Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Sports

Funding College Sports With Private Equity Is Way Better Than Hitting Students With Higher Fees

Plus: Fix the NBA Cup by blowing it up, World Cup ticket prices or lotteries, and more.

Jason Russell | 12.16.2025 10:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
University of Utah mascot Swoop holding a football and sitting on top of a pile of cash, in front of a black and white background overlooking Rice–Eccles Stadium and the surrounding area. | Illustration: Eddie Marshall | Nano Banana
(Illustration: Eddie Marshall | Nano Banana)

Hello and welcome to another edition of Free Agent! Keep your helmets on this week, it could be a bumpy ride.

Let's talk about everyone's favorite evil bogeyman, private equity funding, and how it's slowly making its way into college sports. Then we'll talk about a fun way to make the NBA Cup more interesting and close with a quick hit on World Cup ticket prices, again.

Don't miss sports coverage from Jason Russell and Reason.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Locker Room Links

  • 1910: That's when the world's oldest active sports arena opened, until Northeastern University said goodbye to Matthews Arena last weekend.
  • Root for chaos if you can't root for your team: If the stadium-sharing Chargers and Rams both host their conference championship games, the NFL would have to change the usual Sunday back-to-back schedule.
  • Army and Navy playing on a standalone Saturday time might be coming to an end if the College Football Playoff expands. (I had always wondered what would happen if one of them were in playoff consideration with a decision needed to be made before that game was played.)
  • Thank you, NIL Era: Can you imagine players from Indiana and Vanderbilt going first and second in Heisman voting under the old ways?
  • Speaking of NIL, President Donald Trump called it "a disaster for college sports" and said "something ought to be done and I'm willing to put the federal government behind it." Maybe he should read today's newsletter! (He also totally exaggerated what's happening to Olympic sports programs at schools.)
  • The NFL is worried about the rise of prediction markets—couldn't be because the league's betting partners see them as competition, could it?
  • MLB will start regulating what technology and data teams are allowed to use in the minor leagues. Were the teams that didn't feel like investing a relatively small sum in equipment for that able to regulate the advantage away from those that did?
  • Reason's Matt Welch talks Baseball Hall of Fame and so much more on the great House of Strauss podcast.
  • Elsewhere in Reason: "Trump's Plan To Reclassify Marijuana Would Leave Federal Prohibition Essentially Untouched"
  • How immigration helped create the Miracle on Ice:

    Dumbest tweet of the day.

    Mike Eruzione — family came from Italy

    Mark Pavelich — family came from Croatia

    Dave Christian, Neal Britten — family came from Noway

    Buzz Schneider, Bob Suter, Dave Silk, Herb Brooks — families from Germany

    Steve Cristoff — family from Bulgaria… https://t.co/4ZpmD8rYMj

    — Marc Thiessen ????????❤️???????????????????????? (@marcthiessen) December 13, 2025

Insane Fees

When the University of Utah announced that it would spin off assets from its athletic department into a new for-profit entity, with a private equity firm owning a minority, the reactions were predictable.

Eye-roll-inducing jokes were aplenty. One person said: "Pretty soon Utah football will be eating Costco hotdogs and flying Spirit. Players will get one helmet but must purchase rest of pads on their own." Another joked that the head coaching job was being outsourced "to a remote dude in India." Maybe the football stadium will even be sold off:

I'd give it 2 years. pic.twitter.com/tbSPGDMJ9S

— Mark Ŧ ???? (@RaiderMark) December 9, 2025

What all the reactions seemed to miss was that the deal might be great for a certain group of people: Utah students (or the parents who pay for their tuition and fees, anyway).

A full-time undergraduate student at Utah must currently spend $83 a semester in fees to support the athletic department. That's not so bad, considering a year at the school can reach up to $40,000 including direct and indirect costs. Most schools, from the Power Four conferences to mid-majors, do the same. The fees are seemingly higher at less athletically successful schools, though, and sometimes nonexistent at frequent winners like Alabama. A full-time student at the University of Maryland is paying a $199.50 athletics fee per semester because a "healthy and sustainable Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (ICA) is an essential part of the University community."

Meanwhile, at James Madison University (who I root for vicariously through my alumna wife), students pay a whopping $1,518 fee per semester for athletics, providing nearly three-quarters of the athletic department's revenues. That may have helped JMU go from the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) to the College Football Playoff in just four seasons, but that fee is higher than every other student athletics fee in the playoff combined—even when you multiply the rest by four.

"JMU is essentially taxing its students to help fund its big-time college athletic ambitions — and that clearly seems to be paying off, at least in terms of this year's playoff," as Dwayne Yancey wrote while reporting on the fees. "Why, though, must students be forced to pay for that? If deep-pocketed boosters (the adjective knocks me out) or the free market don't supply the funds for JMU to play at that level, why must my alma mater shake down teenagers (or their parents) to make up the difference?"

Even students at some FCS schools are paying through the nose. At William & Mary, students pay $1,170.50 per semester for intercollegiate athletics, plus $180.50 per semester for their arena's operations and $16.50 per semester for their tennis center. Thankfully, that's down from the $1,992 per semester they were paying for intercollegiate athletics in the 2018–19 school year.

College sports basically serve as marketing tools to woo more applicants, who pay more tuition and fees, whose fees partially go toward athletics, and so on and so forth (I touched on this more here). A longrunning funding race has schools looking for more and more ways to bankroll the best players, coaches, and facilities that money can buy. If school administrators are going to be in that race, it's far better for the money to come from private equity than milking it out of poor students year after year.

Cup It Up

While the NBA Cup final is Tuesday night, the league is already considering some changes to its in-season tournament. It won't be going away anytime soon because of its inclusion in the league's agreement with the players union and Amazon's media rights deal. But the league is moving semifinal games back to home venues and weighing which cities other than Las Vegas could host the final (I wonder what dissatisfaction with the arena atmosphere in Vegas means for the city's expansion team hopes).

But tinkering around the edges of the tournament won't give the league the supercharged results it's hoping for. Three big changes might, though: expanding the tournament to non-NBA teams, shortening games to 40 minutes, and going to single elimination.

Consider what we love about March Madness, contrary to Joel Klatt's awful take: the upsets and buzzer beaters.

Even the best NBA team losing to the worst isn't really a huge upset. That's like if a bad SEC team upsets Duke. What we really want to see is 15-seed Lehigh beating Duke. Add in G League teams so we can watch the Sioux Falls Skyforce play against the NBA. Better yet, make every G League's first-round matchup against their NBA affiliate. Or go really big, like 128 teams big, and throw in the 20 EuroLeague teams, 10 teams from Australia's National Basketball League, 10 more from the Canadian Elite Basketball League, and 14 more from Mexico's Liga Nacional de Baloncesto Profesional and you're getting close. (Bet you didn't know some of those leagues existed.) Imagine the global media rights deal if the rest of the world got to watch their basketball teams go up against NBA stars—even if they're probably going to get crushed.

Of course, the talent gap between NBA teams and everyone else is large. That's where shortened games come in (those also help get the players union on board). One reason we see more upsets in college basketball than the NBA is the shortened clock. Having 8 fewer minutes in a game makes the score more random and gives the better team less time to come back if they fall behind early. Less time in the game also means a closer score at the end, making tight scores and buzzer beaters more likely.

None of that matters, though, unless the tournament is single elimination. We love to see Lehigh beat Duke because it means Duke is eliminated and Lehigh goes on, not because it's just a ding to Duke in group standings.

If the NBA can do all that, I'll tune in instead of just paying attention when I happen to be in a sports bar when my Pistons are playing.

Feeling Lucky?

The World Cup's high ticket prices are in the news—again. Even though I thought I'd said everything I have to say about it here, here, and here, let's go at it again.

When I posted on X that "I would rather have a passionate traveling fan pay $500 to get in than a casual person from the local area pay $50," I got a load of responses displeased with me and FIFA (who, clearly, I'm not a big fan of). Some said fans from local areas weren't going to go, some said traveling fans from abroad weren't going to go, some said the stadiums will be empty, some said wealthier people aren't passionate about sports, and some said FIFA should have designated more tickets to a given game to fans from the participating countries (totally fair, in my opinion).

Apparently my contention that willingness to sacrifice more money is a sign of more passion did not come across very well, nor did the idea that a high ticket price is only a small marginal cost to a foreign traveler who's already paying thousands of dollars for flights and hotels.

Despite all that, the issue is really simple. If FIFA isn't going to charge high prices for matches, then the tickets will largely get distributed by random lottery. Everyone who's unhappy with ticket prices seems to think they'd be lucky enough to win those tickets. In reality, if FIFA is going to get 5 million ticket requests in 24 hours, most of them wouldn't.

Replay of the Week

Just a 44-year-old grandfather with 10 kids throwing a touchdown pass, no big deal. (Completing 18 of 27 with just one interception is not too shabby.)

A Philip Rivers passing TD in 2025!

It's his first in nearly five years.

???? @NFL pic.twitter.com/D6h12REXeb

— The Athletic (@TheAthletic) December 14, 2025

That's all for this week. Enjoy watching the real game of the weekend, Commanders against Eagles on Saturday (shoutout to subscribers Tony and Santoine).

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: ISIS Gunmen

Jason Russell is managing editor at Reason and author of the Free Agent sports newsletter.

SportsFinanceCollegeCollege AdmissionsCollege DebtFootballNBASoccerEconomics
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (25)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Rick James   2 months ago

    Dumbest tweet of the day.

    Mike Eruzione — family came from Italy

    Mark Pavelich — family came from Croatia

    Dave Christian, Neal Britten — family came from Noway

    Buzz Schneider, Bob Suter, Dave Silk, Herb Brooks — families from Germany

    Steve Cristoff — family from Bulgaria

    Jack O’Callahan, Rob McClanahan, Ken Morrow, Mark Johnson, Jim Craig — families from Ireland and Scotland

    Almost the entire team were 2nd and 3rd generation Americans.

    We won precisely because we are a nation of immigrants which brings in the best talent from all over the world, and assimilates them in a generation into what we used to call the great American melting pot.

    How did Marc Thiessen manage to completely miss the point so spectacularly.

    America did NOT "import hockey players from other nations" to build its national team. It wasn't full of non-English speaking foreign nationals brought in as cheap foreign labor ffs.

    I have no idea what the point of the original post was to which he was responding, but it sounds like one of those debates as to whether your national Olympic team is supposed to be made up of foreign nationals who have no allegiance or roots within the country, whether or not Great Great Great Grandma came over in a boat from the Old Country.

    1. Rick James   2 months ago

      Again, I'm assuming the debate was whether Olympic teams should be randos pulled from the local airport lounge or whether the team represents people who have an allegiance and loyalty to the country for which they play. Otherwise, why not just name the teams based on the closest international airport code.

      Better yet, most libertarian solution: Team names changed to QR codes.

      1. CE   2 months ago

        Having national teams is stupid anyway -- various nations have widely different levels of population, financial resources, and interest in particular sports.

        The real libertarian Olympics would be between the major shoe companies: Nike, Adidas, Reebok, Puma, Under Armour, ASICs, etc., anyone big enough to pay the entry fee and field a minimum number of teams in different sports.

        1. Rick James   2 months ago

          Having national teams is stupid anyway -- various nations have widely different levels of population, financial resources, and interest in particular sports.

          Which is what made "miracle on the ice" so damned amazing. It was a bunch of amateur working class guys who were drywallers and forklift operators practicing hockey in the evenings, weekends and off hours that beat the professional Russian team who had the resources of the entire Soviet Union behind them.

          In many ways, it was more impressive than the U15 boys team beating the women's national soccer team.

    2. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

      "How did Marc Thiessen manage to completely miss the point so spectacularly."

      Ideological brain rot?

    3. diver64   2 months ago

      I'm not sure what Thiessen was getting at. The kids were not imported, they were born here so were Americans. Very strange take on his part.

  2. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

    "Army and Navy playing on a standalone Saturday time might be coming to an end if the College Football Playoff expands."

    Yeah, the stupid playoff system manages to help destroy all college football quirks and traditions.

  3. Bubba Jones   2 months ago

    A nominal fee that includes access to all sports doesn't terribly offend me.

    The JMU example is horrific.

    1. CE   2 months ago

      The fees should be optional. Some students have no interest in sports.

    2. diver64   2 months ago

      The problem is that the fee's make up the amount of money having to be spent on money losing sports like women's lacrosse due to Title 9. I remember paying a fee to support free skiing for the college at the local mountain. That I didn't ski was irrelevant. The kids that did loved it. Never thought that was fare.

  4. MollyGodiva   2 months ago

    I don't really care what happens to college sports as long as it does not negatively affect the academics. That being said there is something unsavory about for profit companies swooping down to extract profit from the reputation and fan base of a school that thousands of unpaid people worked for decades to build.

    1. damikesc   2 months ago

      It's cute that you still think universities have much of any academics to mention.

      Almost adorable.

    2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      China does prefer state funded teams.

    3. ML (now paying)   2 months ago

      Wow. Tony ponied up 25 bucks to yell at libertarians.

  5. Rick James   2 months ago

    When I posted on X that "I would rather have a passionate traveling fan pay $500 to get in than a casual person from the local area pay $50," I got a load of responses displeased with me and FIFA

    What about the passionate fan who only makes $45,000 a year? Ie, minimum wage?

    1. CE   2 months ago

      Pay per view on streaming TV, of course.

  6. Winston in Wonderland   2 months ago

    The only reason that college ball will be attractive to private equity is that much of the cost is subsidized. The article doesn't mention all of the athletic department costs hidden in tuition. A few years ago, my local university expanded its playing field and added an indoor practice field. To do so, required demolishing existing parking structures, a dorm, and an administrative building.

    Although the sources of funding for the playing field expansion were well publicized, the costs of replacing structures razed for the project were not. These costs became the major portion of the "Building Fund" that all students pay as part of their tuition. In all, nearly 20% of a student's tuition and fees are now directly, or indirectly, used to support the athletic department...Mostly the football team.

  7. CE   2 months ago

    I'm not a fan of the Rams, but everyone should applaud them for playing in a stadium built with private funding (from Rams owner Stan Kroenke), and the Chargers for renting to share a stadium with them instead of demanding taxpayers' help to build a redundant one.

    More teams (college and pro football, and pro football and baseball) should share stadiums. They generally play on different days or in different months.

  8. CE   2 months ago

    Allocating scarce goods (sporting event tickets in this case) by price competition works every time. Let the person running the event find the market clearing price. It's why Taylor Swift concert tickets cost a thousand dollars or more (well that, and 300 bucks or so to TicketMaster).

  9. Heraclitus   2 months ago

    Just another step in the direction of turning college sports into the farm leagues. With transfers and players joing drafts early we don't have any continuity except for the coaching staff, and only then when they don't threaten suicide with butter knives. Let's just whittle college sports down to the top 25 programs and the rest can go intramural. Too many young people are wasting their college years hoping to go pro and blowing out their knees instead.

    Let's have academic parlay's instead. Place your bet on whether Johnny aces his final. Will Susy hook up with Glenda? I put the oddds at 4 to 1.

    1. Its_Not_Inevitable   2 months ago

      Maybe the next step is for NFL and NBA teams to sponsor university football and basketball programs as their minor league teams. They've been getting it for free for decades.

  10. Gaear Grimsrud   2 months ago

    Skimmed the first few paragraphs, struggled to give a shit, failed to do so.

  11. Purple Martin   2 months ago

    Hmmm...


    In a groundbreaking endeavor, the University of Utah athletics is entering into what could be a $500M+ equity partnership with Otro Capital featuring the creation and shared ownership of a for-profit entity to operate athletics, sources tell @YahooSports.

    OK, an interesting story, in the context of the NIL pro era...but the effort lacks ambition. It needs a more meaningful exploration of college football's inevitable moneysports future.

    NCAA moneysports have long been a cartel dependent on an endless stream of discardable, replaceable talent, and a power imbalance keeping the profits away from the talent. That's changing as NIL money; conference shuffling; transfer portal; 12-team playoff; and legal online sportsbooks nibble away at it while ignoring the real question:

    Why should universities sponsor and run pro sports programs at all?

    College moneysports are valued today because the sports media industry's revenue—fueled by ad money from their exploding-in-revenue legal online sportsbooks—is growing. Desperate for more inventory, they lust after eyeball-gathering, bet-generating streaming content so more gambling-fueled, alcohol-fueled sports fanatics can give them more money.

    ‘The University' is an educational nonprofit with wholly different funding and priorities than for-profit professional sports. Otro Capital seems to believe that university team names/goodwill are valuable intellectual property and famous on-campus stadiums & arenas and lux training facilities, valuable infrastructure assets. They're willing to invest money in the idea.

    Short of cash and competing for a dwindling pool of tuition-generating potential students, many (most?) university presidents would gladly swap pro sports headaches (including today's pro student-athletes) for a substantial, steady source of IP licensing income.

    Over the last few years, the Power 4 conferences (soon Power 3?) have shown they know their place in this by maximizing, over any other consideration, their dollar value as producers of streaming entertainment content. During media rights negotiations, these content providers now negotiate directly with the national buyers, ignoring the NCAA. Soon they'll both tire of paying such a no-value-add middleman $billions—but instead carve out and own America’s commercial, for-profit college moneysports.

    So, let the revenue-positive college moneysports with an avid national following (around 50+ such programs exist today) be taken over by the broadcast/streaming/gambling for-profit sports entertainment industry, with colleges leasing out the famous on-campus arenas/stadiums, licensing their IP (team names/colors/mascots/ goodwill), and establishing marketing agreements for the companies/colleges to promote each other.

    And, finally, negotiate contracts paying a fair wage to management, coaches and—dropping the student-athlete charade—full-time players.

    A formal employer-employee relationship under a freely negotiated contract between two willing parties could—by allowing payment of a fair wage to employee-athletes, with compensation and duration agreed to by both—have the additional benefit of fixing issues caused by big-dollar player NIL money and de-facto, every year, free agency.

    Such a contract could also include a mandatory participation clause with a pre-negotiated liquidated damages schedule, for post-season play-off or bowl games, thereby allowing both the business and the player to make a business decision, each based on their own cost/benefit and risk/reward determinations.

    The arrogance and greed of the NCAA/University cartel broke big-time college football (and basketball to a lesser extent—their business model is easier to monetize). I'm hopeful that, sooner rather than later, non-profit higher education and for-profit professional big-business moneysports will become cooperating businesses with mutual promotion agreements.

    Perhaps then, Universities may return to their reason for existence: Higher Education.

  12. Blank.AI   2 months ago
  13. Blank.AI   2 months ago

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Bondi Bristles

Christian Britschgi | 2.12.2026 9:34 AM

Brickbat: Luck of the Draw

Charles Oliver | 2.12.2026 4:00 AM

Politicians Want To Avoid Reforming Social Security and Medicare. You Will Pay the Price.

Veronique de Rugy | 2.12.2026 12:01 AM

The U.S. House Just Voted To Stop Trump's 'Emergency' Tariffs on Imports From Canada

Eric Boehm | 2.11.2026 7:25 PM

Epstein Files: FBI Tracked Down Anonymous 4chan Conspiracy Theorist

Matthew Petti | 2.11.2026 5:00 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks