in 15 games/5.7 mpg on a good, but unranked Cal team, and transferred to Utah this spring (NOTE: she didn't "come home" for her 2nd chance).
• Gabrielle Abigor (Berean Christian) played in 34 games averaging 8.2 mpg at Cal

Based on their freshmen year, Lee and Cheli seem to be legit. The jury is still out on the others, particularly Peterson.

Some previous highly regarded area players:

• Madison Butcher (Local Superstar at Del Oro HS - 2022 recruiting cohort) stayed local, but only got 12 starts in 2 seasons at Sac State on sub-.500 teams, and transferred to Cal Poly this spring.
• Makaila Sanders (Local Superstar at Foothill HS - 2018 recruiting cohort) only started 1 game in 4 seasons at UCD, never averaging more than 9 mpg.
• Teagan Brown (Local Superstar at Oak Ridge HS & for Jason Kidd Select - 2022 recruiting cohort) has yet to start a game at Washington in 3 season on slightly above .500 teams. Averages about 11 mpg.

Brown's experience at Washington was one if the situations that prompted me to start tracking.

Do we think that following Sac St's current course is even an option for UC Davis? I don't see how it's possible with our admission standards and difficulty finding eligible non-grad transfers (they need to have a certain % of their degree done with UCD-eligible credits). For those reasons alone, the Deion/transfer portal model will never work at Davis without major changes from Mrak (i.e. above the athletics admin).

Davis needs to figure out our own way, focused on landing the best possible, GPA-eligible, HS talent. And retaining them as long as possible. I think Plough is the right guy to do it.

The Deion approach is an option (I’m not recommending it.)
UCD credits are the same as UCLA credits and they have 30 transfers.
Historically UCD has had conference opponents that are vocationally oriented, so UCD seems like an island of academic rigor, Deion’s school, Colorado, is closer to Davis in academics than most Big Sky schools.

Story of the tortoise and the hare we have here perhaps. @Sailorgabe makes a valid point that times are changing with the new world order of transfer portal and NIL. The “torch and transfer” approach may well yield a greatly talented Sac team this year. But even the honest Hornet faithful are wondering if that talent can get along, stay out of trouble, and if this is sustainable year over year. I would tend to think the Troy Taylor approach of doubling down on top local-ish HS talent was more organically sustainable (and was also successful), though we saw that without Taylor, it imploded, showing how important a leader is. @blueforce also makes a fair point that I don’t think torch and transfer would work as dramatically for us. I’m sure Mrak already does make admission exceptions to some degree for athletes and others, but going for felons not even close to legitimate academic transferability is probably a leap too far for us - and should be, for Sac too. I think our best path remains finding and developing athletes who can outwit an opponent and giving them enough reason to stay. Helpful to this is I think is Lan sticking his landing in the NFL to prove to future others that this path is viable too. If the premise of the modern non-SEC athletic program is “front porch of the university” marketing of the academics, you need to make sure winning doesn’t come at the cost of embarrassing the far more profitable parts of the university it is meant to market.

Regardless of UCLA academic prestige (or Colorado for that matter), getting athletes admitted to UC Davis is demonstrably more complicated:
- fewer admissions-by-exception (ABE) utilized for athletes
- higher standards for approvals: "likelihood to succeed" (standard used by UCLA/Cal) plus an additional layer of comparability w/overall admitted student body
- additional layers of approval and relatively less athletics influence in decision-making (vs. UCLA/Cal)

[
The discussion was concerning transfers, and whether they lose progress toward graduating, which would be the same issue at Cal or UCLA, or most Universities that have traditional curricula. Probably can’t transfer with the same ease from a school offering less traditional or job focused majors, or if they offer credit for courses that are remedial.

The freshman admission standards are a different issue, but Cal or UCLA using more admission by exception may be due to more of their athletes coming from out of state, where freshmen need a higher GPA. Or are you saying Davis athletes that meet the minimum UC admission criteria, which is now close to the median HS graduate, face some additional filter?

In the olden days I was told we didn't allow anyone w under a 3.0 on campus.

In the olden days, say 1970, a 3.0 put you in the top 20-25% at a typical high school. And you needed a good SAT score to get in. UC was tasked with admitting the top 12% of students.
Now through grade inflation about half the high schoolers have a 3.0. and no SAT. UC is a selective system because it is very hard to get into the top campuses but the selection includes relatively easy academic standards, which is what the athletes have to meet.

what I learned when I was going through admissions process 20+ years ago, is that not only are high schools chasing test scores, they are chasing a quota for number of seniors admitted to universities. So both sides of the equation, high schools and universities, have incentive to fudge things in the right circumstance. At this point, I don’t actually know how a university is supposed to pick the top applicants most likely to succeed. The grades are inflated against nonsense state K-12 standards that aren’t based on reality and I’m not sure that SAT, AP, GRE or any of those predict anything other than ability and willingness to spend money for access.

"Or are you saying Davis athletes that meet the minimum UC admission criteria, which is now close to the median HS graduate, face some additional filter?"

Precisely. We need transfers with (1) enough UC-eligible credits, that (2) want to come to Davis and (3) can clear our additional admissions hurdles, which are more difficult than UCLA/Cal.

So I'm not surprised UCLA can find 30 eligible transfers. Look at UCLA's athletic/academic pedigrees, location, playing in the Rose Bowl/on TV, etc. Relative to us, they have the pick of the litter and have more latitude to get guys admitted. We are not them.

SAT scores are objective measure of ability combined with exposure to reading and math. They also unsurprisingly reflect ability to take a test, a key component students will continue to encounter. They give a chance to bright kids who have been bored in high school, but who did a lot of reading on their own so are verbal and who at least remained conscious in math class. They supplement the grades, which are distorted in favor of pupils who are striving for grades by untalented effort, by catching the ones who have learned the subject but haven’t been striving for the grade.
The old system of standardized tests combined with grades was the method most likely to identify the ones who would make the effort and have the ability for the work.

deleted

A roommate decades ago had a high GPA from a tony suburb, He was a junior studying ME, very sharp. His frosh girlfriend beat the drum about her 4.0 from a backwater Central Valley HS. He bit his tongue. She was subsequently slaughtered on her first set of midterms. The standardized tests were supposed to sort for this, and call out diamonds in the rough.

Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Brown, Georgetown, Caltech, and others are reinstating the objective tests.

Harvard College: "More information about an applicant, especially such strongly predictive information, can be valuable. Reinstating a testing requirement will bring important and consistent information back into the admissions process."

I took some interesting classes through the education dept. SAT is reliable in that it produces repeatable results but harder to say if it is valid in terms of measuring what it claims to. A topic of much debate among educators.

you may be thinking of “eligibility in the local context”. The university accepts the top x % from each high school, the idea being the top students at a crap school might not outscore the medium students at an excellent school but perhaps they deserve a shot since it wasn’t their fault they lived in Barstow instead of Menlo Park. Not without controversy though, because many good students at top flight high schools get contextually overlooked. Tricky to figure out what’s fair for someone with potential who wasn’t afforded suitable preparation. Some rise to the occasion, others drown drinking from the fire hose their first quarter.

I appreciate dry humor and I’ll dump on Sac State any chance I get, but the reality is they have many legitimate programs and students. The blatant disregard for academic standards and intentionally recruiting transfers unlikely to complete anything academically I think is insulting to the real students paying for this and quite frankly I think spending enrollment spots this way amounts to grand theft from the people of California for what appears to be a vanity project for the university president. Even if this is the new world order for post settlement NCAA.

enough about GPA, who cares?

I wonder if John Fosher and Luke Wood are the same person.

I adamantly believe that the SAT is an outlier. I had to take it at 7am on a Saturday at a school that wasn't mine, that I had never been to in my life. Having taken the SAT as well as the PSAT, I think high school courses tell a better story than one test day. Some people don't do random tests well. I could not pass the UWP exam both times but the course itself I learned a lot and I think I got an A or B.

I transferred to Davis and I personally think lower division college courses, even at a CCC, are a much better indicator of success.

The time and environment of these sit down tests are often overlooked but can be very important. I was given the army OCS qualification test at the oakland army depot at 5 am in the morning before breakfast. Took the SAT after a 4 hour drive from my home to UC during an all day rain storm. I took the LSAT at 6pm on a Friday night after work all day at a service station in Chico. Barely made the mark on any one of the tests. I vote on the side of HS grades over the SAT

Sure lower division college courses may be a good predictor of college performance with courses that are taught at the pace and material of the courses at UC.
High school courses are taught at about half speed, and are not graded uniformly, so are not a good predictor, of whether someone can keep up.In addition because everyone applying has high grades, the admissions office is picking between students with a 3.8 and a 4.4. That difference doesn’t mean ine knows more than the other. The subjective nature of admissions lead to admission on non academic factors. I saw an interview with a well spoken Asian kid with a 4.3 GPA and 1500 plus SAT, who was turned down at Davis, UCSD, Berkeley UCLA and others.