Seems like the PE firm would want to make the approvals/review/oversight as simple and minimal as possible. If they just got a cut of the media rights package and clauses on a renewal then maybe there is a way it doesn't need any boards or governor, etc to approve. Might even not need a direct president of the university approval if the PE agreement is just with the conference. I'm not an attorney, but I just imagine this would be done in a way to minimize all those parties you list from having direct involvement or oversight. In terms of what they own, they wouldn't want any physical asset at all IMO as you mention that could involve oversight. They'd want a cut of media revenue, or maybe they'd require NIL money to flow through them.
Is PE Ready for College Sports?Institutional Investorhttps://www.institutionalinvestor.com › article › portfolio
I think that's something fans who didn't go there (to a college in particular) don't understand how much of a difference it makes.
A PE firm would look to monetize anything and everything they could. They're wanting a 200-300+% return on investment within 10 years. It would be something similar to Nascar, ads and naming rights everywhere. You'd have Taco Bell logos in the endzones. "It's a Taco Bell TOUCHDOWN!" The red zone would become the Mt Dew Code Red Zone. You would have multiple corporate logos on uniforms. Yes, the schools would most likely get a cut of that revenue but it would be small since they're taking money upfront. The Pac X would become the Adidas Pacific Conference and Adidas would become the shoe and uniform provider for every team. Even sections of the stadiums and arenas would have brand names, "great turnout today in the Pizza Hut Student Section." *Corporate and brand names used for example only
Yes good examples. Although Reser paid to get its name on the Beavers stadium back in 1999, so some of this is not new at all. But yes could be 20x as much if this in the future. That along with the transfer portal and NIL have already made all college football effectively a professional league.
I think college football has been professional leagues for decades. Certainly have been since individual conferences started signing deals for media rights I think the most amazing component to this broad story is that somehow the NCAA was allowed to operate for decades as if they had an anti-trust exemption like the NFL or NBA; when they didn't. College football was generating billions of dollars in revenue, but the athletes were getting a pittance. They were indentured labor. It was all a fool's paradise but finally, at long last, 4 or 5 years ago the athletes themselves, thru the courts, established their right to secure a 'fair' piece of the action. That was accomplished thru NIL and the transfer portal. That's all it took for the structure of the NCAA to collapse into impotence. That, and knowing that the SCOTUS is likely looking for an excuse to gut what little power the NCAA still retains I don't begrudge the athletes finally getting a piece of the pie. I'm all for NIL and the transfer portal, even though it has created quite a bit of chaos, and the laws of unintended consequences are ready to leverage that chaos
Sac St. is pretty obviously begging to join the Pax-X maybe the Pac-X should just bite the bullet, add their 8th team, and spend the next 2 years on the 'We-Want-a-Media-Deal' hotlines I mean, is there any other viable candidate that fits into the geographical footprint so well?
San Jose State or UNLV both seem like better choices, already in FBS, have easy Pac travel, and both have bigger media markets. Although those would have a cost of another MWC buyout - sounds like Sac State is getting some big donors and other backers. Perhaps the Pac could negotiate giving them a much smaller slice of revenue going forward so the Pac would effectively pocket cash adding Sac State instead of sending cash out with other schools. Selfishly I'm hoping for Texas State but the travel would be kind of nuts. Every football member would be a _____ State - with any of Texas State/Sac State/San Jose State!
I read that all of the remaining MWC schools signed an intent agreement recently. If that's true it seems unlikely that any other MWC schools will be joining the Pac-X I suppose Texas St. might still be a possibility, but the last I read was that the MWC had made a formal offer and the Pac-X had not. The MWC also added UTEP so Texas St. would have a geographical partner in the MWC. The MWC is also supposedly talking to another Texas U, Tarleton State. Seems like a stretch, especially considering they are currently FCS rather than FBS
They should just have the last spot in the league be relegation for the FCS division. I know that's not really possible, but it'd be interesting.
A year ago when brainstorming Pac12 / MWC merger ideas their was talk of having some sort of relegation/promotion with two conferences. All obviously dead now.
Yeah, I was one that thought it'd be a cool idea. I was really hoping for some out of the box ideas once we got new conference leadership in place. Raiding the MWC wasn't my preference, but I suppose getting the teams we have is a step in the right direction. I'm not sure bringing in PE firms is the right approach eother, but at least there might be someone on the board that actually understands the value of money. Past PAC directors obviously didn't.
This was the idea that was floated out recently and The Athletic did a big piece on it. Really interesting idea that will probably never happen because people like Greg Sankey need to control all the money and power he can sitting on top of the SEC. It was 72 team league with 64 in '2nd division' with relegation and all that like they do in European soccer. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5809686/2024/10/01/college-football-super-league-student/
Its interesting to daydream about.... but theres no way this could ever happen. All conferences have different renewal dates and would need to agree to this. SEC and Big10 are the two dominant conferences so why would they want to join up with lower ranked schools and lose tons of money. Also those maps don't make sense - Houston isn't in the Texas division. Kansas and Oklahoma each have multiple schools but Colorado only has one. On the group8 Rice/North Texas/Sam Houston are in the South division but then Texas State/UTSA both straight south a couple hours are in the Central division. Probably no way to make those maps work without some fault somewhere though, just another reason this isn't going to happen.
some of the things they are talking about doing would require an anti-trust exemption. I don't think there is any way college football could get one
