The Big Ten Conference Weighs Billion-Dollar Investment

By: Joe Wisniewski

November 2, 2025

Photo Credit: Associated Press

The Big Ten Conference is deep in conversations over a proposed multi-billion-dollar capital infusion that could reshape not only its own financial future, but also the broader structure of college sports. Despite the lack of a vote and continued pushback from schools such as Michigan and USC, the Big Ten’s openness to outside investment highlights the growing financial strain across college athletics.

At the center of the discussions is the creation of a new for-profit entity, Big Ten Enterprises, which would house all media, sponsorship, and commercial rights. The University of California’s investment fund, which manages more than $180 billion in assets, would receive a 10% ownership stake in exchange for an estimated two billion-plus injection of cash to the conference’s 18 member schools. Each institution could receive an initial payout in the $100–150 million range, structured on a tiered model that rewards the league’s biggest brands.

Supporters see the deal as transformative. With rising costs, including inflation, higher coaching salaries, and upcoming athlete revenue sharing that could cost schools more than $20 million a year, the Big Ten believes it must shift from a traditional athletic conference to a modern sports media enterprise. Commissioner Tony Petitti has pitched the deal as a long-term stability play, one that would position the Big Ten to continually re-enter the media market every six years and capitalize on projected growth in streaming, sports betting, and global distribution.

Detractors, particularly at Michigan, have publicly sounded alarms. U of M Regents have labeled the deal “a payday loan”, criticizing the idea of trading 20 years of future media revenue for short-term cash. They argue the conference is reacting to spending problems rather than solving them. Others fear extending the league’s grant of rights through 2046 would effectively eliminate institutional autonomy and limit flexibility in an unpredictable media landscape.

If approved, the Big Ten would become the first conference to formally convert its media rights into equity. If rejected, it signals that even amid massive change, the elite brands in college sports are unwilling to compromise long-term control for immediate financial relief.

Either way, college athletics will not look the same in five years, and the Big Ten is once again positioned to set the direction of change rather than follow it.