Houston announces that Chris Pezman is no longer sporting director; the search for a successor begins immediately

Houston becomes sports director Chris Pezmanthe school said Thursday. Pezman, a former Cougars football player, served in the position for more than six years.

The search for a successor for Pezman will begin immediately, Raymond BartlettHouston’s senior vice president for administration and finance, will serve as interim athletic director. When the Cougars announced the change in athletic leadership, university president Renu Khator cited a “paradigm shift” in university sports as the reason for the decision.

“Chris Pezman has led our athletic program through a time of incredible change and we are grateful for his leadership over the past six years,” Khator said in the release. “He was a critical part of our joining the Big 12 Conference and has championed student-athlete success on the field and in the classroom. This was a necessary decision as we go through a paradigm shift in college sports. I want to thank Chris for his commitment to UH and our student-athletes. On behalf of the university, I wish Chris and his family the best.”

Big changes could be coming to the Big 12

The Big 12 Conference provided material for discussion in college sports over the summer when two possible changes to the league were announced in mid-June: A possible deal for the league’s naming rightsAnd another possible deal to give a private equity firm a stake in the league. And these movements are not all the same.

While the possibility of the Big 12 apparently becoming the “Allstate 12” conference or something similar sparked plenty of jokes and online uproar, it would be a private equity deal that could ultimately be the undoing of the league and its member schools, which On3s Andy Staples And Pete Nakos worried.

And the problem stems from a key difference in how these respective deals work. Naming rights, which are easy to scoff at, are basically just a change in the league’s brand name in exchange for an infusion of cash. Operations would be unaffected, aside from some extra money that could be distributed to schools. Private equity, on the other hand, would provide the league with a large sum of money up front — presumably to make up for revenue shortfalls compared to the Big Ten and SEC — in return for partial control of the league and member schools, paid back with interest over a period of several years (probably decades). The former would probably be acceptable for college sports, the latter could be disastrous.

“They’re going to boss you around and tell you what to do. And they’re probably more likely to tell you to slow down on sports than if you don’t involve private equity,” Nakos said.

Staples explained in more detail how things could work out for athletic departments if they allow a private equity firm to have a say.

“Yes, because they’re going to say, ‘Which of these sports make money?’ And they’re going to say, ‘Football and men’s basketball.’ And they’re going to say, ‘Cut everything else.’ And they’re going to say, ‘No, there’s such a thing as Title IX.’ ‘Cut exactly what you need to comply with Title IX and leave nothing else.’ That’s what they’re going to say. That’s a pretty dangerous situation, that’s a dangerous path to go down,” Staples said.

The exact nature of a potential Big 12 private equity deal is also still unknown. The terms reported Thursday are by no means final, but in broad terms a deal would see the Big 12 – the schools in the league – receive a payout of about $800 million to $1 billion from a Luxembourg firm for a roughly 20% stake in the league, plus a repayment with interest.