Sacramento State's Leap to the FBS: Bold Ambition or Risky Overreach?

Sacramento State is set to join North Dakota State as a fresh FBS addition in EA Sports College Football 27.

On February 16, 2026, Sacramento State officially accepted an invitation to join the Mid-American Conference as a football-only affiliate member starting July 1, 2026 — a five-year term that elevates the program from the FCS Big Sky Conference to the Football Bowl Subdivision. It marks the first West Coast program to make the FCS-to-FBS jump since San Diego State and Fresno State did it back in 1969. The Hornets will be replacing departing Northern Illinois and giving the MAC its first Pacific Time Zone foothold.

The move comes with a steep price tag: an $18 million entrance fee to the MAC (with $6 million due in Year 1) plus a $5 million NCAA transition fee, totaling $23 million. Additional terms include Sac State forgoing any conference revenue distributions and covering air travel costs for visiting MAC teams. The university's athletics budget sat at roughly $11 million last year, and the school faces a projected $2.9 million deficit. President Luke Wood has stated the fees will come from game guarantees and football-generated revenue — not student fees or the general fund — while a new NIL collective has raised tens of millions in pledges and stadium upgrades at Cal Expo are in the works.

The announcement has sparked intense debate. Supporters see a visionary program betting on itself to compete at the highest level. Critics call it financially reckless, geographically absurd, and a short-term gamble fueled by envy-worthy spending. Both sides deserve a fair hearing.

The Case for the Move: Vision, Exposure, and Long-Term Growth

Sac State enters FBS with real momentum. Under previous coach Troy Taylor, the Hornets made four FCS playoff appearances (2019, 2021–2023), won multiple Big Sky titles, and built a competitive program in a tough conference. New head coach Alonzo Carter brings recruiting ties from Power conference stops. The university has invested heavily in facilities and NIL, signaling serious commitment.

The biggest upside is national exposure. The MAC’s television deal guarantees weekly national broadcasts — a level of “advertising” that economist David Berri notes would cost far more than $18 million if purchased outright. For a university in the Sacramento media market (a top-20 TV market), this is priceless branding. Every Saturday, the Hornets become a three-hour commercial for the school, potentially boosting enrollment, donations, and community pride in California’s capital.

The deal also gives the MAC an immediate financial windfall — roughly $1.5 million per remaining member from the entry fee — and strengthens its hand in 2027 media rights negotiations. For Sac State, the five-year term acts as a proving ground. Success on the field could open doors to better-aligned conferences (Pac-12 remnants, Mountain West, etc.) down the road. In an era of rapid realignment, this is a calculated stepping stone, not a permanent home.

President Wood has been consistent: most of Sac State’s 21 sports were in the “wrong home.” Moving football to FBS while placing other sports in the Big West is a pragmatic, football-first strategy that many ambitious programs have pursued. The Hornets are betting that increased visibility, better competition, and recruiting access in talent-rich California will pay dividends that outweigh the upfront cost.

The Criticisms: Cost, Geography, and Financial Risk

The skepticism is understandable and not unfounded. The $23 million price tag dwarfs the current athletics budget, and details on exact funding sources remain vague beyond “football revenue.” Critics point out the university’s deficit and question whether game guarantees and ticket sales can realistically cover such an outlay in the early years of transition.Geography is the loudest complaint. Sacramento is more than 2,000 miles from the nearest MAC school. Visiting teams face long, expensive flights — costs Sac State has agreed to absorb. The Hornets will likely be scheduled in clusters to minimize trips, but the burden still falls heavily on one side. Some fans and analysts call the arrangement one-sided: Sac State pays big, subsidizes travel, takes zero revenue share, and gets a temporary home in a conference whose traditional strength has been geographic cohesion.

Bowl eligibility adds another wrinkle. Under standard FBS transition rules, the Hornets likely won’t be eligible until at least the 2028 season (though six-win teams can sometimes sneak into bowls earlier if spots remain). Early years will feature tough non-conference schedules and cross-country road games against established Group of Five programs.

Social media and fan forums reflect envy mixed with genuine concern. Some view the spending as “wasting money” for limited upside (a New Orleans Bowl or similar at best). Others see it as a desperate overpay after rejected lower bids to the Pac-12 and Mountain West. The short five-year term and lopsided financial concessions fuel perceptions that both sides are using each other — Sac State for FBS status, the MAC for cash and a media-market boost — with little illusion of permanence.

A Balanced Perspective

College athletics in 2026 is a high-stakes, rapidly changing landscape. Conference realignment, NIL, and television money have turned mid-major programs into aggressive players. Sacramento State’s move is neither purely heroic nor foolish — it is a high-risk, high-reward gamble by a university that refuses to accept second-tier status.

The criticisms about cost and travel are legitimate. The $23 million commitment carries real financial risk, especially with a modest athletics budget and a university facing deficits. The cross-country logistics strain the “Mid-American” identity and create genuine competitive disadvantages.

Yet the ambition is commendable. In an era when many programs consolidate or play it safe, Sac State is investing in growth, exposure, and a bigger stage. The MAC deal provides a practical on-ramp to FBS that was previously denied (the NCAA rejected an independent transition waiver). If the Hornets compete, recruit well in California, and leverage national TV, the investment could transform the program and the university’s profile.

Ultimately, this is a bet on Sacramento State’s future — on its leadership, its fan base, its NIL momentum, and its ability to turn a five-year bridge into something lasting. Fans of rival programs may feel envy seeing a peer “buy” its way up, but that envy often masks admiration for the willingness to take the shot.

Whether the move proves brilliant or burdensome will play out on the field and in the balance sheet starting in 2026. For now, respect is due to a program that looked at the status quo and decided it wasn’t enough. In college football, betting on yourself is rare. Sacramento State just placed a very public, very expensive wager that it belongs at the highest level. Only time will tell if it was the right call.