Big Ten executives are socializing a plan with member schools to move forward with their capital investment proposal — even without Michigan and USC.

The league has signaled to schools that it may hold a vote in two weeks to potentially adopt a 20-year, $2.4 billion deal with a California pension fund and extend the conference grant of rights an additional 10 years in what would be an unprecedented decision from a major conference — striking a membership extension without all of its current schools.

Advertisement

The move for a vote, supported and encouraged by many university administrators at 16 Big Ten schools, threatens to drive a schism within the league — between those supportive universities and the Wolverines and Trojans, who are not in support of the measure.

Several university administrators, board members and industry executives spoke to Yahoo Sports under condition of anonymity about the Big Ten’s latest proposal in partnering with an investment fund of the University of California pension system called UC Investments.

In messages sent to Michigan and USC, the Big Ten has signaled that it is moving forward with the deal, even delivering to each program a proposed deadline for their decision. If they don’t agree to the deal, the schools may lose the additional capital as part of the landmark proposal and risk their future within the conference beyond 2036, the current end of the existing grant-of-rights agreement. League officials are socializing a specific date — Nov. 21 — for a vote on the capital investment proposal.

Administrators and board members at both Michigan and USC were informed earlier this week that, if a 16-school agreement is reached, the two programs would be granted a grace period — three to six months — to agree to join the deal if they wish to reap the full financial benefits. That period is only a proposal for now.

The money is significant, though it is unclear how the deal’s value is impacted by the potential absence of two of its biggest brands.

Advertisement

UC Investments is proposing to buy a 10% stake in the league at a $2.4 billion cost. The deal with the Big Ten not only would infuse those billions in upfront payments to schools — an average of $135 million a school — but it requires an extension of the grant of rights, the establishment of a for-profit business subsidiary (Big Ten Enterprises) and the creation of a future uneven distribution of league revenues.

In a statement to Yahoo Sports, a Big Ten spokesperson says “no such vote is scheduled” and that the league “continues to work closely with all member universities to explore a partnership to strengthen and modernize our conference. The Big Ten will provide its members adequate time to consider this opportunity with a not-for-profit financial partner.”

While there is wide support for the deal across the other 16 Big Ten schools, board members and even some university administrators at USC and Michigan are pushing back against the agreement for a variety of reasons.

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. While those at USC have kept their feelings more private, Trojans athletic director Jen Cohen and her university board members hold reservations about an agreement that, for one, would distribute more revenue to league members Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State than all other schools.

Advertisement

The latest Big Ten proposal has elicited concerns from an array of university board members, even those outside of USC and Michigan, many of whom say that they’ve been only shown limited pieces of the investment plan and were told the decision rests not with board members but solely with university presidents and chancellors.

The latest movement has sparked involvement from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), a non-profit organization representing more than 20,000 university board members across the country. In fact, ACTA officials told Yahoo Sports that they are holding a call on Monday with board members from five Big Ten schools, including Michigan, USC, Penn State, Ohio State and Maryland.

In an interview with Yahoo Sports on Saturday, Michael Poliakoff, ACTA’s president and CEO, describes the Big Ten’s process in approving the capital deal as “preposterous” as it ignores the role of board members.

“We have emphasized for 30 years the fiduciary role of trustees,” Poliakoff said. “These boards have responsibility for everything that happens on campuses.”

Advertisement

Armand Alacbay, chief of staff and senior vice president of strategy for ACTA, calls the Big Ten deal “problematic in both process and in substance.”

“This is an express train moving without, remotely, enough information available in a timely manner to these governing boards,” he said. “From what we know about the deal, it would cut governing boards out from critical oversight responsibilities.”

Many board members have not had access to the investment deal documents, they told ACTA officials. In fact, the presentation given to several board members last month was described as “informational only,” as it is not a voting issue, they were told.

But there is a differing opinion on that thinking, especially at two universities, Michigan and USC, with interim presidents. The eight-member elected Michigan Board of Regents holds considerable sway, as does the 40-person USC Board of Trustees, over a decision that could impact the school for years to come.

Advertisement

At least one Ohio State board member is expected to join the call Monday, according to Poliakoff — a notable inclusion as the Buckeyes hold an important role in any 16-school agreement. Ohio State owns substantial influence over the potential agreement, as the Buckeyes would be extending a grant of rights, from 2036 to 2046, without its chief rival, Michigan. The two teams play annually in what is viewed as the most valuable and highest-viewed single regular season college football game.

The Big Ten’s grant-of-rights extension would not extend its media rights package with Fox. While that Fox package runs through 2036, the conference is in the third year of a seven-year, $7 billion-plus broadcasting deal that also includes NBC and CBS and expires in 2030.

For more than 15 months, Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti and his executives have worked to amass a capital plan that they believe addresses four main priorities from their membership: (1) long-term stability (grant-of-rights extension); (2) the creation of a privatized business entity to better monetize the league’s assets (Big Ten Enterprises); (3) immediate cash at a financially stressful time (the $2.4 billion that UC Investments agreed to commit by purchasing 10% of Big Ten Enterprises); and (4) the establishment of uneven revenue distributions (keeping its big brands happy).

However, a driving factor for USC is the uneven distribution of revenue. Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State stand to earn as much as $190 million in upfront cash from the $2.4 billion — or about $40-50 million more than USC and Oregon.

Advertisement

USC would also earn a smaller percentage of future annual conference distribution than Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. The three legacy programs are expected to get an annual cut of about 5.5% of league revenues with other schools at 5% or lower, according to those who have seen details of the deal.

However, the league’s new distribution model features a performance and marketing mechanism most similar to the ACC’s success-initiative concept, providing a path for schools successful in football and basketball to achieve a higher rate. USC officials expressed concerns over governance issues of Big Ten Enterprises as well, where the business will be managed by a board with weighted voting and seats for the UC Investment fund and the league itself.

If the capital deal is stymied, it will be the latest private equity or capital plan having failed once it nears the finish line. The Big 12’s presidential board has twice seriously examined capital infusion and equity deals over the last 16 months and continues to pursue them under commissioner Brett Yormark.