Connect with us
https://yoursportsnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/call-to-1.png

NIL

Has private equity broken into college athletics? – Deseret News

Published

on


The specter of private equity money has loomed as a possibility for funding college athletics programs for a while now.

Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark floated the possibility of private equity entering the college sports world last summer and he was only one of multiple conference commissioners to do.

Earlier this year, the Big Ten was reported by Sportico to have taken “preliminary bids from private equity firms.”

Special Collector’s Issue: “1984: The Year BYU was Second to None”

Get an inclusive look inside BYU Football’s 1984 National Championship season.

The concept of hedge funds getting involved in college athletics has seemed to be an eventuality, the only question being when it would happen.

Wrote Forbes contributor Joe Moglia in April, “The latest shockwave to hit college football may come from private equity. As billions of dollars in TV revenue have flooded into Power Four football and top players are able to bring in six- and seven-figure name, image, likeness (NIL) deals, it’s impossible to ignore the fact that college football is a business. Big business.

“These are professional student-athletes, and the teams are major sports franchises,” he continued. “But, at the same time, it’s an industry that is being heavily disrupted. In other words, college football is a ripe hunting ground for hedge funds and private equity.”

With the approval of the House settlement, part of which allows schools to pay upward of $20.5 million to student-athletes directly, athletic departments are in need of an influx of funds, and private equity has plenty of them. So it should be of little surprise that private equity has indeed found its way into college athletics.

Sports Business Journal reported early Monday morning that Elevate, a “global agency network” that supports “over 1,000 ambitious brands across sports, entertainment, consumer products, and retail,” has created a $500 million initiative to invest in college sports, backed by private equity firm Velocity Capital Management and the Texas Permanent School Fund.

The purpose of the initiative? To “provide a new funding source for collegiate athletics programs pursuing capital-intensive projects like facility upgrades and renovations,” write Ben Portnoy and Chris Smith.

Per SBJ, Elevate has already come to terms to fund two unnamed Power Four conference programs, with the expectation to come to terms with three to six additional programs before the 2025 season begins in late August.

What’s more, the plan is for Elevate to become a “multi-billion-dollar platform” that invests across college sports in the long term.

Why is private equity interested in college athletics?

The simple answer to this question is the potential for profit.

College athletics is a multibillion-dollar industry that is ever growing.

Per ESPN, the NCAA generated nearly $1.3 billion in revenue in 2022-23, which was up from $1.14 billion the previous year. Most of that revenue (close to 70%) comes from the men’s NCAA Tournament.

College football, meanwhile, brings in an inordinate amount of money to programs.

At the top, as of last year, according to USA Today, programs like Ohio State, Texas, Alabama, Michigan and Georgia all had revenues exceeding $200 million. Of course, expenses were nearly as high, which is where private equity comes in.

The idea is that private equity firms can make athletic departments even more profitable. One way would be by eliminating waste. Multimillion-dollar coaches’ salaries and buyouts have been mentioned as an area rife for change.

“No one with any business sense would allow a major executive to lose repeatedly and then walk away with a multi-million dollar bonus buyout, but this is something that happens regularly in Power Four football. Agents run circles around most athletic directors when it comes to things as basic as employment contracts,” Moglia writes.

Private equity could also get involved “by directly investing in athletic departments, investing in the fan experience, both in and outside of the stadium, or through adding revenue streams outside of the existing network,” Alfie Crooks wrote for Buyout Insider, the idea being that college athletics haven’t been marketed as well as they could be by conferences and the NCAA.

“College athletics remains a relatively untapped market. Its combination of passionate fan bases, strong brand loyalty and long-term income potential makes it an appealing target for investment,” Brian Anderson writes for Sports Business Journal.

There is not an expectation — yet, anyway — that private equity could purchase ownership stakes in college athletic departments/programs, but the potential for that exists in the long run.

Right now, private equity would likely “favor the private credit model because they can better control the exact monetary amount paid out each year,” Bryan Shapiro writes for Duane Morris Sports Law.

Schools, on the other hand, would likely prefer a “traditional private equity model because it allocates risk between the athletic department and investors equally — i.e., if the program increases in value, both entities are rewarded, and on the flip side, if the program decreases in value, the school is not required to pay a specific monetary amount to the investors, which would greatly injure the program and school overall,” Shapiro writes.

What could be the impact of private equity in college sports?

This question has been posed many times over the last few years and various attempts have been made to answer it.

The simplest answer is that an immediate influx of money to departments and programs that otherwise wouldn’t have access to those funds could bring rapid parity to college sports, football especially.

Think lower-tier Power conference schools that rarely, if ever, have been in contention at the top of their leagues legitimately competing alongside the likes of Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, Michigan and Oregon.

It has already started to happen a bit with the rise of NIL — who can forget Vanderbilt’s 2024 season, during which the Commodores upset the Crimson Tide? — but private equity investment could lead to even more parity.

There is a potential downside, though, and that is the further movement of college athletics away from what it has been for 100-plus years.

Private equity will likely prioritize profits first and foremost and that could lead to some serious changes.

“In all likelihood, the first university to sign a major deal will likely be a smaller Power Four football program,” Moglia writes. “While the biggest programs will have no problem paying players and putting together big NIL packages, smaller schools will likely struggle to be competitive. This is the opening that a firm needs. They’ll approach one of these smaller programs with an offer of $150 million (or more) for 51% of the say in how they run their football program.

“For an AD with little business experience trying to put together a winning program, this will look like a good deal,” he continued. “Cash up front to build a team and a promise from the guys in suits to juice revenue in the future. The problem, of course, is that as soon as this deal is done, revenue growth will become the only priority. The investors won’t balk at putting in their own athletics director and putting profits ahead of players, education, fans and the institution. That’s a horrible, horrible long-term decision for the university, but it’s entirely plausible.”

In a lot of ways, what private equity and college athletics will look like together is as uncertain as the future of college sports in general. And it could be years before any real repercussions are felt from an influx of private equity money into college athletics.

After a few years of speculation that private equity would get involved in college sports, it appears it is now a reality.



Link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

NIL

College Football TV Ratings: Army-Navy Game averages 7.84 million viewers

Published

on


Once again in its standalone window, America’s Game came down to the wire last week. Ultimately, Navy got a second straight victory over Army, and it became CBS’ most-watched college football game of the season.

An average of 7.84 million people watched as Navy came away with the victory at M&T Bank Stadium in Baltimore. While it’s a 17% decrease from last year’s 9.4 million viewers – the best since at least 1990 – it’s still the second-best viewership for the game since 2018, according to Sports Business Journal’s Austin Karp.

SUBSCRIBE to the On3 NIL and Sports Business Newsletter

Last year’s Army-Navy game topped the previous high mark of 8.45 million viewers in 1992. In addition, it tops CBS’ slate of games this year, beating out the 5.6 million viewers who watched Indiana at Oregon in Week 7, according to data compiled by On3.

This year’s Army-Navy game also marked the last for CBS analyst Gary Danielson in the booth. He has worked 17 matchups between the two programs and will get ready for retirement following the Sun Bowl later this month. Charles Davis is set to join Brad Nessler in CBS’ lead booth starting next season.

With the victory, Navy extended its advantage in the all-time series against Army, which dates back to 1890. The Midshipmen have an all-time 64-55-7 record against the Black Knights.

How it happened: Navy defeats Army

Navy struck first in the first quarter of last week’s game, taking a 7-0 lead on a Blake Horvath touchdown. But Army responded with 13 points in the second quarter, including a rushing touchdown from Cale Hellums, to take the lead into halftime.

The two teams traded field goals in the third quarter as Army took a 16-10 lead into the final 15 minutes. That’s when Navy completed the comeback as Eli Heidenreich caught the 8-yard touchdown pass from Horvath, putting the Midshipmen back on top, 17-16. That held as the final, giving Navy a second straight win over Army in the historic game.

Horvath led the charge for Navy, rushing for 107 yards and a touchdown on the ground while adding 82 passing yards to go with the touchdown pass to Heidenrich. On the Army side, Hellums had 100 rush yards and a touchdown to go with 82 passing yards.

Both Army and Navy are now getting ready for their respective bowl games. The Midshipmen will head to the Liberty Bowl on Jan. 2, 2026 against Cincinnati while the Black Knights will square off against UConn in the Fenway Bowl on Dec. 27.



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Ohio State QB Julian Sayin Announces NIL News Before College Football Playoff

Published

on


Julian Sayin is looking to lead the Ohio State Buckeyes to the national title alongside several other stars like wide receiver Jeremiah Smith.

Ohio State heads into the College Football Playoff with one of the best rosters in the country, starring Sayin and Smith along with wide receiver Carnell Tate, safety Caleb Downs and linebacker Arvell Reese.

Advertisement

They’re heading into the playoffs as the No. 2 seed after losing to Indiana in the Big Ten title game. The Buckeyes will have a bye week to begin the CFP.

Other teams that will benefit from the bye week include Indiana, Texas Tech and Georgia.

During his time off, Sayin shared some exciting news off the field. The Ohio State Buckeyes quarterback has partnered with Wingstop and Dr Pepper in his latest NIL deal.

“Postseason calls for big plays with @drpepper and @wingstop, had to get the play card out,” Sayin posted.

Advertisement





Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Stars Stay, Others Head to Portal

Published

on





College Football’s QB Carousel: Stars Stay, Others Head to Portal



































Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Texas A&M’s KC Concepcion has ‘not made a decision’ regarding future

Published

on


Dec. 16, 2025, 5:06 a.m. CT

Texas A&M’s 2025 offense finished the regular season ranked 19th nationally, while starting quarterback Marcel Reed threw for a career high 2,932 yards and 25 touchdowns, with 13 going to star wide receivers KC Concepcion and Mario Craver, who completely rejuvenated a passing attack that failed to move the needle in key games down the stretch last season.

While Craver is expected to return next season for his all-important junior year, Concepcion has a choice to make regarding his future, choosing between a final year in College Station or declaring for the 2026 NFL Draft, where he is expected to be a first or second-round selection.

Whatever choice he makes is entirely up to him and his family, and while those of us in the media have written numerous articles about his draft standing, returning for his senior season could benefit his NFL future. Still, Concepcion is as mature as they come and is entirely focused on facing the Miami Hurricanes this Saturday during the first round of the College Football Playoff.





Link

Continue Reading

NIL

Josh Pate defends Joel Klatt amid G5 backlash, proposes second tier to College Football Playoff

Published

on


FOX Sports analyst Joel Klatt found himself in a social media firestorm after comments he made about the Group of Five on a podcast appearance on Next Round Live. Clips of that interview quickly went viral with short snippets of some of the quotes.

The gist of those snippets suggested that Klatt was anti-G5, to the point of wanting the G5 kicked out of the College Football Playoff. Klatt intimated that the only thing keeping the G5 in the playoff currently is the threat of litigation.

College football analyst Josh Pate had his own thoughts on Joel Klatt’s take. He mostly came to the defense of the suddenly targeted analyst.

Pate first played a couple clips from Klatt’s appearance in their entirety. That offered more full context.

“Some of that was insane, I’m going to grant you that,” Pate said of Klatt’s points. “I just want to say the foundation of it I at least understand. The foundation of it is sound. Not all the parts of it. The foundation of it is sound.

“Couple of quotes there. No. 1, the G5 is in the College Football Playoff to avoid litigation is basically true.”

Pate lambasted the use of quote edits in condensing Joel Klatt’s much larger point into a few soundbites. He tried to explain how that’s misleading to his viewers.

“You know sometimes how you see a snapshot or a small soundbite of something and you get outraged by it and then you go on to learn the context of it two weeks later and you’re like, ‘Wow, I probably shouldn’t have gotten as outraged as I did over that,’ Pate said. “That is what is happening to Klatt. Admittedly he brought a lot of this on himself. …

“Now, what you probably saw was you probably saw quote edits like this or quote graphics like this. And if you’re listening on podcast just imagine scrolling through your social feed and there’s a picture of Klatt, looks like he’s somewhere sunny and happy and there’s a quote at the top, and it says, quote, ‘We don’t want Cinderellas. We want the best teams playing each other at the end. It’s the dumbest tournament and the least fair tournament in all of sports.’”

That part from Joel Klatt, obviously, was what many detractors latched onto. But it doesn’t take away from Klatt’s overall point about the G5, Pate pointed out.

So all the moaning over James Madison being in the playoffs is for naught. That’s just the way the current structure is set up.

“They are present in the playoff, they’re granted an auto bid in the playoff because if they are not then lawsuits will be filed immediately,” Pate said. “So that part’s accurate.

“Now whether or not you think it’s morally sound that they’re included in the playoff, that’s your own opinion. He’s got his, I’ve got mine, you’ve got yours. But he is right. Because in no other merit-based world where we just judged these teams on a static scale of quality, of resources and therefore what you do with the resources, and the results on the field and strength of schedule, in no world would James Madison be in the playoff. But the parameters of the playoff right now are that we take the five highest-ranked conference champs. So by every current rule James Madison is in the playoff and should be in the playoff. I don’t disagree with that. Tulane is in the playoff and should be in the playoff. I don’t disagree with the structure. I don’t disagree with the body of the playoff this year based on the current rules.”

So what’s the solution? Well, Joel Klatt also offered an answer for that. It just didn’t happen to go viral with the other stuff.

Klatt believes the G5 should effectively break off from the power conferences and host its own playoff. It would be a playoff tier between the FCS and the FBS.

“That’s been the same point that’s been made on my show,” Pate said. “So you notice if you really hated the G5 you’d just say, ‘Piss on the G5.’ That’s not what he did, despite the fact that that part didn’t get shared widely and it’s not what I’ve ever done on this show.

“Any time you have a problem with something, you ought to have a solution for it. So if your problem is, ‘Man, it makes little sense that we’ve got 136 teams pretending to play the same caliber of the sport’ you need to have a solution. That solution he just presented is the same one we’ve shared on this show, and that is a G5 playoff.”



Link

Continue Reading

NIL

How NIL has transformed Ohio State’s recruiting from star-chasing to strategic roster building

Published

on


COLUMBUS, Ohio — The days of simply collecting as many five-star talents as possible in college football recruiting are over.

In a revealing Buckeye Talk podcast episode, Ohio State analysts Stephen Means and Andrew Gillis detailed how the program has shifted to a more sophisticated “roster construction” approach that mirrors NFL team building more than traditional college recruiting.

“I think that because the financial aspect has come into this but also just logical roster building that has become more of a focal point than star, star, star, star, stars,” explained Stephen Means. “Because for a long time, college football was like, get as much talent as you humanly can, develop it, cuz you were living in a world where the top 1% of college football had all the talent. And that’s not true anymore.”

This fundamental shift in philosophy is perhaps most evident in how Gillis described Ohio State’s running back recruiting needs for the 2027 class. While five-star David Gabriel Georgees tops their board, the approach is more nuanced than just stacking elite talent.

“If they got three five stars running backs, the odds that we got on this podcast and said that’s actually probably not that good is higher than it might seem because we were saying why is your asset management this? Like because hey, look at your your receiver recruiting was down. You couldn’t have spent some of that money on a receiver,” Gillis explained.

The financial component of recruiting has transformed how Ohio State approaches each position group and recruiting class. It’s no longer just about who’s the best player available, but whether investing heavily in one position might shortchange another.

“It is a math equation. It is a money equation at this point. You’re not going to go get three five stars at running back in a single class,” Gillis emphasized.

Means further elaborated on how NIL money has forced this change: “You can’t pay a fivestar recruit, fivestar recruit money and then have the guy sitting on the bench because there’s another guy with there’s only so much money to go around.”

This strategic approach has Ohio State looking at players through different lenses: “ready to go” immediate contributors (typically five-stars and top-100 recruits), “developmental” prospects (usually ranked 200-350 nationally), and “depth” pieces who might be ranked lower but fill specific roles.

The analysts identified several instances where this approach is evident in Ohio State’s 2027 planning. At quarterback, they’re content with a developmental prospect in Brady Edmonds rather than chasing another five-star. At wide receiver, despite already having five-star Jir Brown committed, they believe Ohio State needs another elite receiver plus two depth pieces to properly structure the room.

“Now we are talking about roster construction,” Means said. “And the reason why we structured it this way is okay, they went and got a devel they have a developmental quarterback in 2027. They probably need a ready to go quarterback in 2028 and they probably need a depth quarterback in 2029. And the cycle continues, right?”

This staggered approach ensures Ohio State will have players at different stages of development at every position, creating a sustainable pipeline of talent ready to contribute when needed.

“Everybody everybody’s running the same race, but they can’t be running it at the same pace or you’re not going to have a team to field every single year,” Means added.

The conversation revealed how Ohio State’s recruiting approach now more closely resembles NFL roster management, with considerations for “salary cap” (NIL budget), positional value, and development timelines all factoring into decisions that previously might have been simply about collecting the highest-ranked players available.

As college football continues to evolve in the NIL era, this strategic roster construction philosophy may become the new standard for elite programs looking to maintain sustainable success.

Here’s the podcast for this week:



Link

Continue Reading

Most Viewed Posts

Trending