Quote from: IC798891 on August 09, 2026, 10:14:16 AMJust to clarify, I was an adjunct for 7 years. I wasn't trying to bash them, just going off my own experience/observations that they tended to be used for the introductory level courses, not the upper level courses -- which tended to go to the professors with tenure

I didn't sense any antipathy or animosity towards adjuncts in anything you or WUPFH said. The professor my son liked so much taught courses at all levels. My son took every course he could from the guy.

Having said that, I think colleges and universities are better institutions with regular, full-time faculty and minimal use of adjuncts.

Quote from: WUPHF on August 08, 2026, 10:56:52 PM

Quote from: IC798891 on August 08, 2026, 12:48:48 PMHuh! Man, you learn something new everyday. I would have thought the exact opposite, but to your point, and in fairness to me, I was assuming that the courses were reflective of being part of advanced degree pursuit, not merely low-rigor cash grabs. If they're the latter, that makes sense that they could hand them to adjuncts.

Fair, and also nothing against the adjuncts, many are smart, capable and dedicated to student learning.

My son's best and favorite professor at Fordham was an adjunct. The guy basically taught the same course load as a full-time faculty member. He hated the year-to-year uncertainty of being an adjunct. I'm not sure why he couldn't get a regular faculty position. 

^^^It's basically a very condensed version of the WSJ article. The NY Post journalist appears to have read the WSJ article and written a shorter version. Questionable journalistic standards at work there.

Quote from: Ron Boerger on August 04, 2026, 04:12:47 PMTrinity has "paused" implementation of the new branding and has returned to the former branding while they figure out how to extricate the school from this disaster.  Wheeeeeeee!

Wow! Really? Fascinating.

Quote from: Ron Boerger on August 04, 2026, 04:45:41 AMUnfortunately, the article is paywalled, but the conclusions quoted are correct; if you're spending restricted dollars on something other than the donor's directed intent, you're not only dishonoring the contract made with the donor but spending money that isn't yours to spend and have, in almost all cases, no hope of recovering.  And it tells a terrible story to anyone that hasn't yet made a restricted commitment or wants to make an additional one.

You're basically opening up schools to multiple lawsuits for breaking those contract and hoping to live off the goodwill of those who made the restricted donations in the first place. 

You can sign up for a free WSJ account with an email address. That's how I was able to access it.

Re honoring the intent of donors to endowments, I know someone who made an endowed gift to an institution in support of the athletic department. A couple of years ago, when the institution was in financial trouble, he was asked to release them from that restriction. He said "no". My comment to him was: "No institution, no athletic department." As it turns out, the institution used a lot of restricted endowment money anyway to help with its financial issues. Things seem to have turned around a bit for that school, thankfully, but I don't know what has become of my friend's endowment funds.

This from the WSJ is not exclusive to D3, but relevant nonetheless: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/colleges-restricted-endowments-financial-trouble-247c7d3c?mod=e2fb&fbclid=IwY2xjawTeWSdwZG9mBWV4dG4DYWVtAjEwAGJyaWQRMXRJdmN6VjVNbGR0V1ExTVRzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeGndJM8tHEniOKS9ymecyBA1CyRjB4GS5rBTrw33CcOi6e3Q6BRFfV9c6PsI_aem_pFhYHuiu9V05mJEKU-6V_Q

"Nearly 200 private colleges borrowed from restricted endowments in 2025, up from 131 in 2021, according to estimates from Perspective Data Science, a higher-education financial consultant. Schools used most of the money for everyday expenses, said Matthew Hendricks, the company's founder.

'This is going to be a huge problem as small colleges close,' said Joanne Florino, a fellow at Philanthropy Roundtable, a nonprofit organization that advocates on behalf of philanthropists. 'A lot of living donors are finding out the money they donated is not being used for what they gave it for.'"

And further in the article: "More than 440 colleges are at risk of closing or merging in the next decade, according to a forecast by the Huron Consulting Group, which advises schools on operations and mergers."

Then: "Using restricted donor funds to cover day-to-day expenses is tantamount to putting a going-out-of-business sign on campus, so it is little discussed outside college boardrooms."

Even further on Baldwin-Wallace and Averett are mentioned.

Does anyone know if any of these schools (Trinity, Maryville, Sewanee) used consulting firms when going through their rebranding process?

Quote from: ziggy on July 28, 2026, 11:25:27 AMAs someone who let Amazon Prime lapse, I can confirm that the new FloSports channel is indeed available for free. Within Prime Video (accessible through the Prime Video app or website) is a set of free channels that don't require any sort of membership or subscription to be able to stream - like their version of Pluto TV, for those who are familiar with that platform.

Thanks. I have only ever accessed Prime via Roku when we were piggybacking on my son's account until he ditched his membership. I've located the FloSports channel on the Prime Video website. In the process I also noticed a separate FloRacing channel.

^^^ I was going to ask AndrewB what it would look like to grow D3 football, but I think jknezek has summed it up pretty well.

AndrewB is right that if Flo were to demand more from the schools in order to provide more, then it would take work -- not just on the part of the schools, but on Flo's part as well. That would mean Flo might have to dedicate more people to providing more content, something there is no evidence they care to do.

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.