Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

What are the Big 12 divisions going to look like, with the Utes and the Arizona twins?


https://twitter.com/utahathletics/status/1687637093957464064?s=20

I'd put the new schools out west with the Texas schools and throw CU in with it's old Big 8 friends + the eastern newbies:
Utah, BYU, ASU, Arizona, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston
CU, Kansas, KSU, OK State, ISU, Cinci, WV, UCF
.
Or you could do North/South:
Utah, BYU, CU, Kansas, KSU, ISU, Cinci, WV
ASU, Arizona, OK State, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, UCF
.
Or some other crazy shit.

Cal-Berkley is in some serious trouble.

UT makes about $20 million a year more then annual expenses so Im not sure how they have any debt outstanding

The debts are related to capital expenditures-- I don't know about all of them but in the cases of UT, A&M, and Cal-Berkeley, I know for a fact that it's coming from recent stadium renovations/reconstructions within the past 10 years that are still being paid off.  In UT's case these are not paid for by operating revenue and don't show up on the income statement.

But for Berkley I found this blurb from 2013:

The stadium cost $321 million to renovate and the athletic center cost $153 million, according to a San Francisco Chronicle report. Stadium debt already absorbs 20 percent of intercollegiate athletics' annual income, or roughly $18 million of its $89 million budget.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1680579-cals-stadium-renovation-debt-shows-schools-need-to-keep-football-in-perspective#:~:text=The%20stadium%20cost%20%24321%20million,of%20its%20%2489%20million%20budget.

The fact that ten years later they still have $440M of the original $493M outstanding, and they have lost pretty much their entire TV revenue that was being used for debt service, is a real problem.

the last stadium expansion has about $174 mill of outstanding debt so I guess thats the answer to my question

Yup.  And read above where I edited, it looks even more dire for Berkley than I had previously thought.  They still owe $440M on their $493M facilities debt from 2013, and they were basically using their entire TV revenue for debt service.  They're in a very, very scary position right now.

Cal caught the wrong end of all that something fierce: 

"You can't compete with old facilities."

"TV will pay for some level of facilities improvement"

"Oh, s$#*"

Cal's setup was positively ancient before they fixed things up. But they were also at the bottom level of a certain kind of program. They were a team that did football because they've always done football and if you have the stupid stadium, might as well play (plus they had a decent run of competence for maybe 8 years). But it's a school with a low passion level for football with a student body that is both interested in sports way less than an average P5 team and not really trained up on being interested in football. Also in a pro sports area, also lacking in a crazy alum who just invests for the hell of it. 

It's a nerd school, but not one in the south, where the area's natural football culture will lift all boats. I wouldn't be surprised if it was gone in the next decade, and I don't totally know if it's the worst thing. And I say that as someone who went to a LOT of Cal games in high school. They were fun, but the world and school are VERY different now. 

Is UT servicing its stadium debt from athletic income or does it come from other sources

Of that I'm not sure, it's been a while since I perused UT's financials.  But if Texas is servicing the debt through athletic income, the point is that it can still afford to do so.  Cal-Berkley, on the other hand, can't.  And looking at just the high level pro forma of their athletic budget, it seems crazy that they ever attempted to do so, at least on that kind of scale.