FloCollege 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.

^^^ Will you be traveling to Ashland for the 9/19 game?

Quote from: WUPHF on July 26, 2026, 09:58:53 AMThe Landmark and other conferences could have implemented a paywall a long time ago if the broadcasts were such a drag on the bottom line without the ROI (e.g. affinity building).

The biggest innovation that Flo Sports brought to the market was giving colleges and universities an excuse to go behind a paywall with promises of improved broadcasts, student-athlete branding and original content. 

It is hard for an organization that brings in tuition and then gives everything away for free (housing and food service excluded) to add a fee.

I have said it before, but I remain convinced: if the Flo Sports model was profitable, Hudl would have responded differently.  I am not convinced that the future of Division III is Flo Sports.

It's been a long time since I've had to send money to a college/university, but don't many institutions have "add on" fees beyond tuition, room, and board for a variety of things under the umbrella of student activities?

Well, that was a long winded X post by Frank Rossi. A lot to unpack, which I'm not capable of attempting. However, I did chuckle when I read this: "Two days ago, on July 21, Flo launched the FloSports Channel, a free ad-supported channel on Prime Video carrying more than 300 live events and over 1,000 hours of live programming, plus studio shows, podcasts, replays and documentaries, with additional distribution partners promised in the coming weeks."

I know this is inconsequential in the overall context of that post and that it is maybe nitpicking, but it's my understanding that it costs $139/year for Amazon Prime, so the new channel isn't technically free. But, I've heard that 75% to 80% of U.S. households subscribe to Prime, therefore for most people maybe this new channel is free. But, I don't do Prime and the last time I ordered anything from Amazon was almost two years ago.

I suppose what Frank was trying to say, in  nutshell, is that sooner or later everyone is going to have to pay something to watch the sports they are interested in, so get used to it.

^^^ Seems to me the Jackets have question marks throughout the lineup this season. Or maybe I just don't remember that much about who's coming back. A #25 ranking might be generous.

Quote from: MCScots2013 on July 16, 2026, 09:55:25 AMSeems to me these schools and conferences are playing the waiting game knowing first and/or second year viewership might (will) reduce, but as the paywall becomes the norm we'll forget we got it for free and pony up the money willingly.  It will be the norm for most families and fans of the freshman class of 2027--ignorance is bliss.

I didn't watch any ODAC games last year due to the paywall but will this year since the SAA is on the Flo train.  Wonder how they will account for guys like me? Inflated numbers, no?

Viewrship stats aside, it's one thing to have to pay for something that was previously free. It's another thing to be told that what you are paying for is going to be better than what you were getting for free, but it turns out not to be noticeably better. It's also another thing to be told that there is going to be all this additional great content (articles, profiles, etc.) and get little or nothing of it that is original or of any real value.

But you are right, as time marches on people are likely to just accept paying for Flo.

Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 16, 2026, 08:40:00 AMThe SCAC has extended their Flo partnership through 2031, a two-year extension.  The release claims a 78% YoY increase in "total live viewership" in the second year of the contract recently ended, though (of course) no mention is made of the drastic reduction that took place the previous year.

Yeah, that could mean anything. Could be an increase from 1,000 viewers to 1,780 viewers. Or it could mean an increase from 10 viewers to 17.8 viewers.

Quote from: Patrick Coleman on July 13, 2026, 03:20:52 PMI would bet the biggest improvements would probably come in sports that are not football and basketball -- I suspect those sports were already getting the best production a department could manage and would have less room to grow than other sports would.

I did notice that RMC has changed its camera location for softball from centerfield to behind the plate. However, they did recently upgrade the stadium to include a new press box, so the change may have been coincidental with the onset of Flo.

Didn't notice any change with the few baseball games I tuned into.

KnightSlappy said: "I see it as a limiting factor to the potential exposure of D3 athletics to the wider sports audience.

I think that is the primary concern.

However, as WUPFH said, it was part of the promise that: "Fans in the Flo Sports ecosystem will naturally watch all manner of sports they would not watch otherwise." So, is that happening and if so does it in any measurable way offset loss of previous viewers who have chosen not to subscribe? And if it does, who are the new viewers?

These are the kinds of questions I'd like to see asked of some conference commissioner.

Quote from: awadelewis on July 11, 2026, 04:55:08 PMAll of the discussion about alcohol sales at events prompts a good off-season topic: How do the schools in the conference deal with concessions in their athletic venues?   

Sewanee has a very much of a high-school feel with football concessions run by one of the charitable organizations from the town (with safety and food-handling training from our Dining Services staff).  It's a big contrast to the mid-major D1 where I went to graduate school bidding concessions at athletic events out to the big food service outfits (Sodexo, most recently).

Where does tailgating fit into all of this? Do some schools solve the alcohol problem by allowing it in the parking areas devoted to tailgating, but not allow alcohol sales in the stadium itself? Don't some people go just for the tailgating and never actually enter the stadium to watch the game?

Quote from: WUPHF on July 11, 2026, 12:03:30 PMThis has surely been discussed elsewhere, but Pat Coleman interviewed Dwayne Hanberry from the Southern Collegiate Athletic Conference and asked about Flo Sports at the the thirty minute mark.

Lots of hope and hopefully heading into 2026-2027, the third season of the relationship.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zt5taC4C_J0

I'm sure many conference commissioners have answered a few questions about Flo. I'm really hoping that there will be some way to have one on a podcast exclusively devoted to Flo so that a lot of unasked (and thus unanswered) questions can be addressed.

Quote from: DagarmanSpartan on July 11, 2026, 01:01:55 AMI have such an address and signed up with it.

It's making more sense now. Seems like I am wrong that Flo might be lowering prices to attract new subscribers.

Quote from: WUPHF on July 10, 2026, 11:58:30 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on July 10, 2026, 02:47:26 PMInteresting. That's down from last year when it was $8.99/mo ($107.88 billed annually), and even less than the $9.99/mo ($119.88 billed annually) that they were trying to get last year's subscribers to renew for.

I thought you had to have an .edu from college or university that is a member of a Flo Sports conference to get that rate.

Oh, good point. Do you have such an email address and is that the rate you get?

Quote from: DagarmanSpartan on July 10, 2026, 11:24:28 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on July 10, 2026, 11:00:20 AM^^^ How did you manage to only pay $6/month?

"FloCollege" subscription was $5.99 per month billed annually ($71 and change).

Interesting. That's down from last year when it was $8.99/mo ($107.88 billed annually), and even less than the $9.99/mo ($119.88 billed annually) that they were trying to get last year's subscribers to renew for. When I decided to cancel rather than renew I got offered a 20% discount ($86.30 annually). (Thanks deiscanton for alerting us to that.)

So it would seem that Flo is not having success attracting subscribers at last year's rate. And they clearly need subscribers to do what they do. Perhaps the market for their service isn't what they thought it would be.

Anyway, good for you getting the deal you got. I hope all new subscribers are as fortunate. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over time as Flo tries to determine the price the market will bear.

Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 10, 2026, 10:24:15 AMIf so, he'll be the first to do so.  All the other conferences have provided boilerplate answers about how much better things are gonna be.  The SCAC commissioner is the only one I know to have gone on record saying the conference itself is receiving funds that it is using to improve conference championships. 

Are you aware of any conference commissioners who have gone on a podcast and specifically answered in depth questions regarding the benefits of Flo to the schools in their conference and to the fans of those schools who are now having to pay for what was once free? Last summer the ODAC commissioner was on a more generic podcast, part of which covered the decision to sign with Flo, but did not get to the in depth issues of the benefits to the fans and the schools. Now that there is more data available they could also address the issues of viewership, how it is affecting recruiting, etc..