I agree. I am a dinosaur, still with DirectTV, hopefully they pick it up too. Watching replays on Peacock is annoying because you can't fast forward through the commercials. Interesting timing with YTTV given the blackout of ESPN currently.
College Sports (Football)
- Status
NCAA issues punishment for Michigan State recruiting violations under Mel Tucker
The NCAA COI levied significant penalties against Michigan State for recruiting violations that occurred under former coach Mel Tucker.
+1 to this (also go through due diligence, have done acquisitions on both sides, many years in finance/accounting, managing incentive plans, etc.).
While I don't expect anyone has time to dig into all the details, there's a lot of questions. The long term nature of it is one. People who won't be around to deal with realized risk typically make decisions that benefit their current position at the expense of others. There may be no greater example of this than our massive federal debt, which btw is repeated around the world, but the thinking would be the same with long term rights related to these sports properties. What's the value-add of bringing in an investor? Are the universities not already milking their sports teams for every dollar and partnering with competent specialists? Or that this solves the unequal distribution problem in a way that lowers risk with modest loss of upside? I see a lot of red flags, and the fact that the people leading the charge are trying to rush this and force it on schools is a huge one. Nothing to see here, just quickly sign on the dotted line.
These are public non-profits. There should be more transparency and time for input IMO for something of this magnitude.
Curbelo Fanboy
BERTBALL IS LIFE
They can't punish Cleveland State any more. Coach Kevin Mackey just died a couple days ago.
Some interesting commentary here suggesting the process by which they're rushing it through has a lot of issues.
Article with concerns
Article with concerns
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
Another risk I see is will this be a one and done or is this allowing an entity to get there foot in the door hoping that down the line there will be another chance to acquire a bigger % of ownership of the B1G when financial difficulties arise at some mismanaged schools by alarming buyouts of coaches contract , etc etc.......
I just see a risky venture with what the conference gives up can never be reacquired again............sounds like the 2.4 billion will be spent quickly by a majority of schools that are in dire straits of their bottom line failures......
I've never had a payday loan but I have heard from former clients , friends and others that rue the day they ever got that first payday loan......
the more you know...........................
“In public comments made last month, University of Michigan trustees described the deal as a “payday loan” and called it an unnecessary step and a “bail out” for those Big Ten schools that have mismanaged their finances.”
Payday loans fuel repeated cycles of mismanagement. This doesn’t address the root cause, so expect more of the same.
By design, absolutely. Once you identify an individual or organization's leadership that's willing to burn the furniture to keep the place warm for a few more weeks, that's a path to greater distress, not less. That often opens the door to distressed terms terms for the next round.
Brave of those two schools to call it out as I'm sure this is causing a lot of conflict. Anyone have a link to what ILL is saying about the deal?
Another article with some figures on the debt burden
That’s a superb article, with deep insights and data on the massive, frantic spending blowout. The binge isn’t letting up, so we’ll need more payday loans. The closing paragraph sums it up.
“There isn’t much in the current College Sports Inc. climate to suggest we are entering an era of austerity. That’s why the Big Ten is close to cutting a deal with the UC Pension System. Instead of curtailing spending, the short-term solution is to find more money to blow.”
Last edited:
I was looking around for updates this weekend, not much out there but....
Despite my insistence that it’s a 20-year deal and Dellinger stating that, there isn’t anything definitive about that out there that I can find beyond that piece. So…. But oddly, no one addresses the length of the agreement? I don’t understand why that part isn’t crystal clear. UCI isn’t buying 10% in each university but 10% in the BTE money so just say it.
UCI Singh Bachher (CIO) even stated he considers this a 100-year partnership. Whatever that means.
I still think there’s more to this than perpetuity (or less than). After 20 years, what’s to keep a university from leaving and keeping their stash? It would be silly to leave but stranger things have happened. What’s to keep the B1G from dissolving the BTE? It just didn’t “work out” so it’s being dissolved.
The devil is in the detail which hasn’t been fully fleshed out. We aren’t owed any explanation for that matter.
In other news, rumor is that even if Michigan and USC don’t sign, UCI will still pay out what was promised to each university. The MI/USC money would be held and if and when they agree it would be paid. If not, I suppose it could go to another university for joining in 2036. But those two aren’t going anywhere.
Apparently, the group of 16 really believe the BTE would have big positive financial impact so signing the agreement is a net positive regardless of giving up 10%.
Lots of Michigan and perhaps USC sources are giving out questionable info. When you read private equity, payday loans, Tony Petitti is trying to break apart the B1G, etc… know where that info originates. Also, the Presidents directed Petitti to looking into a money deal, he isn’t just out there running rouge or doing this solo.
Hopefully we will know more in a week or less.
Despite my insistence that it’s a 20-year deal and Dellinger stating that, there isn’t anything definitive about that out there that I can find beyond that piece. So…. But oddly, no one addresses the length of the agreement? I don’t understand why that part isn’t crystal clear. UCI isn’t buying 10% in each university but 10% in the BTE money so just say it.
UCI Singh Bachher (CIO) even stated he considers this a 100-year partnership. Whatever that means.
I still think there’s more to this than perpetuity (or less than). After 20 years, what’s to keep a university from leaving and keeping their stash? It would be silly to leave but stranger things have happened. What’s to keep the B1G from dissolving the BTE? It just didn’t “work out” so it’s being dissolved.
The devil is in the detail which hasn’t been fully fleshed out. We aren’t owed any explanation for that matter.
In other news, rumor is that even if Michigan and USC don’t sign, UCI will still pay out what was promised to each university. The MI/USC money would be held and if and when they agree it would be paid. If not, I suppose it could go to another university for joining in 2036. But those two aren’t going anywhere.
Apparently, the group of 16 really believe the BTE would have big positive financial impact so signing the agreement is a net positive regardless of giving up 10%.
Lots of Michigan and perhaps USC sources are giving out questionable info. When you read private equity, payday loans, Tony Petitti is trying to break apart the B1G, etc… know where that info originates. Also, the Presidents directed Petitti to looking into a money deal, he isn’t just out there running rouge or doing this solo.
Hopefully we will know more in a week or less.
Last edited:
sbillini
- st petersburg, fl
Thanks for the update.
Regarding the length of the agreement, i agree there's some confusion as to how the deal is structured. I chalk that up to reporters not fully understanding terminology/deal structure and mixing up the GoR extension with the deal itself. Typically when the term "equity stake" is used, it's intended to be a perpetual ownership. If it is, indeed, a 20 year deal, typically terminology like "licensing" or "royalty" agreement to be used. But I might be wrong on that given the mixed reporting.
Regarding the USC/Michigan holdout, it's a weird situation. If the two schools, indeed, don't want anything to do with this deal, then I assume they don't sign the GoR extension. Does UC investments still want the deal if the GoR extension is an important aspect to it and two marquee programs don't go along with it? I would imagine it changes the math quite materially as future TV deals, etc. will also be negatively impacted. Ultimately, I think there's some negotiating in public going on with each side talking big threats. I still think the deal is ultimately more of a defensive move than an offensive one, but my thoughts obviously mean a nice fat goose egg in the ultimate outcome
Guess that's it for a while, maybe longer.
I happen to like the B1G as an 18 maybe even up to 24 member league. I love the coast to coast conference. I liked the binding of the conference until 2046. I really don't think Michigan was in favor of that and I'd rather not find out what alternative plans they may drum up.
ptgrd23
- orange county CA
thank goodness USC and Michigan stopped this selling 10% of B10 future income. Typical government stupidity to trade uncapped future income for fixed price today.
Ask NBA how they like paying revenue share in perpetuity to one ABA team that was not allowed to join.
deadspin.com
still getting TV money
Ask NBA how they like paying revenue share in perpetuity to one ABA team that was not allowed to join.
Deadspin | NBA To Pay $500 Million To Get Out Of The Worst Deal Ever Signed
Deadspin | NBA To Pay $500 Million To Get Out Of The Worst Deal Ever Signed
deadspin.com
still getting TV money
Spirit of ABA deal lives on
They never owned an NBA team, but Dan and Ozzie Silna share in the league's lucrative TV deals.
www.espn.com
Illini in Italy
- Illini HQ, Florida Panhandle
Are there TWO TEMU Mahomes?
- Status