In a letter to the USC fan base Friday, athletic director Jen Cohen addressed the school’s stance on the pending Big Ten private capital deal that could infuse the conference with up to $2.4 billion.

“As we continue to evaluate the merits of this proposal or any others, our University leadership remains aligned in our stance that our fiduciary obligation to the University of Southern California demands we thoroughly evaluate any deals that could impact our long-term value and flexibility, no matter the short-term benefit,” Cohen said in the letter.

The proposed deal would extend the league’s grant of rights an extra 10 years to 2046 and create a new business entity, Big Ten Enterprises, that would house all leaguewide media rights and sponsorship deals. Each school, as well as the league office, would get shares of ownership of Big Ten Enterprises, while an investment fund that is tied to the University of California pension system would receive a 10% stake in the new entity in exchange for an infusion of over $2 billion to conference athletic departments.

USC and Michigan are the two Big Ten schools that have pushed back on the deal, which has otherwise been supported by a majority of the programs in the conference, as well as Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti.

In a call last month between USC and Michigan trustees, sources told ESPN’s Dan Wetzel that both programs were skeptical of the deal and talked about how it does not address the root issue — soaring costs — that has made cash so imperative for athletic departments. Just providing short-term money, sources said, does not solve that issue.

The schools also noted pending federal legislation that makes predicting the future of college athletics difficult, as well as a general apprehension about selling equity in a university asset — the conference media rights.

Beyond the potential impact to long-term value and flexibility in exchange for a “short-term benefit” that Cohen suggested (an extension to the grant of rights to 2046 could limit conference expansion and the departure of any programs, for example), she also noted in her letter that the $2.4 billion would be “unevenly distributed” among the schools and “create a tiered revenue distribution system moving forward.”

According to reporting from Wetzel and ESPN’s Pete Thamel, the exact equity amounts per school in Big Ten Enterprises are still being negotiated. There is expected to be a small gap in the percentage of the remaining equity among the schools that would favor the league’s biggest athletic brands, but it’s likely to be less than a percentage point. A tier system for initial payments is also expected, but with the lowest amount in the nine-figure range. Larger athletic departments could receive an amount above $150 million.

“We greatly value our membership in the Big Ten Conference and understand and respect the larger landscape,” Cohen said. “But we also recognize the power of the USC brand is far-reaching, deeply engaging, and incredibly valuable, and we will always fight first for what’s best for USC.”

The Big Ten is in the middle of a seven-year, $7 billion media rights package that runs through 2030. The money infusion is believed to be acutely needed at several Big Ten schools that are struggling to pay down debt on new construction and budgeting for direct revenue ($20.5 million this year and expected to rise annually) to athletes.

In a move that altered the college football landscape, USC left the Pac-12 and joined the Big Ten conference in 2024, alongside UCLA, Oregon and Washington, pushing the league to 18 members.