Welcome to SB Nation Reacts, a survey of fans across the NCAA. Throughout the year we ask questions of the most plugged-in Michigan fans and fans across the country. Sign up here to participate in the weekly
emailed surveys.
The Big Ten Conference is attempting to do something controversial: sign a private equity deal worth $2.4 billion with a California pension fund. This would provide “immediate cash” to all 18 schools in the conference, but the deal would last for 20 years and give the pension fund a 10% stake in Big Ten Enterprises while also receiving a cut of the Big Ten’s annual distribution.
Michigan and USC are the only schools that are against this deal, with their respective board of regents holding a firm stance on the matter. However, some schools in the conference are having budget problems and want their hands on an immediate cash infusion.
In this edition of SB Nation Reacts, we want to know if you think Michigan is right to reject the Big Ten equity deal. Vote below.
The Big Ten is reportedly moving forward with the deal without Michigan and USC, with a potential vote as early as next week. Michigan and USC schools could lose additional capital as part of the deal and risk their future within the Big Ten beyond 2036.
The USA Today was objectively critical of Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti and views Michigan and USC as the sensible parties in the matter.
— “The best part of Petitti’s shell game is that it took USC and Michigan — apparently the only rationally thinking members of the stoic and stodgy conference — to grind the gears and slow the roll of running the conference off a financial cliff.”
— “The Big Ten reported $928 million in revenue last year, and in fiscal 2025, USA TODAY Sports projects the revenue to jump to $1.2-1.4 billion. Billion, with a B.”
— “There isn’t a revenue problem in the Big Ten, there’s a budget problem.”
How did you vote this week? Let us know in the comments, and come back Friday when we reveal the results.
