(06-06-2023 02:15 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  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.

There is quite a big difference in student-athletes at D2 and D3 schools — at least in the part of the country that I'm familiar with (the South).

A lot of D3 athletes would attend the same or a similar four-year (often private) institution whether or not they were competing in sports.

A good many D2 athletes might not have the means or motivation to attend a four-year (often state) IHL if it wasn't for a chance to play sports

(06-06-2023 10:44 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(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?

Fair assessment. And I would say that most D2 schools want to earn their keep with no subsidy from other NCAA teams. But, and here's the problem: no tv network wants to televise D2 teams. So , that leaves us with streaming options like FloSports, ESPN+, & YouTube. It's practically impossible to get casual viewers that way.

(06-06-2023 12:46 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(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.

If the streaming is free, I'll suffer through poor video/audio quality. If I have to pay a lot, I'm going to demand higher quality video &/or audio feeds. Just the nature of the beast.

(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 . 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

I loathe Flosports for that very reason.

(06-06-2023 06:34 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(06-06-2023 12:46 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(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.

If the streaming is free, I'll suffer through poor video/audio quality. If I have to pay a lot, I'm going to demand higher quality video &/or audio feeds. Just the nature of the beast.

$12.50 a month with a year's subscription
$30 per a month

That's a lot of money to watch CAA games, most likely on your computer while watching P5 games on the tv.

Football in their footprints from D3 and NAIA schools. Larger schools.

Belhaven
Rhodes
Middle Georgia State if they turn their club team to a varsity one.
Faulkner
Florida Memorial
Kaiser
St. Thomas, FLO.
Southeastern
Campbellsville
Cumberlands
Pikeville
William Carey was talking in adding football before.
Missouri Baptist
Bethel, Tenn.
Cumberland Tenn.

(06-07-2023 10:28 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Football in their footprints from D3 and NAIA schools. Larger schools.

Belhaven
Rhodes
Middle Georgia State if they turn their club team to a varsity one.
Faulkner
Florida Memorial
Kaiser
St. Thomas, FLO.
Southeastern
Campbellsville
Cumberlands
Pikeville
William Carey was talking in adding football before.
Missouri Baptist
Bethel, Tenn.
Cumberland Tenn.

You missed Soring Hill College, already a DII school in Mobile.

(06-07-2023 12:09 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(06-07-2023 10:28 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Football in their footprints from D3 and NAIA schools. Larger schools.

Belhaven
Rhodes
Middle Georgia State if they turn their club team to a varsity one.
Faulkner
Florida Memorial
Kaiser
St. Thomas, FLO.
Southeastern
Campbellsville
Cumberlands
Pikeville
William Carey was talking in adding football before.
Missouri Baptist
Bethel, Tenn.
Cumberland Tenn.

You missed Soring Hill College, already a DII school in Mobile.

No football. The GSC needs football schools.

(06-06-2023 02:15 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(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.

D2, in my view, was established with the purpose of offering scholarships within the NCAA framework, providing a regional and cost-effective alternative to the NAIA. It aimed to attract students under the motto of "I choose D2." However, the actual preference for D2 appears to be relatively low when someone picks D2 over D1.

D2 faces several challenges, particularly in the western and southern regions where it lacks significant representation. Many schools that transitioned to D2 were replaced with inadequate substitutes that lacked full-time head coaches, full-time assistants, and had excessively large rosters. Additionally, there are disparities in scholarship allocation between larger D2 schools that engage in scholarship manipulation and newer D2 institutions that had to adjust their scholarship models from NAIA or add scholarships since they moved up from D3.

Furthermore, when examining D2 budgets, it becomes apparent that certain schools are flying chartered flights for single games. This raises questions about whether such practices align with the original intentions of D2.

Compare Tiffin gym to West Texas A&M arena
https://www.gotiffindragons.com/faciliti...id=1&pid=6
https://gobuffsgo.com/sports/2010/5/20/f...aspx?id=36

(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.

I understand the appeal of D1, but unless its FBS it's not money. No D2 is going FBS for a long time. So why move to FCS and have even more expenses for basically the same revenue and slightly more exposure?

(06-07-2023 08:43 PM)Bobcat2013 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.

I understand the appeal of D1, but unless its FBS it's not money. No D2 is going FBS for a long time. So why move to FCS and have even more expenses for basically the same revenue and slightly more exposure?

Disagree, it is money $$$$. You are forgetting March Madness & the College World Series.

(06-07-2023 08:43 PM)Bobcat2013 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.

I understand the appeal of D1, but unless its FBS it's not money. No D2 is going FBS for a long time. So why move to FCS and have even more expenses for basically the same revenue and slightly more exposure?

You can't play D2 football teams if you an FBS team, and D2 basketball games are marked as exhibition and do not count on the books. Now, D2 schools with upset wins against D1 in men and women's basketball do not count.

(06-06-2023 02:15 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(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.

D2 needs to be eliminated then. Send the 90% back down to D3 and move the 10% up to the FCS. However, there are teams at the FCS level that operate as a D3 team, so they need to move down to D3 as well. Maybe that would improve the quality of the FCS product.

(06-07-2023 09:42 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(06-07-2023 08:43 PM)Bobcat2013 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.

I understand the appeal of D1, but unless its FBS it's not money. No D2 is going FBS for a long time. So why move to FCS and have even more expenses for basically the same revenue and slightly more exposure?

Disagree, it is money $$$$. You are forgetting March Madness & the College World Series.

Does the cws pay out?

Best way to fox the DIII/II/FCS/FBS expansion problem, promotion/relegation. Earn it on the field, all sports are individual of each other. UConn basketball plays at the top level while their football team lives somewhere in the middle of DIII.

At some point these ridiculous P5 schools paying these kids millions is going to destroy the current system. The Alabama’s, Texas’ and Ohio State’s of the world will have their own pro division of college football.