Sacramento State - FBS in jeopardy?
- Thread starter bcvegaspt2
- Start date
The only reason they need a waiver is because they have no conference to go to. This is solved by a conference adding them, which would probably carry a smaller share of media revenue, but it may now be in MWC interest to add Sac St. Since we have the flexibility to add schools without needing a full 8th member
I hope they file a big fat lawsuit against those teams and the NCAA that kept them from moving up. Under what ground do schools have the right to determine who can or can't play D1? If we do not get the court involved in this stupidity sooner than later, the Big and SEC may do the same thing to any school they decide doesn't meet their standards!
They didn't have a conference invite to a conference that plays FBS football and therefore aren't allowed to move up. Since FBS schools can only schedule 1 FCS game a year towards record it creates a scheduling issue.
Well the F-ing stupid Pac-? should get off of their asses and invite Sac State. What do we have to lose? This arrogant BS just kills me. We could make a big deal out of this, and the Sac St. community would respond in kind. But no, let's continue to sit on our hands, sneer at Sac St. and act like Texas State is some prize. Can it get any worse?
That'd be a dumb move because Texas St would then decline and you'd be stuck at 7 full members when July 2026 rolls around and you can be damn sure the P4s would be more than willing to allow the Pac 12 to collapse and die then give a waiver to full membership requirements...
Have I previously mentioned that you all suck doggie dicks?
But to Texas State - who I've said I don't hate, they are just too far away. All this talk about a half share for them, that is such BS. Oh yeah, incur a shitload of travel cost and exit fees and we'll give you some crumbs. Of a not very big cookie. If I were them Texans, I'd be sitting back and saying 100% or nothing. And here's NMSU's phone number for y'all, pardner.
But Sac St shouldn't hurt them. Add both. Sac St can pay their own way in.
Adding Sac St. hurts the little leverage you may have with Texas St. I agree, they should be asking for a full share and then some.. Why not ask for 1.5 shares for the first 5 years to cover costs of jumping to a league where they will be at a competitive and financial disadvantage for the entirety of the conference prior to 2032.. Their programs are going to get destroyed for 5-7 years so why not ask for a larger share to help establish their brand... and they have all the leverage. Its probably why they havent been announced yet.. The Pac 12 isnt sure how much money theyll have left to offer
Are not allowed to move up based on what, NCAA rules? We have seen how their rules have held up in the courts!
Bruh..Mountain West should have picked them up. They would make good rivals with San Jose State.
Its a large market...There's some buzz around the program. They may want the PAC down the road, but the MWC offering them a life line so to speak might get them to rethink and join.
Also don't think its the worst idea to take potential additions away from the PAC. If for no other reason than pettiness. 😁
I am totally good with pettiness. Metrics this bitch….
Would this be a topic here if Marion was not their HC? Just wondering. Interesting saga over there in Sactown right now
No, we'd probably care very little for Sac St.. honestly, I dont care what they do or what success he may or may not have. He's not going to be there one way or another, thats his MO. And when he moves on to his next job, I won't really care what they do either...
Been thinking more about this. Right now the Pac-2/? is basically down to Texas State and NMSU. We are in Hail Mary territory (although we don't seem to understand that). Sac St is sort of a Hail Mary, but with the community support they have shown they could be a gem. What does the Pac have to lose at this point? "Flutie takes the ball, rolls out......"
Because it would be a massive whomp whomp after PAC saying they would not be adding any FCS schools.
The other issue is there is a 'transition' period for FCS schools to FBS. The way I read it was Sac State or any other FCS school would not count as an 8th full member until after the July '26 deadline to reform the PAC.
It would require a waiver request from the PAC to expedite the transition process.
FCS schools are not eligible for post season play their first year.
Again I may not be understanding the wording so take with a grain of salt.
PAC fans need to stop worrying, they'll get their 8th and have their conference.
It will all work out for the best.
I'm sure.
Probably..
First of all, I reject your "work out for the best". That ship has sailed.
Now - I don't give a F if the Pac takes a whomp whomp. They (we) need one. And I'm not sure about the NCAA transition rules. Yes a new FCS team can't go to a bowl. But I don't know, if we added them now (before July 1), whether that would satisfy our Conference requirement or not come 7/1/26. Guess I need to look into the specifics.
First of all, I reject your "work out for the best". That ship has sailed.
Now - I don't give a F if the Pac takes a whomp whomp. They (we) need one. And I'm not sure about the NCAA transition rules. Yes a new FCS team can't go to a bowl. But I don't know, if we added them now (before July 1), whether that would satisfy our Conference requirement or not come 7/1/26. Guess I need to look into the specifics.
It will all be fine..
They dont count. Teams in transition to FBS do not count for the full member status as you must be eligible for the CFP in order to count as a full member institution.First of all, I reject your "work out for the best". That ship has sailed.
Now - I don't give a F if the Pac takes a whomp whomp. They (we) need one. And I'm not sure about the NCAA transition rules. Yes a new FCS team can't go to a bowl. But I don't know, if we added them now (before July 1), whether that would satisfy our Conference requirement or not come 7/1/26. Guess I need to look into the specifics.
Ok, I tried to research this and cannot find anything that specifically says you have to be eligible for the CFP to be the 8th. Best I could find was this - and the "bowl subdivision requirements" don't seem to refer to bowl eligibility. You find something more defining please share......
"A conference classified as a Football Bowl Subdivision conference shall be comprised of at least eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members that satisfy all bowl subdivision requirements. An institution shall be included as one of the eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members only if the institution participates in the conference schedule in at least six men’s and eight women’s conference-sponsored sports, including men’s basketball and football and three women’s team sports, including women’s basketball. A conference-sponsored sport shall be a sport in which regular season and/or championship opportunities are provided, consistent with the minimum standards identified by the applicable NCAA sport committee for automatic qualification."
I think you can sum up everything that has transpired with the PAC since UNLV declined with a simple phrase/question.
If not, why not...
If mediation isn't an issue, why hasn't the PAC added anybody?
If the PAC is sitting on millions upon millions of dollars why not just break the bank to add Memphis and Tulane?
If mediation/uncertainty is an issue, why would you even offer Memphis and Tulane to begin with knowing you were going to litigate?
If the media deal is done and solid why no additions?
I seriously don't get how they approached any of this.
After reading Dan Wolken's article in USA Today about the PAC offer to the AAC schools, it really comes across as amateur hour.
Similar threads
