Key Takeaways
- • BYU Athletic Director Brian Santiago has explicitly ruled out private equity participation for the athletic department, citing alignment with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' institutional principle against borrowing.
- • The Big 12 negotiated a $30 million-per-school credit facility with RedBill and Weatherford Capital in December 2025, structured as an optional line of credit rather than equity stake, with no mandatory participation requirements for member institutions.
- • BYU's governing board and religious affiliation drive the institution's contrarian stance on private equity, contrasting sharply with rival University of Utah's openness to alternative financing structures.
- • Santiago views the rejection of private equity as a competitive strength, emphasizing BYU's commitment to self-funded operations consistent with church doctrine.
- • The decision reflects broader institutional positioning within college athletics' evolving capital structure, as schools pursue alternative funding mechanisms to support athlete revenue sharing amid NCAA regulatory changes.
Summary
BYU Athletic Director Brian Santiago has formally rejected private equity involvement for the university's athletic department, positioning the institution distinctly against an emerging trend in college sports financing. Santiago's statement underscores BYU's adherence to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' foundational principle prohibiting institutional borrowing, stating that "BYU will not be participating" when the topic arises in Big 12 conference deliberations.
The rejection arrives as college athletic departments face mounting pressure to fund athlete revenue-sharing arrangements approved under evolving NCAA frameworks. In December 2025, the Big 12 negotiated a $30 million-per-school credit facility structured with RedBill Capital and Weatherford Capital, designed as an optional line of credit mechanism rather than an equity sale. Critically, the arrangement required no mandatory participation from member institutions, allowing schools flexibility in accessing capital.
Santiago framed BYU's stance as institutional strength rather than constraint. "That's a strength for us. Our governing board is for us very, very important, and we're going to live within the principles that we've been taught, and we're having great success doing it that way," he stated. The church-owned university funds capital projects—facilities, infrastructure, and expansions—through accumulated cash reserves rather than leverage, a practice Santiago anticipates extending to athletic operations.
BYU's position creates a notable divergence within the Big 12, where peer institutions including rival University of Utah have pursued alternative private capital structures. The contrasting approaches highlight how institutional governance, religious affiliation, and capital philosophy shape divergent responses to college sports' financial modernization. Santiago's explicit restatement of BYU's non-participation signals the decision is non-negotiable within conference discussions, regardless of competitive pressure or capital availability.
The rejection arrives as college athletic departments face mounting pressure to fund athlete revenue-sharing arrangements approved under evolving NCAA frameworks. In December 2025, the Big 12 negotiated a $30 million-per-school credit facility structured with RedBill Capital and Weatherford Capital, designed as an optional line of credit mechanism rather than an equity sale. Critically, the arrangement required no mandatory participation from member institutions, allowing schools flexibility in accessing capital.
Santiago framed BYU's stance as institutional strength rather than constraint. "That's a strength for us. Our governing board is for us very, very important, and we're going to live within the principles that we've been taught, and we're having great success doing it that way," he stated. The church-owned university funds capital projects—facilities, infrastructure, and expansions—through accumulated cash reserves rather than leverage, a practice Santiago anticipates extending to athletic operations.
BYU's position creates a notable divergence within the Big 12, where peer institutions including rival University of Utah have pursued alternative private capital structures. The contrasting approaches highlight how institutional governance, religious affiliation, and capital philosophy shape divergent responses to college sports' financial modernization. Santiago's explicit restatement of BYU's non-participation signals the decision is non-negotiable within conference discussions, regardless of competitive pressure or capital availability.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.