Dear Michigan fans, alumni, and supporters,
On June 6, 2025, Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California gave final approval of the House vs. NCAA antitrust case, which will drastically change the landscape of college athletics.
The settlement results have a significant impact on the finances of Michigan Athletics and the way college athletics are structured.
Three key changes are coming to college sports as a result:
- First: The introduction of a revenue-sharing model that allows schools to fund and share up to $20.5 million with student-athletes.
- Second: New roster limits will be phased in over time for all sports.
- Third: Unlimited scholarships up to a sport’s newly established roster limit.
The prospect of these added costs left Michigan Athletics facing a projected deficit of nearly $27 million for the 2025-26 academic year ($20.5 million to fully participate in revenue sharing and $6.2 million in new scholarships).
With only six home football games this fall, our projected year-over-year decline in revenue of roughly $19.1 million steepens these costs. The department has implemented several measures to counteract these new expenses. Through adjustments to University financing, budget cuts, travel policies, not filling select positions when vacated, and the utilization of new revenue streams, we have reduced our estimated need from $27 million to $15 million for the coming year.
I would like to explain how we improved our financial position and why we still need your continued support.
Added costs and their impacts
A fixed factor in this equation is the revenue-sharing money as defined by the House settlement. A maximum of roughly $20.5 million per school can be shared with student-athletes for this coming year. Schools can distribute that money any way they see fit.The figure is calculated using a formula that incorporates revenues from media rights, ticket sales, sponsorships, and licensing, calculated at an average across Power 4 institutions. Those inputs are tracked annually, meaning the $20.5 million total will rise in future years. That money, combined with the value of tuition, room and board, and the many other benefits already provided, leaves NCAA student-athletes in a position to receive a similar percentage of revenue shared with professional sports athletes.
We will support our student-athletes with the full amount allowed each year to remain competitive for Big Ten Conference and national championships.
Another fixed factor to consider is scholarship costs, which are rising. The results of the House settlement will allow departments to offer full scholarships for every roster spot on every team, directly connecting a team’s ability to compete to its level of scholarship support. With 82.1 new scholarships added across 19 sports for fall 2025, at a cost of an additional $6.2 million, Michigan Athletics will be supporting athletic scholarships at an annual total cost of nearly $40 million.
Internal budget adjustments
To combat the added cost, the department staff will gradually decline in number through two methods: attrition, with a long-term goal of a 10% reduction in total staff, and through a stricter approval process for new hires. The department has committed to more than $10 million in budget cuts for the coming fiscal year, and has worked with the main campus to reduce its allocation from TV revenue to the University from $8 million to $2 million. We also revamped our travel policy, which resulted in over $900,000 in savings during 2024-25.
Michigan Athletics is also producing more revenue from events in our facilities, such as our partnerships with Upper Deck Golf and AEG/Zach Bryan. Events such as international soccer matches and the 2014 NHL Winter Classic generated between $750,000 and $3 million each for the department in the past. The 2024 calendar year saw the implementation of alcohol sales at Crisler Center, Yost Ice Arena, and Michigan Stadium, which generated over $2.25 million for the department. We will continue to evaluate other opportunities to generate additional revenue.
These changes have been a tremendous undertaking for Michigan Athletics, but we know they are just the beginning. We ask for your continued support and understanding, and welcome your questions, comments, and concerns.
Go Blue!
Warde Manuel
Donald R. Shepherd Director of Athletics
(This piece is published courtesy of mgoblue.com. Lead image: Six planes fly over Michigan Stadium before the first game of the 2024 Michigan Football season. Image courtesy of Michigan Commons.)
Roger Frazer - 1970
How about taking all of the $30M DEI budget. That should cover it nicely.
Reply
Dave Murray - 1973
I agree with Roger Frazier!
Reply
Jules DLC - 1986
We all know how to identify those who don’t meet the bar of continued excellence in being a Wolverine. Roger slipped in and somehow made it through but we all see him for who he really is now.
Reply
Steve Haddad - 1985
Hmmm. I’m glad you make the decisions as to who qualifies as a dedicated Michigan Alumnus, Jules. “We all know….”. The only thing “we all know” is that you don’t understand fiscal restraint and judicious spending, which is how this financial problem occurred in the first place. You are set to become a Regent!
Reply
Norman Stensaas - 1974
How about a voluntary 15% reduction in salary for all athletic department employees making over $100,000 per year?
Reply
J Pete
How ‘bout spinning off the entire athletic enterprise and concentrating on the core institutional mission: education?
Reply
Doug Dagostino - 1975
Mr. Pete – I was a season ticket holder for nearly 40 years. In the early 2000’s I attended an athletic department meeting for season ticket holder explaining how the Athletic department is 100% self funded. They are even required to pay full out of state tuition to the ‘Education branch’ of the University for every out of state student athlete scholarship they “grant”. All athletic department costs, including salaries are paid strictly from athletic department revenue generated. No tuition dollars are utilized. The ticket licensing program was instituted that year to help fund all these costs. Basically the athletic programs do NOT detract from the Educational programs – they actually enhance it by giving better exposure through national TV broadcasts. As far as concentrating on the ‘core institutional mission’ that has been going downhill since the early 1980’s when the Department of Education started mandating certain curriculums to support DC politics. You want improved educational quality? Get rid of the US Dept of Education and require professors to return to teaching students HOW to think instead of WHAT to think. We don’t agree but that’s okay – the Constitution gives us the right to our differences of opinion.
Reply
Steve Haddad - 1985
I just read an article about the volleyball team’s European Trip. They didn’t seem to play too much volleyball, and was more of sightseeing trip. Who paid for that? (Seriously, if it was paid for by the families of the team, fine. If it was paid for by the U, then you could have saved money there!). Who makes those decisions? Thanks.
Reply