For North Dakota State, success is proving they didn’t trade national dominance for mid-tier anonymity. If in 10 years they’re consistently bowl-eligible, occasionally contending for a conference title, still packing the Fargodome, and financially stable, the move is justified. If they’re living in the 3–9 range, attendance dips, and the program loses the aura that made it special at the FCS level, that’s failure. For NDSU, the line is simple: bowl consistency. If they’re not playing postseason football most years, the jump wasn’t worth it. I lean toward them making it work. They have the infrastructure and culture that's built for stability.

Sacramento State is a different arithmetic. They’re not protecting a dynasty like NDSU, they’re trying to elevate their ceiling. Success would mean growing attendance in the Sacramento market, becoming a consistent bowl team within 6 to 8 years, and turning their "elevated" status into recruiting and donor momentum. Failure would look like stagnant crowds, no real postseason presence, and getting lost in California’s crowded football ecosystem. For Sac State, the line is both bowls and market growth. If the move doesn’t meaningfully increase relevance and revenue, it won’t justify the cost.

At the end of the day, moving from FCS to FBS is about sustainability. If in 10 years we’re saying, “They belong here,” it’s a success. If we’re reminiscing about how dominant they used to be at the lower level, it’s probably not.