Ughh. I have heard some very bad things about FloSports:

https://uahchargers.com/news/2023/5/26/g...nsion.aspx

Depends how much they're making. FloSports is a nightmare, but DII conferences rarely have the opportunity to make tv/streaming revenue. I can only recall some CIAA/SIAC games on ESPNU over the years.

But if the revenue is effectively nothing, then they're disconnecting from alums who want to be engaged but not at that price.

I think this is one of the reasons why schools want to bolt for D1. The problem is with D2? The media rights do are nothing but peanuts comparing to the athletics budget. With the realignment that will start soon? I think a lot of schools including GSC schools are willing to make a jump.

FloSports is terrible. Just ask any person that follows CAA sports (The one conference in Division 1 that uses it) about it . But it is some exposure I suppose that a d2 conference wouldn't get otherwise. The GLIAC made a deal with them last year posted below and I think the SAC has a deal with them too.

https://www.gliac.org/general_news/2021-22/FloSports

Not sure their is an economic benefit of being in DII. Even terrible DI gets media money from basketball and other sports, and if you have football, schedule an FBS game for $500k and pay for a lot of stuff. In DII you don’t have any of that, no matter how good your baseball, softball or basketball may be, there is no recognition to be had.

With the ridiculous money to be had in DI, all schools are looking at it as an option.

Ok, now I am starting to see a little about what DavidSt has been talking about, but he's wrong on the reasoning. The main problem with the GSC is that we have been used as an incubator for Conference Carolinas football, IMO. I understand about Chowan & Erskine, but they're grabbing North Greenville, and Shorter also. Worse yet, it's hard to identify any good replacement schools that fit the profile in the GSC's footprint. The GSC could grab Faulkner from NAIA, but they really wouldn't be a good institutionsl fit becsuse they are a lot like Shorter who plans to leave for Conference Carolinas soon.

(06-05-2023 11:07 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Ughh. I have heard some very bad things about FloSports

(06-06-2023 12:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  FloSports is a nightmare

(06-06-2023 07:01 AM)Mid-Major Hoops Enthusiast Wrote:  FloSports is terrible

Noticing a trend.

Not familiar with FloSports other than maybe stumbling across an AAU tournament or something similar on YouTube.

What is the deal here? And why the awful reputation?

I’m going to post this, knowing the NCAA is currently powerless and has zero control over anything that is going on.

There probably needs to be some reclassification, dependent on school enrollment, athletic facilities, sports offered, athletic budget and athletic attendance. I’m not sure how you weigh all that out, but something can surely be done. But like I said, the NCAA is not in control, so it will continue to be the Wild West with NIL, COA and conference and division expansion.

(06-06-2023 02:16 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think this is one of the reasons why schools want to bolt for D1. The problem is with D2? The media rights do are nothing but peanuts comparing to the athletics budget. With the realignment that will start soon? I think a lot of schools including GSC schools are willing to make a jump.

But might those DII schools be a day late and a dollar short?

No current DII schools are realistic candidates for anything higher than DI-AA, which gets no CFP money.

So (at this point) we're basically talking the men's basketball tournament as a significant revenue generator. How many DI hoops conferences are going to approve — even if the tournament expands to 96 teams — letting a DII conference move up to DI and grab a piece of the pie by (eventually) receiving an auto bid? Answer: None.

The narrow path to DI seems set in stone at this point. Be ready to jump when a (somewhat) geographically appropriate low-DI conference needs to backfill

Money is the problem, and the answer. The reason why these schools want to jump up to DI is because the money is so big. If DI/FBS would trickle that money down in a better way, these schools would be more likely to stay where they are.

(06-06-2023 09:16 AM)Usajags Wrote:  Money is the problem, and the answer. The reason why these schools want to jump up to DI is because the money is so big. If DI/FBS would trickle that money down in a better way, these schools would be more likely to stay where they are.

Well, it's part of the problem and part of the answer. The other part of the problem and the answer is more exposure, IMO.

(06-06-2023 09:16 AM)Usajags Wrote:  Money is the problem, and the answer. The reason why these schools want to jump up to DI is because the money is so big. If DI/FBS would trickle that money down in a better way, these schools would be more likely to stay where they are.

As you alluded, the NCAA men's basketball tournament already helps fund championship events in DII and DIII.

Is it fair for those DI institutions — particularly the ones driving the massive media contract — to question why we should donate even more of our money to DII and DIII?

(06-06-2023 08:56 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(06-06-2023 02:16 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think this is one of the reasons why schools want to bolt for D1. The problem is with D2? The media rights do are nothing but peanuts comparing to the athletics budget. With the realignment that will start soon? I think a lot of schools including GSC schools are willing to make a jump.

But might those DII schools be a day late and a dollar short?

No current DII schools are realistic candidates for anything higher than DI-AA, which gets no CFP money.

So (at this point) we're basically talking the men's basketball tournament as a significant revenue generator. How many DI hoops conferences are going to approve — even if the tournament expands to 96 teams — letting a DII conference move up to DI and grab a piece of the pie by (eventually) receiving an auto bid? Answer: None.

The narrow path to DI seems set in stone at this point. Be ready to jump when a (somewhat) geographically appropriate low-DI conference needs to backfill

West Florida, Central Oklahoma, Colorado Mesa, CSU-Pueblo, UIndy, maybe a Midwestern State and Angelo State are teams in large tv markets that can move to FBS in the future. Wayne State Michigan would be another.

(06-06-2023 08:15 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(06-05-2023 11:07 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Ughh. I have heard some very bad things about FloSports

(06-06-2023 12:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  FloSports is a nightmare

(06-06-2023 07:01 AM)Mid-Major Hoops Enthusiast Wrote:  FloSports is terrible

Noticing a trend.

Not familiar with FloSports other than maybe stumbling across an AAU tournament or something similar on YouTube.

What is the deal here? And why the awful reputation?

I subscribed last year because UNA was in the Softball NIT last year about this time. I enjoyed it. I watched DCI (drum corps) all summer and then several UWF and other GSC games in the fall.

They broadcast a lot of things from HS Marching Band comps to singing comps to gymnastics and beyond.

I have both Flo and ESPN+. Both are good but have similar tech issues at times.

(06-06-2023 12:28 PM)unalions Wrote:  I have both Flo and ESPN+. Both are good but have similar tech issues at times.

I think most people misunderstand the nature of streaming. It's the SCHOOL who's producing streams, regardless of what platform the stream is on.

If it's ESPN+, ESPN sends some equipment to make a scorebug and graphics package that looks like ESPN; has minimum standards they need the schools to meet. But the school is producing the broadcast (Obviously, we're not talking SEC/ACC kinda schools here that have ESPN partnership for an actual network. You can usually tell right away which is which).

D-II schools are like two guys in charge of everything on gameday, and sending the stream off their own equipment to FloSports or Sidearm, or StretchInternet or BlueFrame (or YouTube)

The service they're on really has nothing to do with the production value; the service is just a server hosting the stream and managing the login/sales of PPV. The same school can have a great production one year, and a terrible one the next... because the GA who was really into the streaming side moved on and was replaced with someone who isn't as in to that.

All streaming is "you get out of it what you put in." If people care and try, it's a good broadcast. Some bad broadcasts have good people who just don't have enough help to make it not suck.


In all honesty not on ESPN+ should avoid PPV streaming. That's the fastest way to make no one care. The smarter way to go is to stream for free, monetize it as best you can by selling a streaming sponsor... and then asking boosters for donations to support continued streaming.

People are more likely to give to keep free streaming going, because PPV gives them a sense of entitlement, that they paid for something, so it should be like an ESPN broadcast; even if it's a 22-year old kid running the show by himself.

(06-06-2023 12:46 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  I think most people misunderstand the nature of streaming. It's the SCHOOL who's producing streams, regardless of what platform the stream is on.

If it's ESPN+, ESPN sends some equipment to make a scorebug and graphics package that looks like ESPN; has minimum standards they need the schools to meet. But the school is producing the broadcast (Obviously, we're not talking SEC/ACC kinda schools here that have ESPN partnership for an actual network. You can usually tell right away which is which).

D-II schools are like two guys in charge of everything on gameday, and sending the stream off their own equipment to FloSports or Sidearm, or StretchInternet or BlueFrame (or YouTube)

The service they're on really has nothing to do with the production value; the service is just a server hosting the stream and managing the login/sales of PPV. The same school can have a great production one year, and a terrible one the next... because the GA who was really into the streaming side moved on and was replaced with someone who isn't as in to that.

All streaming is "you get out of it what you put in." If people care and try, it's a good broadcast. Some bad broadcasts have good people who just don't have enough help to make it not suck.


In all honesty not on ESPN+ should avoid PPV streaming. That's the fastest way to make no one care. The smarter way to go is to stream for free, monetize it as best you can by selling a streaming sponsor... and then asking boosters for donations to support continued streaming.

People are more likely to give to keep free streaming going, because PPV gives them a sense of entitlement, that they paid for something, so it should be like an ESPN broadcast; even if it's a 22-year old kid running the show by himself.

Great post!

It’s the same in DIII, except most are free. Some have multiple camera angels, replay and game commentators, while others literally have one camera and you can barely hear the PA announcer.

(06-06-2023 01:30 PM)Usajags Wrote:  It’s the same in DIII, except most are free. Some have multiple camera angels, replay and game commentators, while others literally have one camera and you can barely hear the PA announcer.

Sorta like Alabama with a dozen paid "analysts" and a random NAIA bottom feeder with a volunteer offensive coordinator.

Yeah, it's all College Football but ...

(06-06-2023 07:01 AM)Mid-Major Hoops Enthusiast Wrote:  FloSports is terrible. Just ask any person that follows CAA sports (The one conference in Division 1 that uses it) about it.

I believe the Big East uses it for women's basketball too?

I can't speak for other CAA fans, but my main problem with it is that it feels like it's some kind of island apart from the rest of the college sports ecosystem. No one is stumbling on 2nd round CAA tourney games the way they would on ESPN+. (Flo is also not inexpensive for what you get.)

The CAA just re-upped with Flo. Supposedly, it's cheaper for schools to buy out local TV rights on Flo vs. ESPN+, which means schools can put more games on local cable TV. That's seen as a positive for schools like Drexel and Hofstra with strong regional sports networks. The value proposition seems weaker for schools in smaller markets.

(06-06-2023 07:25 AM)Usajags Wrote:  Not sure their is an economic benefit of being in DII. Even terrible DI gets media money from basketball and other sports, and if you have football, schedule an FBS game for $500k and pay for a lot of stuff. In DII you don’t have any of that, no matter how good your baseball, softball or basketball may be, there is no recognition to be had.

With the ridiculous money to be had in DI, all schools are looking at it as an option.

I'm unclear why D2 exists. Either you are really serious about athletics and willing to fund it at D1 levels, or you see athletics as just an amenity for students and campus culture. In the latter case, that's D3. Probably 90% of D2 schools should be in D3.