Private Equity Meets College Football: Inside Michigan State’s Bold - and Risky - New Play
In Hulu’s comedy Chad Powers, a wealthy booster character drops a line that feels more real than scripted: “Yes, we are [buying a quarterback]. I am.” It’s a punchline that hits close to home in today’s college sports landscape, where the line between booster and stakeholder is blurring fast - and nowhere is that more evident than at Michigan State University.
MSU is diving headfirst into the private equity era of college athletics, and it’s raising eyebrows across the board. The university has launched Spartan Ventures, a new, independent nonprofit entity designed to raise - and spend - money through media deals and Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) contracts.
It’s a bold move aimed at keeping pace in a college sports world that’s rapidly professionalizing. But it’s also a move that’s triggering serious concerns about transparency, governance, and long-term control.
From Donors to Shareholders
At the heart of this transformation are Greg and Dawn Williams, East Lansing philanthropists who made a jaw-dropping $401 million commitment to MSU athletics. Of that, $100 million was used to purchase an ownership stake in the university’s sports programs. According to sources familiar with the deal, that investment secured the Williamses an 11% share - with the potential to earn distributions or sell their stake after a holding period for a guaranteed return.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t your typical booster relationship. This is a business partnership.
That shift - from pure donor to shareholder - fundamentally changes the dynamics. It introduces expectations of financial return, not just wins on the field.
And with that, the potential for influence over athletic decisions grows.
Who’s Really in Control?
That’s where things start to get murky. While the MSU Board of Trustees approved the creation of Spartan Ventures back in October, several members say they’ve been left largely in the dark since. The entity’s for-profit arm, Spartan Media Ventures, is where most of the deal-making will happen - and it’s being run with limited oversight from the board.
Republican Trustee Mike Balow has voiced concern about the lack of transparency, saying he hasn’t even seen the full documentation for Spartan Ventures. “My concern is control,” Balow said. “I still haven't seen any of the documents to ensure we won't be leaving the university vulnerable.”
That’s a sentiment echoed by Democratic Trustee Dennis Denno, who questioned how the university could sell off a piece of its athletic program without a full board vote. “This is the future of college athletics,” Denno said. “If we want to be the university that’s doing this correctly, we want to be the university that is slowing it down, making sure all the documents are available and all i’s are dotted and t’s crossed.”
A New Model - With Old Risks
MSU isn’t alone in this pivot. The University of Utah recently inked a $500 million deal with private equity partners, signaling that this model is quickly gaining traction across the country.
The driving force is clear: the cost of running a competitive athletic department has skyrocketed. NIL deals, the transfer portal, and coaching buyouts have put athletic departments under immense financial strain.
MSU’s own athletic department currently owes $120 million to the university’s general fund. That’s a tough number to swallow, and private investment offers a way to inject cash without dipping further into public resources.
University spokesperson Emily Guerrant described the new model as more aligned with professional sports - with the ability to recruit top-tier front office talent and offer them compensation packages that wouldn’t be possible under standard university rules.
But that professional model comes with professional risks. When shareholders are involved, questions follow: How much say will they have in recruiting?
In hiring and firing coaches? In game-day decisions?
And what happens if - or when - those shareholders decide to walk away or sell their stake?
Balow put it bluntly: “The risk to the university is years down the road, when the shares change hands. We wouldn't want to have a partner who, say, is involved in sports betting.”
A Shadow Operation?
One of the most alarming aspects of this setup is how little of it will be subject to public oversight. Guerrant confirmed that Spartan Ventures and Spartan Media Ventures are independent entities, meaning they’re not bound by Michigan’s Open Meetings Act or Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Only the information they choose to send to the university will be available through FOIA.
That means large sums of money - raised and spent in the university’s name - could move without public scrutiny. For a public institution, that’s a significant departure from the norm.
Sources say Spartan Ventures will be governed by a seven-member board: one appointee each from the board of trustees, the university president, and the athletic director, plus four at-large members. Control of Spartan Media Ventures, the for-profit arm, will reportedly be split between the athletic director and the Williamses.
Guerrant noted that governance details are still being finalized. But as it stands, the MSU Board of Trustees - the elected body responsible for overseeing the university - would have no direct authority over one of the most powerful operations on campus.
The Future Is Here - But Are We Ready?
This is college sports entering a new era - one where the traditional booster model is being replaced by equity stakes, boardroom deals, and return-on-investment metrics. For athletic departments drowning in red ink, it might feel like a lifeline. But it’s also a slippery slope.
The upside is obvious: capital, infrastructure, and the ability to compete at the highest level. But the downside? A loss of institutional control, a murky governance structure, and the potential for outside interests to steer the program in directions that don’t align with the university’s values.
MSU’s leap into private equity is a bold one. Whether it becomes a blueprint for success or a cautionary tale will depend on how well the university balances innovation with accountability.
Right now, that balance looks precarious.