I think it is clear we will likely plan to be no more than a few years behind Sac in moving up, so I expect the series would continue uninterrupted. We have leverage to continue to get Sac to come to Davis, as they under any circumstances will want to keep the home game with us. It will be a huge challenge for them to get home games period, and until they get Fresno at home, we will likely be the biggest draw of the year. It is in the interest of both schools to keep the series going uninterrupted.

As long as Davis is FCS they should play a maximum if 1 FBS game, more hurts their playoff chances, assuming Sac actually plays at the level of a FBS team, something yet to be seen. Would Sac be an upgrade to playing Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington etc.? If it is not home and home, Sac needs to pay the amount Davis would get from those schools.

Like your analogy.

Exactly. They're not going to have the money to match any of those schools and no point to us doing them any favors if they won't continue the home and home series.

Also, in this schedule, Poly would be giving up their currently home game vs Sac.

Exactly, they have no guarantee these talented misfits will be able to play well together. Does the new coach have a magic elixir that will make the troubled players into model student-athletes that the previous coaches didn't know about? We'll find out. Right now Marion might as well be Adam Sandler's character in "The Longest Yard" (haven't seen the original). Like Paul Crewe he'll be looking to get out soon.

I hope this first roster is merely Marion doing an initial jumpstart with players of his choosing (like re-decorating your new office when you get promoted), and not his long-term strategy. It won't be good for Sac State's image if they get a reputation for being Jailbird U., not that any program is flawless.

Is a meaningless Cal Poly game at Sac, going to draw better than the prior conference match between the two teams? The FBS aura doesn’t attach instantaneously and Sac’s fan base is going to want to see FBS teams, which is what the move promised them. Attendance won’t generate revenue to buy home games from teams like Cal Poly. The whole schedule is wishful thinking.

Cal Poly and Sac aren't true rivals. They played the last 15 years or so because the BSC allows for two set rivals and it made too much sense to not have the three teams play every year.

LOL, clickbait. So many errors and misinformation - no clue how the funding for athletics works. I love AI generated content from Thailand. "TheTouchback.com" has picked up on a click trend for Sacramento best I can tell and jealous Idaho guy has been posting some weird videos.

while true it is not fully accurate on how to get the funding, some is true. It isn’t fair to point any opposing view as fictional just because you don’t agree with it.
Some of the concerns raised were valid and some of the things mentioned were true. Such as students not voting for increased student fees for athletics and how they asked the committee to approve the loan and fees before they announce the known academic shortfall/cuts when those same $/athletic fees could have gone towards academic/university things if they proposed it for that instead. Now that it is approved they can’t simply re allocate the funds already collected for this year but the students/committee can also easily vote to cancel the athletics fees for future years.
You got to admit that Dr wood and his brother had been a bit sneaky on passing things through at the local/university level, and also leaking “positive” info to press/social medial while also sweeping any negatives views and info.
We all (including myself) want sac to succeed athletically AND academically, and are concerned about the current approach

Comment of the year!

He ain't wrong.

One of the consistent discussion points on this thread relates to Sac State "being successful / not being successful" next year with this approach. But what is "success" in this situation?

I'm curious what everyone thinks success in football next season actually looks like in various metrics.

What kind of win-loss record qualifies as success?
Is the Causeway Classic a must-win?
Do the Hornets need to win the Big Sky Championship?
How deep do the Hornets need to go in the playoffs (assuming they make qualify)?
What does average attendance need to be?
Does the football program need to have zero players who have an incident that involves the police?
Other?

Can they even participate in FCS playoffs now that they've declared that they are moving to FBS?

I would assume that they can until they are actually in the FBS but I'm not positive about that...??

I did some googling:

The current (24-25) NCAA Division 1 Manual says that once they've formally forwarded their request to transition, they are ineligible.

20.5.3 Championships Eligibility. A member of Division I that has forwarded to the national office written notice of its intention to change its football membership classification from Championship Subdivision to Bowl Subdivision per Bylaw 20.5.2.1 no longer shall be eligible for participation in the Division I Football Championship.

Is the paperwork that was discussed above the written notice?

Success for them will be generating enthusiasm, plus giving the impression that they can sustain success. Ineligible for playoffs. Big Sky Championship may be dependent on whether they adhere to Big Sky rules on number of scholarships, which seems unlikely.
Sustaining success is going to be a challenge with the roster turnover and the rent a coach history of their head coach.

There seems to be consensus on this thread that Sac IS generating enthusiasm already. But it's going to take on the field results to sustain the current enthusiasm, let alone drive it higher. I.e WINS
So would going 7-5 enough to do that? What about 6-6? Or 5-7?

Considering the hype about the quality of players Sac will have on next year's roster (see BlueGoldAg's list from 5 days ago, the visuals of the players signed that have been posted, etc.):

*Do they have to beat UCD?
*In addition to UCD, Sac plays (at home) 3 other Big Sky teams that were FCS Playoff teams. Are this must-wins?
*How critical is the opening game at South Dakota State (another FCS Playoff team)?
*If UCD, South Dakota State, Idaho, Montana and NAU are the 5 losses, will beating everyone else be enough to sustain enthusiasm for the next season? How many of those games are must-wins?

So again, what will be enough to be considered a successful season?

well I think their president will try to spin any outcome positive because on a fundamental level “success” is making donors and sponsors for the FBS push more willing to open their wallets on Nov 22 than Aug 30. My guess is that they seek to prove they belong with the big boys and I think their make or break test comes early - at South Dakota State, last year one of the best teams in FCS. And at Nevada, last year a not-that-good FBS team that boat-raced the Eastern Washington team that beat Sac State. If they make their statement in those games I think they have to win out against the peasants. If they poop the bed week 1 and 2, idk the case gets harder to make, I think, that they are ready to play with the big dogs. I think they are going to want attendance 15k or better and demonstrate they can take a strong showing on the road to Reno.

They don’t have an FBS schedule, they are playing meaningless FCS games, if they go 12-0, thats only important if fans think it predicts something about the team two years hence. 12-0, 11-1, 10-2 will get them the stories about they’re being deserving of being a playoff or bowl team, anything less is ho-hum. I think their season will be a success if the head coach sticks around, the players don’t generate bad news, and their recruiting next year helps them for when they start playing an FBS schedule, if that ever happens.

Yeah, I agree that weeks 1 & 2 will be crucial.