Sacramento State has informed the Big Sky Conference of its intention to leave starting June 30, 2026, the league announced Thursday. The Hornets are expected to announce a move to the Big West for every sport but football starting July 1, 2026. The move will leave the Hornets without a football conference home starting next year as the school waits for final word on its waiver application to reclassify as an FBS school next season. 

The waiver is tied to the NCAA’s “bona fide invitation requirement,” which sets an FBS conference invitation as a prerequisite for reclassification. The Hornets currently do not hold a conference invite, and would compete as an independent should they move up.

The FBS Oversight Committee recommended denying the waiver request last week, with the Division I Council set to make a final decision in the coming days. So what’s at sake for the Hornets? And how did they get to this point?

The big bet 

Last year a prominent group of Sac State boosters formed the “Sac12” — an organization dedicated to raising the athletic department’s profile to a point it can earn a Pac-12 invitation in the future. 

According to the group’s website, its goals include: 

• Securing $50M in NIL commitments to cover the first 10 years in the Pac-12.
• Securing funding and approvals to build a football stadium that seats at least 25,000 attendees.
• Securing funding and approvals to build a basketball arena that can seat at least 6,000 attendees.
• Turning out at least 15,000 attendees per home football game for the remainder of the season
• Securing $5.25 million in conference fees for NCAA re-alignment into the Pac-12.

Taking the first toward these goals, the school announced construction on a new football stadium — set to open in 2026 — along with renovations to its basketball arena. 

The athletic department placed a heavy bet on reclassifying with splash offseason hires for both the football and basktball programs. The school tapped Brennan Marion as its football coach, an up-and-coming coordinator from UNLV who drew interest from several FBS schools with coaching vacancies this past offseason. On the basketball side, the Hornets turned to former NBA All-Star Mike Bibby to to lead the team. 

The moves certainly built some buzz around the football program. The Hornets signed an exceptoinal transfer class, headlined by former blue-chip quarterback prospect Jaden Rashada, who is expected to lead Marion’s exciting “Go-Go Offense” in 2025. Overall, the Hornets brought in 40 Division I transfers, 29 of which have significant playing time under their belts. 

What’s at stake? 

Many of Sac State’s strong offseason moves were made under the belief the football team would be playing in the FBS in 2026. A source told CBS Sports the program’s football budget is just north of $1 million for next year, but questions remain as to whether booster support can endure a multi-year transition process. 

There’s also a strong chance several of the Hornets’ high-profile transfers could search for greener pastures after this season rather than toil away in the FCS ranks again in 2026. 

As mentioned above scheduling would be complicated. While Marion told CBS Sports earlier this spring that the Hornets had an independent schedule ready for the 2026 season if the waiver was approved, compiling an FCS independent slate would be a much more difficult endeavor. The Hornets only have two opponents (Lamar and Fresno State) set for the season. 

FBS schools are only allowed to count one FCS team per season toward bowl eligibility, and those opponents are usually set years in advance. The Hornets could be forced into buy games from Division II opponents, which would not only drain funds but further dampen positive momentum the school has made with its donor base.

What happens next?

Sacramento State’s waiver is tied to a similar move made by Liberty in 2017. The NCAA granted the Flames’ waiver, allowing them to play an independent schedule from 2018-22 before the program joined Conference USA. 

The NCAA Oversight Committee was not swayed by the argument, pointing to drastic changes to the college football landscape over the past eight years.

“Although a waiver of the bona fide invitation requirement was granted in 2017, that decision was made in a different era, under a different set of facts and rules,” the council wrote in its waiver denial. “The Division I membership adopted the current legislation to affirm the importance of the nature and purpose of the subdivision reclassification process, choosing to place that decision-making authority with the council.” 

On Wednesday, Sacramento State president Luke Wood penned a letter in response to the oversight committte’s statement:

This week, an NCAA committee recommended against granting Sacramento State a waiver to join FBS as an independent. We remain hopeful as the D1 council has the ultimate decision and authority. The rationale, that a lack of a conference invite ‘signals readiness,’ is flawed. 

In a normal situation this rationale would make sense, except for we are located in a part of the country that has limited FBS conference options. The only reason we don’t have an invite is geography. Multiple FBS commissioners and presidents who are outside our region have told us directly they would welcome Sacramento State, but cannot make the travel work. Geography should not be a deterrent when a university is in a unique geographic situation. The last West Coast school to make the leap was Boise State, nearly 30 years ago.

A conference invite is not the right benchmark. Readiness is measured by investment, infrastructure, and commitment and Sacramento State exceeds the standard. Liberty University was (relatively) recently granted approval to make the same transition but we are now being told ‘that was a different time.’

The fate of the football program now rests in the hands of the NCAA Division I council. A waiver would keep the Hornets’ ambitious plans on track, while a denial would could drastically affect the athletic department’s timeline. 

We’ve all heard numerous times in our lifetime that records are made to be broken. It’s just the nature of progress. But just the same, there are some achievements that will likely stand the test of time, and the Oklahoma football program lays claim to several of them.

Chris Lowe and some of his colleagues at ESPN took a look back over the past 75 years of college football, back to 1950 and the beginning of what’s called the modern era of college football, and came up with a list ranking what they consider to be the 10 most “unbreakable” records in the sport, which included three OU records.

“In every sport, there are hallowed records, dubious records and records that are seemingly unbreakable,” wrote Lowe in the article this week. “Some good, some not so good.”

Oklahoma owns several of college football’s most unbreakable records

Oklahoma’s remarkable 47-game winning streak, achieved from the third game of the 1953 season through the seventh game of the 1957 season, topped the list. The Sooners lost 7-0 to Notre Dame on Nov. 16, 1957. It was their only loss that season. Said another way, that was 1,499 days (more than four years) without a loss.

You have to go back more than 100 years (Washington with 40 from 1908 to 1914) to the next closest to Oklahoma’s 47-game record. Since 1950, though, the longest win streak recorded was 34 by Toledo in 1969-71 and 34 by both Miami (2000-02) and USC (2003-05).

The Sooners also ranked No. 4 and No. 7 on the list of ESPN’s 10 most unbreakable college football records and were part of another record performance belonging to former Texas Tech quarterback Patrick Mahomes, which sat at No. 9.

At No. 4 was Oklahoma’s 1971 team, which in the second season of its vaunted Wishbone offense averaged a record 472.4 rushing yards per game. To illustrate how truly special that was in comparison to today’s college game, only four teams averaged more than 250 yards rushing in the 2024 season. The 1971 Sooner team averaged 45 points a game and lost just once that season, 35-31 to No. 1 Nebraska in the much ballyhooed “Game of the Century.”

OU’s Antonio Perkins amazingly returned three punts for touchdowns in a 2003 game against UCLA. That incredible performance ranked No. 7 on the list. As rare as it is to have a punt returned for a touchdown, it’s almost unthinkable for a player to do it three times in the same game. Perkins’ three punt returns totaled 84, 74 and 65 yards in a 59-21 home blowout against UCLA. In four seasons at Oklahoma, Perkins ended up with eight punts returned for touchdowns, a program record and second-best in NCAA history.

In 2016, Patrick Mahomes and Baker Mayfield, two future NFL quarterbacks, faced off against each other in a classic shootout that produced a combined 125 points and an NCAA Division I record 1,708 yards of offense. Mayfield and OU outlasted the Red Raiders, but it was Mahomes who lit up the scoreboard, as well as the record books, in a performance that ranked No. 9 in ESPN’s list of the 10 most unbreakable records.

Mahomes accounted for a record 819 yards of total offense in the game. He put the ball in the air an incredible 88 times, completing 52 passes for 734 yards and five touchdowns. He also rushed for 85 yards, all while playing the second half with a separated throwing shoulder and a fractured left wrist.

As eye-popping as Mahomes’ stats were in that game, Mayfield, who it should be noted began his career at Texas Tech, produced some impressive numbers of his own, throwing for 545 yards and seven touchdowns.

Read more about OU football

MSU alum and Michigan House Representative D-9th District Joe Tate introduced a bill on June 12 to limit NCAA regulations on name, image and likeness payments to college athletes.

Tate, a defensive lineman at MSU from 2000-2003 and former Michigan speaker of the house, presented HB 4643 to block the NCAA, athletic conferences and universities from interfering with athletes looking to collect on NIL funds.

“There are conflicts with the Michigan statute that we have on the books allowing student-athletes to take advantage of their name, image and likeness while they are at the university that they are participating in and as a student,” Tate said. “It prohibits any entity from limiting a student-athlete’s ability to take full advantage of their name, image and likeness.”

On June 5, a settlement in the House v. NCAA case made way for athletic departments to pay student-athletes directly from university funds, ushering in a new era of NIL in college athletics. The ruling limited the power of third parties and NIL collectives to pay student-athletes. 

The bill would circumvent this ruling, allowing athletes and third parties to determine a “fair market value” according to Tate. 

In congruence with the House settlement, the NCAA is asking power conferences, including the Big Ten, to comply with the NCAA rules even if it means breaking state laws like HB 4643. 

It is unclear how this will unfold between the NCAA and states in the coming months. Industry leaders have called on Congress to enact a law preventing student-athletes from becoming employees and provide the NCAA with antitrust exemptions. 

The president of Charitable Gift America and a prominent NIL collective, Dr. Tom Dieters, sponsoring MSU athletes like baseball’s Joseph Dzierwa, said the new bill would allow for athletes to earn compensation without the limits of the university or NCAA.

“The new NCAA rules, and they’re not laws, put a cap on compensation or can even prevent the student from getting an NIL contract altogether,” Dieters said.

MSU tennis standout Ozan Baris said there is an overwhelming amount of uncertainty in the NIL space and stated this bill would put an end to that.

“That’s where NIL is always so beneficial,” Baris said. “It gives me that place where I can play tennis and not have to worry about the financial stress of a financially burdening sport at times.”

Tate has experienced the difficulty of being a student-athlete and states they deserve the same rights that other students receive. “I know the dedication, sacrifices and challenges that come with balancing academics, athletics and personal growth,” he said.

Without the limits imposed by the House v. NCAA case, National College Players Association Executive Director Ramogi Huma said the bill could lead to increased recruiting at universities in the state.

“Student-athletes and their families look at a lot of factors whereas to decide where you go to school,” Tate said. “If Michigan is open for business, for student-athletes being able to take advantage of NIL, I would imagine that would be a tool to attract talent into our universities across the state.”

Hailey Van Lith was one year away from tying a bow on a traditional college career at Louisville and being cemented as one of the most decorated four-year starters in Cardinals history. She had just led her team to its third straight Elite Eight appearance and put up career-high numbers, including 19.7 points per game.

But the rising senior from Wenatchee, Washington, had other plans. With WNBA aspirations on her mind, Van Lith swapped Louisville red for LSU purple and gold and embarked on a new journey in Baton Rouge. Her lone season included another run to the Elite Eight and it was back to the transfer portal.

Coach Mark Campbell’s pro-style offense caught her eye, and she decided her fifth and final year of eligibility would be spent at TCU.

College sports was once rooted in tradition, school pride and loyalty, but those expectations are changing if not fading in a landscape where athletes have won the ability to transfer season to season, year to year. Some are painted as disloyal or selfish but Van Lith and others don’t see it that way.

“Whenever you transfer, you always expect pushback,” Van Lith told The Associated Press. “I can’t tell you how many podcasts I’ve seen on people discussing my choices to go to this school and that school, and the theories that are thrown out there are all wrong. But it’s just, you learn to live in harmony with that, and at the end of the day, I just decided I’m no longer going to let false assumptions disrupt my peace.”

One of the biggest misconceptions, Van Lith said, is that her transfer decisions were guided by NIL compensation. She was able to look past accusations of being a “money chaser” or a “trophy chaser” and find solace knowing onlookers didn’t have the full picture.

“Multiple of the schools that I went to, I actually never got a check from,” she said. “I think that in transfer culture now, a lot of people automatically assume that it has to do with the collective money or now I guess it’s revenue share. But it just depends on the person, and for me, it was all basketball decisions.”

A level playing field

Ann Skeet, senior director of Leadership Ethics at Santa Clara’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, said all parties should be held to the same standards. Coaches and athletic directors take new jobs, navigating buyouts and ill will along the way.

“I do think one of the realities of sport in this day and age is that people are making changes more often than they used to,” Skeet said. “How they communicate what their decision is, how much time they give people, how frequently they’re changing teams, all of those things should be considered, and I think it’s fair to hold the coaches and players to equal standards.”

Skeet acknowledged the pressure on athletes navigating a new, professional-like industry at a young age. Millions of dollars in name, image and likeness compensation is already flowing even before schools start cutting checks after July 1 under the NCAA antitrust settlement.

“The reality is, NIL is bringing market pressures to college sports in a way that we haven’t experienced before, and so players are having to trade off and think about what serves their own personal interests vs. what serves the team interests in ways that they haven’t had to consider in the past,” she said.

Complicated decisions

While Van Lith was deciding her future, running back Ray Davis was awaiting his. In his sole season at Kentucky, Davis rushed for 1,129 yards on 199 carries and led the SEC with 21 touchdowns from scrimmage. His production was enough to garner interest from NFL scouts.

Similar to Van Lith, Davis’s winding road to the pros involved several stops. Before Kentucky, he had two-year stints at Temple (2019-2021) and Vanderbilt (2021-2023). Transferring to Kentucky meant Davis would suit up for his third team in five years, and he knew moving from one SEC school to the next could stir the pot. The decision wasn’t an easy one.

“It was super difficult,” Davis said. “It took days, literally almost weeks to just really make a decision. And when I made the decision, I just had to live with it. I couldn’t think twice about it. I had to be confident.”

The move paid off. Davis gained national attention and was selected by the Buffalo Bills in the fourth round of the 2024 draft. But while his draft stock soared, the backlash from transferring a second time took a toll.

“Mentally it sucks because, you know, as a kid when you’re 18, 19 or whatever, you’re being told, ‘Hey he’s leaving because he’s disloyal,’ and that’s not what it is,” Davis said.

He focused on what he could control.

“I think it’s really about how you handle it yourself, how you internalize it yourself, and how you go about walking in the building each and every day. If you be like, `Ah, people are looking at me like I’m not an honest and disloyal person,’ then that’s going to hurt you mentally. But if you walk into a place where you’re confident in who you are, then I think you’ll succeed,” Davis told AP.

The impacts

Transfer decisions, regardless of the underlying factor, can lead to unfavorable public perceptions — or worse. A 2024 study found a cross-section of abusive content directed toward college athletes on social media.

“It certainly is their right to transfer, but then they will also develop whatever reputation they develop as a result of the choices they make. So people who transfer multiple times are going to be identified in that way,” Skeet said. “It goes with the territory, as they say.”

Both Van Lith and Davis noted the irony in receiving blowback when team personnel can seek new ventures without repercussions.

“Coaches leave. Directors leave. Everybody has the opportunity to leave. So for players, we’ve got to have that opportunity too,” Davis said.

Added Van Lith: “A lot of times, the loyalty is placed on the responsibility of the players, but you see coaches leave all the time to better their financial situation, to make more money, to do better for their family. When people talk about loyalty, I really challenge them to put into perspective, if they would feel the same if a coach left.”

AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports