If Michigan and USC do not agree to the capital deal with UC Investments, the schools may lose millions in additional capital funds and risk their future within the conference beyond 2036 - the current existing end of the league’s grant-of-rights.

— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) November 9, 2025

The potential for a 16-school capital agreement has sparked a meeting Monday among board members at five Big Ten schools and reps from the American Council of Trustees & Alumni, which believes board members have been illegally cut out of the process, they tell @YahooSports.

— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) November 9, 2025

Remember the days when a kid was booted from the team, or a school sanctioned because a backer helped him land a summer job?

The system was nuts then and it's nuts now.


Honestly, if I had a kid in there, I'd say he was a pro athlete the moment he graduated high school and to do whatever was best for him within the rules at that point.

Sometimes that means maturing in a stable environment, developing friendships and maintaining belonging.
Other times it means moving for opportunities and money.

Nobody can sit in judgment of any athlete.

As for the schools, the ncaa, congress in whatever oversight they may play? They are less than inspiring.

And the fans…the fans just want their colors to win. They have scant loyalty to anyone other than their own sense of thrill seeing their colors glorified with victory. No better.

ACC will take em! Already have embraced unequal revenue sharing.

Is anyone following this closely enough to understand the why? I assume it MIGHT be because Michigan and USC are those with the least amount of debt and believe they (along with tOSU) are the schools that bring the most value? I didn't realize just how much this is being driven not by greed but by fear as places like NorthWestern and Indiana have HUGE capital debt and this gives them an immediate cash infusion at the price of long term revenue. I know that UC Investment SAYS that it will manage things better and the pie will grow but really it is about generating a solid and guarnteed return from a fairly desperate seller.

ColoradoBear said:

---

ACC will take em! Already have embraced unequal revenue sharing.

---

I agree. The ACC take them, and UCLA and see how that whole thing ends up. LA generates about a quarter of the Big 10s revenue from TV.

4 5 team pods, with 5 other games with other pods.

The money there would be tremendous- the ACC network would have amazing Olympic sports, the academic schools and a true national presence. Bring in ND as well.

I'm not even sure why the larger schools in the Big Ten even need private equity now. That's the thing - money now will have to be paid back later and then some.

It also seems UCLA is ready to spend that private equity cash to buy out Pasadena and move to SoFi. Is that really going to net them enough money to justify PE? I think they could easily move and have the same attendance issues after a few years of novelty.

Yeah I think I'm rooting for more chaos.

Another thing about Michigan and USC to the ACC would be a way to solidify yearly games with Notre Dame, whether in conference or more likely a modification to the current ND -ACC structure.

The Pac-12 might have an opening.

sycasey said:

---

The Pac-12 might have an opening.

---

Oregon State is now the King.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

sycasey said:

---

The Pac-12 might have an opening.

---

Oregon State is now the King.

---

The royal Beavs lost at home to 0-8 Sam Houston State.

Big is getting an ACC vibe with schools at the top not wanting to share with losers like Rutgers and Maryland. Wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't end well.

Give the SEC credit. They've been better at maintaining geographical credibility and competition

ColoradoBear said:

---

I'm not even sure why the larger schools in the Big Ten even need private equity now. That's the thing - money now will have to be paid back later and then some.

It also seems UCLA is ready to spend that private equity cash to buy out Pasadena and move to SoFi. Is that really going to net them enough money to justify PE? I think they could easily move and have the same attendance issues after a few years of novelty.

Yeah I think I'm rooting for more chaos.

Another thing about Michigan and USC to the ACC would be a way to solidify yearly games with Notre Dame, whether in conference or more likely a modification to the current ND -ACC structure.

---

Because they are short on cash now, many of the schools. Many due to large construction projects for athletic facilities

Anarchistbear said:

---

Big is getting an ACC vibe with schools at the top not wanting to share with losers like Rutgers and Maryland. Wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't end well.

Give the SEC credit. They've been better at maintaining geographical credibility and competition

---

This is part of why I'm skeptical that the "Super League" thing is really going to happen. Seems like any such plan can easily fall apart due to infighting, and the playoff system actually provides some incentive to stay in a second-tier power league and just win that.

sycasey said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Big is getting an ACC vibe with schools at the top not wanting to share with losers like Rutgers and Maryland. Wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't end well.

Give the SEC credit. They've been better at maintaining geographical credibility and competition

---

This is part of why I'm skeptical that the "Super League" thing is really going to happen. Seems like any such plan can easily fall apart due to infighting, and the playoff system actually provides some incentive to stay in a second-tier power league and just win that.

---

Or get four or five bids ( SEC) as a top conference but the Big has two ( very) good teams and two good teams. They are likely to get two to three bids. Because the rest are so bad there are few marquee games of interest. The Big expanded to get huge media markets but there is nothing worth watching. The SEC has 7 out of the 10 most watched games this season.

Strong arming some of your strongest schools into accepting a deal they don't want is a Larry Scott type of move. Only thing more Pac12 is making those schools play multiple games a season in China on the Chinese National TV Channel.

socaltownie said:

---

Is anyone following this closely enough to understand the why? I assume it MIGHT be because Michigan and USC are those with the least amount of debt and believe they (along with tOSU) are the schools that bring the most value? I didn't realize just how much this is being driven not by greed but by fear as places like NorthWestern and Indiana have HUGE capital debt and this gives them an immediate cash infusion at the price of long term revenue. I know that UC Investment SAYS that it will manage things better and the pie will grow but really it is about generating a solid and guarnteed return from a fairly desperate seller.

---

I don't get it. Could there be a non-monetary reason? I know - no such thing. But, MI, a founding pillar of the conference, and SC, the shiniest new penny? This sounds nuts.

Whatever the issue(s) this is supposed to solve, I can't help but think that cooler heads will prevail.

Michigan doesn't need the money. USC thinks they are worth more- it's not an even distribution

Anarchistbear said:

---

Michigan doesn't need the money. USC thinks they are worth more- it's not an even distribution

---

well, luckily I don't have to get it and whatever they do, they do. Michigan ethics have fallen to the SC level, anyway, so a pox on both of them.

Anarchistbear said:

---

Big is getting an ACC vibe with schools at the top not wanting to share with losers like Rutgers and Maryland. Wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't end well.

Give the SEC credit. They've been better at maintaining geographical credibility and competition

---

Rutgers and Maryland were brought in for the NY/NJ and MD/DC/VA TV markets. Nothing more than that.

It is off topic from the context of this discussion, but Nebraska is the only Big 10 member that is not an AAU school (thrown out in 2011). They are spending a bit of money to regain entry (which, IIRC, was a condition of admission to the B1G), and it will involve building a second Med School at their campus in Kearney NE. You'd think they'd be first in line to be thrown out.

I'm not sure I see Michigan State or Ohio State letting Michigan leave. My guess is that something would be worked out.

USC would be another thing. Independent? ACC? SEC?