I don't know if the 3.5 million for "staff" is an average of their members or a requirement. I looked at the Nevada coaches and they have perhaps 18 to Davis' 12, it's hard to compare because of different roles. While it makes sense to expand the staff, and increase pay, more than tripling Davis' coaching expenditure seem like it would not be necessary to put a good product on the field.

that’s the minimum. The average head coach salary is something like $1,3M, with UNLV’s Dan Mullen topping the list at $3.5M.

https://nevadasportsnet.com/news/reporters/how-much-every-head-football-coach-in-the-mountain-west-and-pac-12-will-make-in-2026

Program needs a huge amount of money to come in. We aren't going to wing it like our neighbors.
My timeline for anything to happen with football is probably farther out than many here. Which is not bad IMO.

at the sac airport:

we should put a lot more ads at SMF and show everyone that the sac region only has one true university

[quote]Mountain West Football Budgets

FY25 Football Expenses

University of Nevada, Las Vegas: $21,767,260
San Jose State University: $16,017,209
University of New Mexico: $15,386,871
University of Nevada, Reno: $14,787,520
University of Hawaii: $13,943,117
Northern Illinois University: $13,269,400
University of Wyoming: $13,091,900
University of Texas at El Paso: $12,717,061
U.S. Air Force Academy: $12,007,431
North Dakota State University: $8,353,482

Average: $14,134,125 per school[/quote]

https://herosports.com/fbs-mountain-west-football-budgets-look-like-ksks/

That is some great information on where UC Davis football stands, moving in the right direction with respect to FCS. Finally having the funds to compete. Doing more with more (not just more with less).

However, it does show where we need to go in the event we want to move to the Mountain West for football.

Side note. For the 2024 season, Sac State had the second highest football expenditures at the FCS level (for reporting schools). Their record for the 2024 season . . . 3-9. This is what "bust" looks like.

I'm.curious what Sac spent on in 2024, which was before they really went crazy with NIL, and coaches salaries.

‘This is a good site for researching college athletic finances: https://knightnewhousedata.org/
They plan to add revenue sharing data once that becomes available.

I don’t mean to divert from the current topic, but for a moment I will. About a week ago I commented that UCD was apparently done with the Big West but for the paperwork and possible associate membership in some sport or another. Turns out there is still one Aggie active this season. Long jumper Kylee Davis will compete in the first round of the NCAA track and field post season.

On the subject of finances there is an article in today’s Bee about Sac’s anticipated revenues from “game guarantees.” The Bee reports Sac will net $225,000.00 this coming year. They will need to step it up to meet an anticipated obligation of $24,000,000.00 over the next five seasons.

wow. 225,000! You can host a bunch more of those 10 min concerts with that $. In all seriousness, is that the total revenue after they have to pay the visiting non conference games and pay for the travel of their in conference opponents? If it isn’t then it will likely be a net negative.

After $24M move to FBS football, Sac State will net $225K in 2026 game guarantees
By Chris Biderman
May 21, 2026 (Online)
May 22, 2026 (Print)
When the Sacramento State Hornets football program earlier this year made an aggressive leap into college football’s top level, the Football Bowl Subdivision, it took on a roughly $24 million obligation over the next five years to join the Mid-American Conference.
Key in helping pay for that ascension, school officials said, would be future money made from playing higher-profile schools in non-conference road games, known as game guarantees.
“All of this is being primarily paid for by game guarantees,” university president Luke Wood said in February, according to the State Hornet student newspaper. “As an FBS school, we can get $1 million to $1.5 million per game.”
But for 2026, game guarantees for games against Hawaii, North Dakota State, Mississippi Valley State and Fresno State will net Sac State just $225,000, according to contracts provided to The Sacramento Bee in response to a California Public Records Act request.
The Hornets have two road games that will bring in funds: Fresno State on Sept. 12, for $350,000; and Hawaii on Nov. 28, for $225,000. They will pay Mississippi Valley State a $350,000 guarantee for a Sept. 5 home game in Sacramento.
Sac State’s home game against North Dakota State on Sept. 19 is the first in a traditional home-and-home agreement, with no money involved and Sac State slated to visit North Dakota State in 2027, though either program canceling without mutual consent would be contractually obligated to pay the other $350,000.
The contract with Fresno State was signed in 2020, well before Sacramento State made its move to the FBS and while it continued to play in the lower-level Football Championship Subdivision as a member of the Big Sky Conference.
The game against Hawaii was announced in March after Hawaii had a home-and-home canceled with UMass. The Mississippi Valley State game was agreed upon when Sacramento State was considering operating as an FBS independent, months before the move to the MAC became official.
Sac State football’s monetary obligations
Sacramento State’s entry fee to the MAC was $18 million, spread out over the five-year agreement. The university made a $6 million payment to the MAC that was due April 3, and is on the hook for $3 million payments each December through 2030.
The school will also pay $75,000 in affiliate member fees this year, which will increase by 4% each of the four remaining years, and $130,000 annually in standard bowl fees charged to each team in the conference.
Additionally, Sac State will pay $5 million to the NCAA for the FBS promotion and will pay travel costs for the four visiting conference opponents, bringing the grand total cost through 2030 to roughly $24 million.
An eight-figure fee to move from an FCS conference into an FBS conference is not unheard of. North Dakota State also newly joined an FBS conference, the Mountain West, for 2026 and paid $12.5 million to the Mountain West to do so, plus the $5 million NCAA fee.
‘Extremely late start’ for 2026 scheduling
The net $225,000 for Sac State from non-conference games is a far cry from what the school would need from game guarantees in future years to pay for the move to the FBS and the MAC.
But athletic director Mark Orr said he was less concerned about the low dollar figure for 2026 and more concerned with getting games on the schedule in the first place.
The FBS move required Sacramento State to schedule a minimum of five FBS home games, which was difficult just months before the season while most non-conference schedules for FBS teams are mapped out years in advance, Orr said.
“We obviously got an extremely late start in putting a schedule together for 2026,” Orr said. “For us to have two non-conference home games, two road games and still come out on net positive in my eyes for 2026, that’s quite an accomplishment.”
How much could guarantees grow in 2027 and beyond?
Orr said he’s been working on scheduling bigger non-conference opponents starting in 2027 through 2034.
He expects there to be games against bigger name schools in the region, including Cal, Stanford, San Jose State, Nevada and regular games against Fresno State in the coming years.
Sac State has played road games against each of those five schools since 2021, including an upset win over Stanford in 2023. Stanford paid Sac State a $625,000 guarantee for that game, news outlets reported at the time.
Orr also noted Sac State is nearing agreements with Power Four schools — those in the SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and Atlantic Coast Conference — similar to what Fresno State and San Jose State have signed in recent years.
“We’re very close to finalizing a game for 2027 with a Power Four school that will be a significant amount of revenue,” Orr said. “Certainly more than all of our guaranteed revenue combined for this year. ... We’re in conversations and negotiations with several Pour Four programs that are interested in playing us in future years.”
Fresno State received $1.85 million for its road game against Michigan and $1.35 million against UCLA in 2024.
San Jose State received game guarantees of $1.5 million for contests against Arkansas (an upset win in 2019) and Penn State in a game that was moved from 2020 to this September due to the COVID-19 pandemic. San Jose State also reportedly made $1.1 million to play at USC in the 2023 opener and $1.85 million to play at Texas last season.
Sac State is confident it can afford move to MAC
Sac State’s ability to foot the bill for the move to the MAC amid a budget shortfall for the public university of upward of $31 million in 2025 was a key question when the announcement was made in February.
The questions grew sharper as details of the agreement were made public. There isn’t much money coming in from the MAC as Sac State won’t receive broadcast revenue from the conference throughout the five-year agreement. And they have to foot the bill for visiting teams coming for conference games, which are expected to be six figures for contests with MAC programs traveling from Ohio, Michigan and Indiana.
For Sac State to recoup even half of the $24 million being spent to join the MAC via game guarantees over the remainder of the five-year agreement, the university would need those guarantees to net an average of $3 million a year from 2027 through 2030.
College football teams generally play three to four non-conference games each season, so in a balanced non-conference schedule with two home and two road games, Sac State would need to average $1.5 million per road game — and that’s ignoring the need to offset any guarantees Sac State might pay out to visiting teams.
Orr said he believes the school will be able to pay its share to get into the MAC with the help of game guarantees, corporate sponsorships and local revenue despite the obstacles of the agreement and the university tightening its financial belt.
“I think all that’s pretty lined up,” Orr said. “We feel good about the entry fee, what we’ve committed to.
“I think the challenge now is in the marketplace of Division I athletics with NIL (name, image and likeness monetization rights for college athletes), and all the other needs that you have to be competitive at an FBS level, those are also revenue opportunities, fundraising opportunities that we’re chasing as well.
“We didn’t enter FBS and the MAC just to be in it. Certainly we want to win and be competitive.”

https://www.sacbee.com/sports/article315828546.html

“I think the challenge now is in the marketplace of Division I athletics with NIL (name, image and likeness monetization rights for college athletes), and all the other needs that you have to be competitive at an FBS level, those are also revenue opportunities, fundraising opportunities that we’re chasing as well.“

An expense is labeled a revenue opportunity. No wonder they are hopeful, they’ve got lots of expenses.

Davis admin have been smart taking their time to move up to FBS. Luckily I don’t foresee Davis having to pay anywhere near the same about of fees to the MW because moving up would just make Davis a full member, not an affiliate member like Sac State or NDSU. The game guarantees to play big programs is good. I don’t know how many of those you’d want to schedule though to make sure the team has a competitive record.

None of the 24 million sac is committed to includes items that improve to quality of the team. More scholarships more.coaches, better facilities, revenue sharing are in addition.

I find it very surprising that the sacramento sports community has not realized what is actually going on at sac state. That Luke wood has so bambozled them and especially the students is just beyond belief. It’s like drink the koolaide and it will all be okay. The sac bee has nibbles around the edges on the subject, sees the issues, but seems afraid to do what the old sacramento bee used to do, that is investigative reporting into what could be a very big story, is also odd. I hate watching a train wreck about to happen, but it is a coming.

to be fair, there may be some stuff going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about. I predict that Sac State doesn’t build a new stadium, and they become tenants and the new soccer stadium at the rail yards.

Well said. The Bee coverage almost feels intentional or "wait & see" because it doesn't take flipping over many stones to see the glaring risks here..

I hope I am not becoming overly paranoid but I see a trend that I don’t like. I feel like UC Davis is being the focus of a lot of major school’s portal recruiting efforts. They like that we recruit freshmen with good academics, coach them exceptionally thru their first year and then they’re ripe for the portal and ripe for the picking. Recently a cal athlete revealed that he was recruited thru his parents who were the first to contact him for going into the portal too, and eventually be picked off by another school. They had been approached by an agent. “OH, could you use some extra cash for some home improvement?” Do I have a deal for you, or, I should say your son/daughter! It’s happened to our basketball team, our football team, many of our entire women’s soccer team last year. I am here to be convinced that I am wrong.

I don't think you're entirely wrong, though I tend to think it's more the agents/"sports management" companies who are the biggest danger. In addition to getting a %-age of any NIL deal they make for an athlete, I'm pretty sure that there's compensation from the school or a booster for delivering the goods. Teams need practice players as well as stars. And unfortunately, these kids are ripe for plucking.

I think that college athletes (and their parents), because they've always been successful - and usually the best player on most of their teams, are very prone to optimism bias. They have a tendency to overestimate their chances of positive experiences and underestimate their chances of negative experiences. So when a recruiter, be it a coach or an agent approaches them with a sales pitch, they're extremely susceptible.

Or to put it another way, college athletes have been "failure deprived" during their athletic careers. The bad experiences, like NOT starting, or worse, NOT playing haven't been frequent enough to make them (or their parents) wary. Often they've been protected from failure by their parents, or the "blame" has been placed on "that coach" who didn't realize how good the player was.

You understand there are more football transfers coming in than going out, no?

William & Mary
Stony Brook
Sac

All not getting bang for their buck.

These are from the 2024 season and Stony Brook went from 0-10 in 2023 to 8-4 in 2024

My bad, I had read that as 2025 -- then yes! Stony Brook, turning it around.

if you are anxious for us to move up to the MWC in football, you want to be a BIG men's and women's basketball fan starting this season. their success will be a litmus test for our readiness to move football up. personally, i think we have a ways to go before we are in the top half of the MWC men's basketball standings. we were a consistent top level team at in the BWC with an arena that was one of the top 4-5 in the conference; i think we'll be toward the bottom of the MWC, with one of the worst arenas.

Out of curiosity, where do you think the WBB team will finish? Since you didn't make a prediction for them in your post.

I don’t follow WBB very closely. Not sure how they have stacked up with MWC teams in the past.