larry legend33 said:

Its a massive leap still. I agree with Streak.
1. Going from FCS to FBS factor 1.0
2. Going from Big Sky to Pac 12 anote 1.0, which is weaker than the old Pac 12 but light years better than Big Sky.

baby steps people

Click to expand...

What’s the talent gap in football from Sac St to Colorado state ? Utah state? San Diego state (they’re awful right now) ? It’s not that big at all with a big NIL transfer fund mixed in with rich local talent ? Give them 2-3 years they will be right in the mix easily…….you’re telling me the lure of living in Pullman, Corvallis, Logan, Fort Collins, Fresno is too much for Sac State to overcome?

MC415 said:

jumping to the PAC 12 is just really jumpin go to the Mountain West basically which is the next step for them anyways

Click to expand...

Its a massive leap still. I agree with Streak.
1. Going from FCS to FBS factor 1.0
2. Going from Big Sky to Pac 12 anote 1.0, which is weaker than the old Pac 12 but light years better than Big Sky.

baby steps people

jumping to the PAC 12 is just really jumpin go to the Mountain West basically which is the next step for them anyways

ThunderRam said:

You keep saying this but aren’t providing reasons why. Furthermore, why is it that there are a myriad of other FBS athletic departments not hurt long term over it? Why is Sac State so prone versus other programs such as Fresno, San Diego, and SJ State?

Click to expand...

I think UCONN struggled with this when they left the Big East in a football driven move and turned it around (with baskeball) by going back to the Big East. Probably the best example of buyer's remorse when it comes to conference realignment.

I think schools like Maryland leavaing the ACC is another example of a school hurting their brand.

And my issue with Sacramento State is they seem to be in a good spot with their athletics (from an outside perspective) and they are potentialy jumping two levels to the Pac-12 whereas the other schools would be jumping one level. And I'm not saying those schools you mentioned aren't open to some of the same issues. They are. I just don't get Sac State trying to force their way to the table when we don't know what the table looks like and if they will keep having the resources to stay at that table.

Again, I would be a huge fan if this move works out. It would be great to have another local program in a major conference. I just think it has pitfalls that many are glossing over.

BigMann08 said:

The Pac12 is a great move! It could keep many kids from flocking to Boise, Washington State, Fresno State, Oregon State etc.

San Diego State will be tough by most kids don't want to be in Corvallis, Pullman, Fresno, etc....

Click to expand...

Yeah, I’m not getting all the naysaying over this. Clearly the university sees it as a positive. I don’t see how it’s a bad thing at all. And if somehow the naysayers are right and it doesn’t work out (assuming they can even make the jump and build the facilities) what does it cost any of us? There’s no losing for sports fans here.

Keeping more top level student-athletes at home is a good thing. So is bringing in more marquee named opponents.

None of these facility improvements were happening staying at the FCS level. They weren't going to happen (at least to this proposed degree) staying at the FCS level. But if this move falls flat and fails in 5-10 years -- the FCS and Big Sky will still be there. And by that time the Hornets flagship programs will own even more distinctive advantages over everyone else in the field.

I think some people forget that back in the mid-90's Boise State was once a member of the FCS and Big Sky. Why is it that the move was good for them but such a low success thing for Sac State? Someone needs to explain that to me. The population and market size of Boise ain't close to metro SAC. And neither is the hunger for top level sports.

Streak One said:

but I still stand that long term, I think it will hurt the overall athletics department long term. And this isn't just Sacramento State. I think a lot of schools will have some regret over the next 5-10 years.

Click to expand...

You keep saying this but aren’t providing reasons why. Furthermore, why is it that there are a myriad of other FBS athletic departments not hurt long term over it? Why is Sac State so prone versus other programs such as Fresno, San Diego, and SJ State?

larry legend33 said:

The thing about the G1C that is tough is you have an average team that draws sub 1K fans and you put them into a 15k arena. It's like watching the state champ games but a lot worse and I would argue the players would rather have a cozy 3k seat on campus arena that looks somewhat full and has some energy. The only local college games that draw any fans at G1C for college is when you have a 2 game lineup with a couple marquee games.

I'm sort of chuckling during all of this. Sac state didnt have 2 nickels for decades and now is flush with cash. really?

Click to expand...

This is what can happen when you hire the right people, build a winning program in a sports hungry metro area as big as SAC, then hint at moving to the highest level of collegiate sports. Of course lots of people are going to be interested that weren’t previously. Also, lots of folks from the Bay and LA have moved here over the past 5-10 years that are accustomed to having access to these types of things.

As for your G1C comment, sure, the basketball teams won’t be selling out there, or coming remotely close to it, but when recognizable programs start coming through town, they’ll draw some fans. I would ignore the sub-1K thing since that gym and Big Sky opponents aren’t going to draw $#/t.

ankleassassin said:

moist and plump was right

Click to expand...

Blind pig…

Go Cats!

Niklas227 said:

SI technically also held Serra’s offense to 14pts too. The other TD was a pick 6.

Click to expand...

Glad this will all be settled tomorrow night @ SI. Should be a good one!

bella123 said:

Be great if this happens. But long term sustainability and overall health of the entire athletic department could be dicey.

I get the ever changing dynamics of college sports and no one wants to be left behind, but maybe sit back and see where things play out the next few years. There most likely will be more changes and the landscape will continue to evolve.

Click to expand...

Agree. Seems like you are in the market for a honda accord and then all of a sudden you feel that you could be driving a Range Rover. I'm not sold on this being a great move. Sorry too all you hornets alumni but lets not forget..... It's Sac State. Stingers up. C'Mon people. Shake yourself.

Clinks built a factory and realistically could have been a D1 coach on WC if he wanted to go that path. I'm happy if he takes that role because he's the sort of person that will grow the program(s) even bigger. Have faith... He will hire well.

10. Pitt
9. Christopher
8. 12 Bridges
7. Ukiah
6. Sacramento
5. East Nicolaus
4. Esacalon
3. Palma
2. St. Ignatius
1. Calaveras

Be great if this happens. But long term sustainability and overall health of the entire athletic department could be dicey.

I get the ever changing dynamics of college sports and no one wants to be left behind, but maybe sit back and see where things play out the next few years. There most likely will be more changes and the landscape will continue to evolve.

so if there are not a lot of quality players... why make 2 expansion teams

10. Soquel
9. Pittsburg
8. Riordan (34-21)
7. Christopher
6. Hughson
5. Summerville
4. Ukiah
3. Sacramento
2. Twelve Bridges
1. East Nicolaus

larry legend33 said:

The thing about the G1C that is tough is you have an average team that draws sub 1K fans and you put them into a 15k arena. It's like watching the state champ games but a lot worse and I would argue the players would rather have a cozy 3k seat on campus arena that looks somewhat full. The only games that draw any fans at G1C for college is when you have a 2 game lineup with a couple marquee games.

I'm sort of chuckling during all of this. Sac state didnt have 2 nickels for decades and now is flush with cash. really?

Click to expand...

As fun as Big Sky basketball is, I think you would get a lot more people into GIC to watch Gonzaga, SDSU and Utah St over the Montana's and Dakota's.

I agree how fast this thing is taking off, is never ceases to amaze me how powerful boosters (money!!!) can be in college sports to make things happen.

Thought this was a good explainer too

viper221980 said:

Is this the big man's 5th year in high school?

Click to expand...

That was my question. His grad year changed prior to last season

Streak One said:

Can't agrue against the NIL money coming in. I still think using G1C has a lot of pitfalls based on conference schedule and how often that lines up with the Kings schedule.

They are lining themselves up well to be included, but I still stand that long term, I think it will hurt the overall athletics department long term. And this isn't just Sacramento State. I think a lot of schools will have some regret over the next 5-10 years.

Click to expand...

The thing about the G1C that is tough is you have an average team that draws sub 1K fans and you put them into a 15k arena. It's like watching the state champ games but a lot worse and I would argue the players would rather have a cozy 3k seat on campus arena that looks somewhat full and has some energy. The only local college games that draw any fans at G1C for college is when you have a 2 game lineup with a couple marquee games.

I'm sort of chuckling during all of this. Sac state didnt have 2 nickels for decades and now is flush with cash. really?

Wow, this would be big news for men's basketball which has become one of the Top D2s on the West Coast