Would Nevada, SJSU and Hawai'i drop to FCS, or do they expect UCD, CP-SLO and a-team-to-be-named later to move to FBS?

Still better than talking about the climate, pickleball, politics, Bud Light, civil rights, the Royal Family, pandemics, or Taylor Swift tickets.

"May you live in interesting times."

Davis in the same conference as Nevada and San Jose State makes too much sense to ever be considered. When I was a student in the 70s a Nevada game program said Nevada was our oldest rival.
I’d like to get rid of the FCS/FBS dichotomy, it basically comes down to number of scholarships, 22 separate the two, split the difference and have everyone have 74. FBS schools wouldn’t notice the difference and it would be worth it to FCS schools to get rid of the minor league distinction. Schools that absolutely can’t afford it don’t have to allocate all the scholarships.

Makes too much sense to ever be seriously considered by FBS schools. Cal and Stanford, for instance, would hate idea of having to concede the sacramento valley fans to us and sac state. FBS is also just starting to realize that they can use the FCS as a cheap minor or developmental league with the portal. I would love to see it happen, but not holding breath for now.

I interpreted the post as trying to form a new FCS league. But its just a random post on a message board so does it really mean anything?

And yes realignment seems ridiculous at times but talking about college sports is far more interesting than the subjects you listed- lol.

That was my interpretation as well, but hard to imagine any of those schools pulling an Idaho.

The Big Sky Conference has too many members. You know that when every team does not play each other each season. I think Sac State would gladly join the Big West as it would help them lower the costs of non-football sports and having weekend contests in those sports against UCD should boost attendance at their home games. These Tuesday baseball games are an attendance joke at both venues but on a Saturday... And Sac State would give them an even number of members.

I think the WCC would welcome Stanford with open arms as it is filled with similar institutions (albeit mostly non-football ones). I imagine Gonzaga and SMC would be on board and they are the bball schools you have to sell on it. Would they take on a public university ? If so CAL could be a good fit.

Or would the PAC-12 poach some WCC schools for non-football sports ? The WCC could move to replace its losses by poaching "orphan" WAC schools that seem like good fits (Seattle, Grand Canyon, and Cal Baptist).

Wouldn't life be easier splitting football away from the Olympic sports (league issues)?

Wow. The loss of the Pac-12 blows my mind away.

My first thought is this. I competed as a NCAA athlete and my children did. I doubt if my grandchild will.

I have read several times that many administrators are using the phrase that changes that help the student-athlete's wallet are what they support. That makes me angry, as the biggest winners of these giant sums of money are going to be the ICA administrators. Sure some athletes are going to do well for a short window. A child of mine at a Pac 12 school benefited last year for 5,000 dollars and will make a little more in their last year. But this is peanuts compared to the starting salary and lifelong earnings with a great degree. Meanwhile the administrators are going to get pay raises because the department earns more money. Not that they have done a good job.

What about the 16 year old that committed to play in the Pac -12 and the conference is gone? Should they be allowed to get out of their commitment just like if the coaching staff was changed. Even if they are allowed to the challenge with that is the burned bridges and lack of scholarship dollars for them.

FBS College football is really minor league football that is doing a tremendous amount of damage to the NCAA landscape. Even NCAA basketball is being hurt by these changes and I never thought anything would hurt the NCAA basketball brand;, but crazy travel and loss of regional games does that.

I am still processing all of this and fear for the majority of the student athletes at every level of college sports..

I've long been a proponent for bringing Sac into the BW. Davis needs a travel partner within 2 hours. Bake is too far away. Some have floated Cal and Stanford asking some UC's to join them which would be tempting but you know they will leave when the Big Ten eventually calls. The Big West is pretty stable.
The Big Sky is too large. The Dakota and Southern Utah defections helped but ideally they'd lose one or two more schools without kicking the Ags or Cal Poly out.

Why not? Cal and Stanford to ACC? https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/california-stanford-interested-in-acc-conference-set-to-evaluate-viability-of-adding-pac-12-teams/

No. 53 in a series. Collect them all!

Cal/Stanford to the ACC is D U M B (in my opinion), but here we are. Thanks, television deals! Way to ruin top level collegiate sports!

I really wish we could split D1 football off from the rest of the athletics departments and put everyone back in their old conferences.

"I really wish we could split D1 football off from the rest of the athletics departments and put everyone back in their old conferences."

You are not alone in that wish:

https://sports.yahoo.com/heres-an-idea-set-up-football-only-college-conferences-214244420.html

Sadly funny article by Jason Gay of WSJ on this craziness. Don’t know if link will work without a subscription. One Washington State alum said he wished Wazzu would drop down to FCS. That’s very unlikely but an intriguing idea as we watch the progression to a superconference with the chase for money and eyeballs.

https://www.wsj.com/sports/football/college-sports-pac-12-big-ten-big-12-7b7902a7

I have been enjoying watching a lot of FCS football the past few years (including big sky) with a subscription to ESPN+ during the football season then ditching it. But when is some ESPN exec going to say “why are we showing “low level” college football when nobody is watching it?” There is certainly no incremental profit from ads/subscriptions generated from fans who would otherwise dump it if not for FCS football. I guess it’s being subsidized by all the cage match events or whatever they call that - fans and Red Bull commercials.

Might help reciting at least in California as one of the major disappointments stated by the departing schools is that they cannot sell a major issue with recruiting: will my family be able to see me play. No they cannot when you are playing in New Jersey or wherever. IMHO

I agree. Football should be split off into its own conferences. The reason it isn't is the main recurring theme in this topic-money.
It would sure simplify things though for football not to be a consideration in picking a conference.

I would also be in favor of allowing schools to have teams compete at different NCAA levels if the team is unable to compete at the same level as the rest of its programs due to lack of competitiveness or lack of opponents. For example UCD should have been able to compete in FCS all those years it was D-II and beating I-AA teams. Wrestling had to compete at D-I.

Consequently I believe UCD should now be allowed to have baseball only compete at D-II. It would lower the cost of a program that costs a ton and doesn't deliver revenue. It would likely have no negative attendance difference because the fans who attend are mostly family and friends of players anyway and it would be more enjoyable to watch a more competitive team. If anything the attendance might actually go up due to potentially playing more local teams.

I do not think the Big West schools would care. They would gladly spend the extra week playing schools that would boost their RPI. Softball can stay at D-I. They have risen to the challenge and they can more sustainably recruit excellent female athletes. And Title IX doesn't care about men lol.

I don't understand the logic of having everyone in "BCS." What does that do for our athletes?

If the argument is about FCS teams being a minor league for FBS teams -- well, in basketball we're already the minors for the big conferences. Nothing is going to change that. NIL money will lure the best away because it's money and that talks.

If UCD's primary task is to educate, and we're not willing to subvert admissions to the needs of the athletic department, then we should accept that which we are: the minors. And it's fun to watch. The teams are competitive. Sometimes students attend the games but how many times does football fill the stadium? How many times does the Pavilion need to roll out the top bleachers? Darn few - especially when we're not on ESPN's linear channels.

College sports may be irredeemably broken. Perhaps we should ask who we are and what we want - deriving from our first principles how UCD should fit into the world as it currently exists. Where should our focus be? I'd say focus on our athletes first which means education first, competition second. But there are other choices. We should be up front about making those choices.

Where did anyone say everyone should be BCS? My own opinion, not shared by anyone else in this thread, is that BCS and FCS should lose the distinction as far as scholarships but that implies BCS moving in the FCS direction as well. No level needs 85 scholarships, thats just squirreling away talent.
It is humorous when Davis pretends it is more of a public ivy prestige University than Cal or UCLA. It’s even more ridiculous now that the SATs aren’t required. Davis wouldn’t tarnish its reputation by having the same standards as other UCs.

This is the best article I have read yet about the fall of the PAC12 and the impact of the rush to form super conferences in college football. Unfortunately, the whole article is only able to be viewed in its entirety by people who subscribe to ESPN+. I could break it down and copy and post sections of it but it's quite a long article. Very worthwhile to read if you have access to it.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/38140373/pac-12-downfall-college-football-realignment-big-ten

FBS and (formerly) Power 5 are the terms in place but your point stands.
Interesting article from Spokane that notes that we spend the most in the Big Sky with CP, Sac, and Montana bringing up the top 4.
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/aug/09/big-sky-athletic-directors-discuss-conference-real/

Reuters recent.y ran an article that focused on the effect realignment would have on the Olympic sports I.e. the cost of sending the Stanford woman’s swim or softball team to Rutgers for instance. Very costly to say the least.and Stanford is famously proud of its Olympic sports performance. Mentions the importance to players of having their families be able to see them play. Mentions how difficult it will be for teams that play more than one game a week and how they will be negatively impacted traveling from the west coast. Insofar as these so called minor sports are concerned and these concerns, it seems like the big west may be in pretty good shape and we might even see some player defections from the PAC-4 schools to the big west (not in article).

https://youtube.com/shorts/WHjADqJjCok?feature=share

PAC-4 moving to Big Sky?
Funny spot. Sounds like done with chatgpt

Lumberjacks v. Trees! Very funny.

It didn't take long for someone to suggest an 11 team D-1 "California Conference"

https://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/joe-mathews-the-california-conference/article_bda6504a-3d74-11ee-b154-07109aa0afdb.html

Big Sky being a "non-elite" conference <-- them's fightin' words!

Other than the above, I like the idea of staying (relatively) local.

Excellent article: "College Football Is Eating Its Institutions Alive:"

Excerpt:

And while the NCAA is flawed—hugely, hilariously flawed—and was in desperate need of reform, it was still the closest thing college football had to an overarching authority. When it checked out, that vacuum launched an arms race among athletic directors, conference commissioners and television executives to fight for every scrap of revenue—and to destroy anyone who stood in their way.

That’s why Oklahoma’s now in the SEC, Arizona is in the Big 12, Washington’s now in the Big Ten and the Pac-12 is dead. Every college football decision has been made with solely short-term interests—rather than what’s good for the sport, and higher education in general—in mind. No one’s minding the store. So everyone’s pulling up and selling anything not nailed down.

This is bad enough for college football which is going to look up in 10 years and realize almost everything people loved about it is now gone. But it’s also bigger than college football. If you care about other collegiate sports, or just “college” as a concept—you need to know: there is collateral damage everywhere.

First off, what may make sense for college football television contracts—the reason all this realignment is happening in the first place—is generally a disaster for every other collegiate non-revenue sport. (A non-revenue sport is one that doesn’t make money for the university but is an essential part of the collegiate experience regardless—generally speaking, it’s every sport but football and occasionally men’s college basketball).

Whole article here: https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/24/opinions/college-football-conferences-realignment-pac-12-acc-sec-big-12-leitch/index.html

Cal, Stanford and Southern Methodist have joined the ACC.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/38304694/sources-acc-votes-invite-stanford-cal-smu

So dumb.

Isn't it? Feels like a treading water move until some of the lower division schools come up. However, looking at that circus, makes you feel good that the Aggies are solid in the Big Sky and other California-centric conferences that don't require 5 hour flights every other week.

What happens with Oregon State and Washington State now?