And we are keeping Poch. I'm not a fan. I like Poch, it's not an issue with his coaching and I think he did well with the team he had this cycle, but I can't think of any time a U.S. coach went 2 cycles and it worked out well. Or too many international coaches in general that a second cycle worked well. Maybe having a short first cycle will help, but I feel like the players just tune out a coach the second time through. I'll be surprised if he makes it all the way through the cycle.

Well between UEFA, CONCACAF and ASEAN, there are enough votes to kill this idea. However, given how corrupt FIFA is at all times, I think it's unlikely that the votes are definitely there. CAF will likely be in favor of any money they can get, as will the Oceanic nations. That leaves South America, and for the the three that have already disavowed the idea to keep their smaller and poorer nations onside. Frankly I'm surprised both CONCACAF and ASEAN came out so strongly against it. There are a lot of smaller nations in both regions where an extra $10-12MM would be a big deal.

Finally, the proposal isn't quite as odious as I first thought. I think, if it passes, the private equity influence would slowly creep larger until it becomes as odious as I feared, but to start with, the deal is very similar to those cut by the University of Utah, the New Zealand All Blacks, and even Spanish soccer's first division. Selling a minority stake in a separate media rights company, if you can firewall it to just that area, isn't really selling out the game. I just doubt the firewall would hold.

Quote from: Gray Fox on July 30, 2026, 08:04:05 PM

Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 30, 2026, 07:13:31 PMThe ESPN story linked above has been updated with Concacaf's decision:  "Following its own meeting later in the day, the 41-member Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football said it had also rejected the proposal.

Concacaf members include 2026 World Cup hosts the United States, Canada and Mexico. The U.S. Soccer Federation wrote on social media that it "stands with Concacaf and its members." " 

Concacaf's statement, however, does not go as far as UEFA's, saying nothing about a boycott of FIFA events, and instead "tasked" their "FIFA Council Members" to engage FIFA and to instruct "the FIFA President to ensure that any matter follows the proper governance processes via staff and FIFA Council, in accordance with the FIFA Statutes."

Will any of this affect who will be the coach of the national team?

Doubtful. Having an Xtra $10million might help pay more, but I.S. Soccer can find the money to hire if they want to. Poch proved that.

This plan should be DOA. But the one member one vote nature of FIFAis going to make that cash grab real attractive to a lot of small, never going to be competitive, countries.

Quote from: AndrewB on July 28, 2026, 01:50:55 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on July 27, 2026, 10:10:49 PMFloCollege on X has posted early predictions of Gagliardi finalists: https://x.com/FloCollegeFB/status/2081843319466827790

D3football.com commented, correcting the school one of them is playing for this season.

That's funny. FloSport really should have demanded more for the money they paid to schools.  I know some might think this is crazy.  And it 100% on them for not knowing of the transfer to John Carroll.  But they needed to demand a certain number of Coaches Corners to get fans interested in the upcoming season.  If they demanded media days. Live coverage of a spring practice.  A summer interview with offensive, defense and head coach.  It could work, but it would take work.  I don't see a better option to grow the game.  Pat and Keith have been busting their ass trying to grow the sport.  There's only so much they can do. (Along with Frank).  At some point, somebody had to come with money, which FloSports has done.  If this doesn't work, nothing will work to grow D3 football.

Nothing is going to grow D3 football past the small audience of alumni, parents, and people close to the schools. It's up to the schools to maximize their athletic teams for alumni connection. The schools that do it really well have outstanding game day atmospheres and more connection, the schools that do it poorly have what they have. But nobody, on a Saturday afternoon, is going to be flipping around the internet with the chance to watch LSU vs Ole Miss grudge match and instead decide on W&L vs Bridgewater without a baked in reason.

No, D3 schools need to learn from the places that do it best in D3 and try and make that a regular thing across the division. Get your own people invested and it will pay dividends. That's the best that will happen.

I tried to click on the link and couldn't understand why it took me nowhere until I realized I had previously blocked the "author" in the past. Probably because I consider it AI generated garbage that pervades the world these days.

W&L could. But why? You have to have the alumni support to do it. In other words, it has to matter to the alumni and they have to fund it, or want it funded. As near as I can tell, W&L's alumni, except for some of the ones that actually played, just don't care. Go to a game and you see player parents and other student athletes mostly. Every time I go to a game here in the deep south for soccer or women's lax or anything like that, I'm about the only non-parent/non-recent player W&L alum at the game. We used to get some alums for Sewanee football games, but that rivalry went away. I suspect this is more the norm in D3 than anything else.

What is in it for the school? Prestige? I guess to some degree. Better campus experience? Most D3 sports are sparsely attended now, whether the team is great or not, especially outside of football and basketball.

But do I think some schools are going to find ways to make it happen? Yes, especially schools who are deeply tied to their athletics. But schools already emphasize sports different ways. From the NESCAC "tips" to facilities spending to coaching. How many D3 schools still share men's/women's soccer coaches? It's embarrassing it happens at all. How many share assistants? How many have no paid assistants? RMC lists 7 football coaches, W&L only has 5. So who is putting in more resources? Should the ODAC or D3 set a limit? That's really my point.

Nothing is even in D3. You just can't offer scholarships. NIL will be no different. If you want to compete at the highest levels of D3, you have to put in the resources already.

Take a look at this analysis of D3 men's and women's lacrosse:

https://d3lacrosse.net/p/does-spending-equate-to-npi-success

"Overall program expenses (includes operating, coach salaries, etc.) for the 2025 women's top 20 NPI teams was $240,483 in 2023 while the overall D3 women's average was observed at $137,809, more than $100,000 less than the current Top 20.

The difference in overall program expenses between the 2025 men's top 20 NPI teams and the average D3 program was remarkable. The mean overall program expense for D3 men's teams in 2023 was observed at $189,891. The 2025 men's top 20 NPI teams, however, averaged $386,208 in 2023, more than double the overall D3 men's average."

Basically in D3, if you want to be good you have to spend money already. NIL isn't going to change that, it just might up the money some.

Money has talked in D3 for decades. It will continue to talk going forward.

Quote from: rmc1982 on July 15, 2026, 02:33:10 PMDidnt know where to post this so I did it here so as to address "the elephant in the room". Whats the liklihood of and the degree to which the NCAA is going to allow NIL for D3 sports?? I know its being discussed at a number of D3 schools, and whats there to stop the schools with huge endowments from basically turning D3 into a full scholarship entity for the kids some schools really want. For example- whats to stop high power and big endowment schools from luring some D1 and D2 talent thats maybe not getting playing time at a D1 or D2 to come play D3 football and ruin the integrity of D3 by PAYING THEM? The whole thing just seems unfair and gives advantage to schools with bigger endowments or alumni with deep pockets. Sooner or later the NCAA is going to have to face this head on or this is going to turn into a bidding war!


"We're completely surrounded-Excellent!...Now we can attack in any direction!'....Chesty Puller, USMC

There are NIL deals in D3 already. The playing field in D3 has always been... tilted? depending on a school's desire to succeed at sports and monetary strength. Just look at the Learfield Cup standings. Other than Wisconsin-LaCrosse, you have mostly elite private schools with huge endowments dominating the top 20 rankings.

Maybe not the big 3 sports, but most D3 sports are dominated by those types of schools. If they choose to find a way to put NIL to work, they will simply continue to dominate, though they may make a bigger dent in football. Or maybe it will be the large state schools, with tons of alums, who can even the field? I don't know. But you can't pretend that D3 is flat playing field now. It's not, and never has been. The only real rule is "no scholarships."

I'm not a UMHB guy, but I did look at these numbers in the past for both UMHB and other programs. Here's what I found in general (there is a difference between the top tier D3 programs like UMHB and the other tiers, that's why the ranges are pretty large).


Less than 50% of those 100+ first years will be on the roster this year. It might be as low as 25 or 30%. This is the biggest "loss rate," so it has the biggest variance. Of those who remain as sophomores, about 2/3rds will be on the roster as Juniors, and about 70-80% of the juniors have remained as Seniors. So, in very broad terms, if you start with 100 first years, you'll have between 30 and 50 sophomores, you'll have 20-40 juniors, and you'll have 15-30 seniors.

The transfer portal does make this a lot more volatile, and I suspect the actual numbers of first year through seniors holds up, but the actual same names is even lower. In other words, you may still have the same general numbers, but that includes a lot more athletes transferring in and out. But yeah, if you have over 100 first years, you generally have 15-30 seniors. How many of those have been there all 4 years given the current system? No idea, and I'm guessing there is huge variation between schools that are heavy with transfers and the smaller, more academic schools that have a lot fewer transfers in general.

Quote from: SierraFD3soccer on July 13, 2026, 08:23:55 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on July 11, 2026, 11:48:09 PMAfter a full month and 100 games... we're left with the top 4 ranked teams in the semifinals.

Did you all see that Gianni Infantino is talking about 64 teams?? And I am guessing they would then have 64 women's teams?? What country (other than the US) will be able to host that many games??

I know Mexico and Canada hosted games, but the US hosted 78 with Canada and Mexico each hosted 13.

FYI apparently there are 211 countries who are members of FIFA, and, with 64 teams, a little over 30% of these teams would make the WC field. 

I think you'd go from one country to a region like this year. But any of England, France, Germany, and Spain could solo host. Not with the same size or quality of American stadiums, but no one can do that. We are nuts with billion dollar stadiums.

Question is, with 64 teams, could Italy qualify?

Off to visit Wesleyan with my daughter today. She's a rising junior and has been touring colleges this summer. So far, I'm happy to admit, all D3 except Brown, which she don't care for. Emory, Brandeis, Tufts, Amherst, Wesleyan with only a hard no on Tufts so far.

Haven't been to Wesleyan in many years. I'll be interested to take the tour!

Visited the Coast Guard Academy with my son the other day since we were in CT visiting family. He's only a rising h.s. freshman, but he is very interested in attending. We will see as time goes on. Lot of improvements being made to campus right now and a beautiful location above the river!

He did not have interest in Conn College but we walked around anyway. Gorgeous campus.

Ok. Being honest and looking at the final 8. When you looked at the Rd of 32 and the matchups, the only team I'm surprised about is Norway. Netherlands/Morocco might be second, but Morocco has been solid for a couple cycles now. This is their second deep trip in a row. Switz/Columbia is close with no clear favorite for me. Overall though, when you look at each 4 team pod from the round of 32, the best team in that pod, in 7 of 8 pods in my opinion, is through.

Someone might point to Germany, but France is simply better right now, so even had they gotten past Paraguay, I don't think they are still standing. Netherlands I think would have gone through if they got past Morocco, but again, Morocco is having a golden generation right now.

Norway is the big surprise. I think they were the 3rd, maybe even 4th, best team in that pod if you played it 100x, but when you have a striker like Haaland, lots of doors open quickly.

Quote from: MCScots2013 on July 07, 2026, 04:12:09 PMMaryville's invitation was unanimous. Either the presidents thought it was a good idea to extend the invitation, or someone played along to get along.  Hard to believe they didn't consult a map until after the ink dried.

Maryville had a good thing going and it's looking more and more like the wool was pulled over our eyes. Would not be surprised if MC is one of the schools looking for that escape hatch and asking the CCS/USAC for forgiveness.

Lots of things are unanimous once people realize they've lost. It does little good to extend the hand to Maryville while someone says "these are the three schools that didn't want you". It's much better for those three schools to say, "Maryville, buddy, welcome to the conference. So excited to have you!" while calling the SCAC and saying "how much interest you got?"

And yes, I'm just pulling 3 out of a hat. No idea if anyone didn't actually want Maryville, but the results kind of speak to a conclusion.

Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 07, 2026, 03:47:48 PMThe SCAC is in a good place with 12 schools - not sure they want a 13th.  Trinity doesn't have a lot of options if they don't - it would be ironic if they were forced to the ASC due to there being literally no other options.  The SAA is looking very insecure at this moment and there are rumblings that there are other schools looking for an escape hatch. 

Honestly? If the SCAC doesn't accept Trinity they are not learning from history. The Texas conferences need every football member they can get, because you never know what is going to happen next.