FCS Daily Dose: Thoughts On Sac State’s Plan To Go FBS Independent

The FCS Daily Dose is a blog-style article series featuring an assortment of news, rumblings, quick hitters, and commentary on various topics.

A new Daily Dose will be published multiple times a week.

Thoughts On Sac State’s Plan To Go FBS Independent

In a report we’ve been waiting to drop for the last couple of months, ESPN’s Pete Thamel tweeted that Sac State “Plans to file an application with the NCAA this week to transition from FCS to FBS in football. They plan to do so as an independent. The school has already filed a waiver to transition as an independent in football, which requires NCAA approval … The reason for a waiver is because they aren’t transitioning with a conference invite.”

It was quite public — and I’ve talked about this plenty on Twitter and different shows — that Sac State intended to go FBS, and its most likely route was to go independent.

Here are some scattered thoughts:

-Sac State will still play a 2025 Big Sky schedule but would be playoff ineligible if the waiver is approved and it begins its FBS transition. The Hornets went 3-9 last year and 1-7 in Big Sky play after reaching the playoffs in 2019, 2021, 2022, and 2023.

-I have heard and confirmed that Big Sky school officials recently voted to increase the exit fee from $250K to $1 million. I also heard there was only one dissenting vote. It’s a pretty safe guess who voted no.

-There is also a $5 million transition fee for an FCS team to move to the FBS.

-Sac State would have to find another conference to park its Olympic sports in.

-What happens if this waiver isn’t approved? That could happen. But Sac State president Luke Wood and NCAA president Charlie Baker have met. I assume Sac State feels confident that this move will get approved, or else it’d be odd for the university president to be publically promising they will be FBS.

-Going from FCS to FBS independent is unorthodox, unstable, and expensive. Liberty, with piles of money, pulled it off in the 2010s and eventually landed in CUSA. But it’s a gamble that may make sense for Sac State. More on this below, but in short: Get better positioned for an FBS conference invite and potential for massive community engagement and financial support.

-After a very public campaign and hype on going FBS — getting recruits and transfers and boosters and corporate sponsors and fans excited — the school almost had no choice but to make this move at whatever cost. Especially when the president publically guaranteed they will be FBS. When it became apparent that no FBS conference was interested, it pivoted to the independent avenue.

-I wonder how Sac State’s senior athletic administration staff privately feels about this move and trying to make finances work. Probably a combination of excitement and angst. Revenue sources increase if you go FBS. But so do expenses. And expenses can outweigh the revenue. Conference media deals, CFP revenue distribution, and pay games against P4 opponents can help offset those expenses. As an FBS independent, though, Sac State won’t have conference TV payouts, won’t have bowl game tie-ins, and won’t have the same access to the CFP revenue pot. Also, it has to pay for every home game opponent unless it can get some home-and-homes or a scheduling agreement with the MWC or Pac-12.

-As mentioned above, going FBS independent is very expensive. Only Liberty, who has piles of money, has made that FCS-to-FBS-independent move in recent memory. It’s also unstable. Being in a conference for football just provides more stability. That’s why UMass made the move to the MAC.

-However, if Sac State goes through a couple of years as an FBS independent, it could lead to an FBS conference invite. The Pac-12 and Mountain West are turned off about adding any FCS programs because of 1) perception, 2) pressure from power conferences to not grow FBS membership, and 3) the 2-year transition period for FCS move-ups. Sac State is much more likely to get a future FBS conference invite as an FBS independent than as an FCS member. This move is a huge risk, but it could pay off with that invite. Or Sac State could be stuck in no man’s land with no rivals, no CFP access, no all-conference accolades for its players, and no titles to play for. How long will that shine of being FBS in name only starts to wear off? How well can you recruit if that’s the reality you face? Or, in 2028, Sac State could be in the Pac-12. Those are worst-case and best-case scenarios, and it’ll be fascinating to see how it all plays out.

-Another reason why this move makes sense? In an odd but impressive campaign, a number of donors pledged huge NIL dollars if Sac State goes FBS. Odd because what would have happened if Sac State couldn’t go FBS and stayed FCS? Those donors just aren’t interested in helping the football program? Impressive because of the dollar figure (see below).

-The “SAC-12” is a committee formed last fall to try and push/campaign Sac State into the Pac-12. It’s co-chaired by Joshua Wood, president Wood’s brother. The committee reportedly raised $50M in NIL pledges for if Sac State gets into the FBS. I wonder if those pledges were dependent only on Sac State getting into the Pac-12. Or that money will come if the Hornets get into any FBS conference. Or if being FBS independent is good enough for this money to still come through.

-If you have that dollar amount waiting for you if you go FBS, you kinda have to kick every door down to get into the highest subdivision. And frankly, after all the hype and public promises and private promises, it’d be a bit embarrassing if Sac State’s FBS aspirations failed.

-A big misconception about Sac State football is no one goes to their games. That’s just simply not true. Maybe some people think that because the main TV camera shows the visitor side, which is rarely filled out. But the home side is usually quite full. Sac State averaged 14,047 people at its home games in 2024, which ranked 12th in the FCS. And by going FBS, the likelihood is that even more people and businesses will be engaged with Sac State football when it’s playing Fresno State or San Jose State or UNLV instead of Idaho State and Northern Colorado.

-The football attendance requirement at FBS schools has been eliminated and replaced with a scholarship requirement. All FBS schools are required to provide 90% of the total number of allowable scholarships over a two-year rolling period across at least 16 sports, including football. Schools are required to offer at least 210 scholarships each year, amounting to no less than $6 million in athletics scholarships offered. FBS schools previously had to meet minimum attendance requirements (average 15,000 people in actual or paid attendance per home game), which had to be met once in a rolling two-year period.

-Sacramento State (the university) announced a $45 million budget cut earlier this year. While this doesn’t seem like the most ideal time to push for an expensive FBS independent route, the school’s counterargument is that FBS will boost enrollment and help the overall school budget.

-Sac State’s athletic department budget a couple of years ago was around $36 million. 84% of that budget was subsidized, meaning money from the state, the school, and/or student fees automatically coming in before even selling one ticket. For comparison, NDSU’s budget is around $30M and is 25% subsidized (the lowest subsidy in the FCS), and Montana’s is around $29M and 34% subsidized, meaning they need to raise most of their money themselves through tickets, boosters, media rights, corporate sponsors, merchandise, etc.

-From an FCS perspective, Sac State going FBS doesn’t impact the FCS title picture much, but it would deliver another hit to the depth of the FCS. Sac State’s deepest playoff run was one quarterfinal appearance in 2022. It rarely lived up to high rankings. But …it at least had the potential to be a stronger contender. This year’s team perhaps could’ve made some postseason noise if all the talent gels. Keep an eye on the Week 1 Sac State at South Dakota State game. The Hornets brought in loads of talent, and their scheme is difficult to prepare for, especially in the season opener.

-When you look at FCS-to-FBS move-ups since 2021, only one of those teams was really contending for an FCS title. And that was James Madison. Sam Houston rose up one year to win it in the shortened spring season, a deserved national title in those circumstances. But Jacksonville State? Kennesaw State? Missouri State? Delaware? Sac State? None of those teams were threatening for an FCS national championship. But they at least had the potential to be a threat. And that’s what makes the FCS’ current situation a tough one. There are only a few teams that can realistically win a national title. And that’s been the case since probably 2017, a few years before this cluster of move-ups even happened. The FCS being top-heavy isn’t a new thing. But as these teams have moved up, the list of programs that one can point at and say, “They have potential to rise up and be a Tier 1 FCS team” is dwindling.

-The fact that multiple Tier 2 or Tier 3 FCS teams are jumping to the FBS while the tiny and geographically-isolated Tier 1 group is looking around waiting for someone to consistently challenge them is why I want there to be three D1 football subdivisions. Or why I want those few top-tier teams to all get FBS invites together, somehow. And no, a group of top FCS teams forming a new FBS conference together is very unlikely and incredibly challenging to pull off in the current NCAA structure. The political pushback to get that moved through all the approvals would be immense.

-A big D1 tent is great and should remain for the Olympic sports. You want the mid-majors and power conference competing in the same postseason tournaments, especially as the NCAA men’s basketball tournament distribution is key for mid-majors. But football is just a different animal. There should be three D1 football subdivisions: mini-NFL with the P4, G6 and the top of FCS, and the rest of the FCS. An upcoming new NCAA governance could even try to enforce a minimum investment required to be in each subdivision. That way, a conference and its members can choose which sub-level of D1 football they want to be in.

-The resources are in so many different stratospheres to fit every D1 football program into two subdivisions. And as more FCS-to-FBS moves happen, not only is the FCS getting watered down, but the FBS is getting watered down too. What’s crazier: Stetson and Mercyhurst playing in the same football subdivision as NDSU and Montana State, or Sam Houston and Missouri State playing in the same football subdivision as Texas and Ohio State?

Past Daily Doses

142 Of Top 350 NFL Draft Prospects Transferred At Least Once, 26 Of Them From The FCS … READ MORE

FCS Oversight Committee Discusses Annual 12-Game Regular Season + 11 FCS Players In ESPN’s 7-Round Mock Draft … READ MORE

SoCon/Big Sky Set Scholarship Caps Ahead Of House Settlement + Villanova Signs 32-Year-Old Punter … READ MORE