News & Insights

Collegiate Athletic Districts

Don’t go it alone: How competitive bidding protects universities in athletic district development

At this week’s NACDA conference, I had the pleasure of joining Marvin Lewis, George Mason University’s Assistant VP and Director of Intercollegiate Athletics, and Ryan Alpert, the University of Tennessee’s Sr. Deputy Athletic Director and Chief Revenue Officer, on a panel to discuss the development of collegiate athletic districts—a topic that’s occupying much of B&D’s attention today. One key takeaway from that conversation was the importance of a structured, competitive process when it comes to selecting a development partner. After all it’s a common occurrence that our clients are approached by a single developer offering the opportunity of a partnership – but therein lie some risks.

Why competitive bidding matters

A competitive bidding process isn’t just about getting a better deal (although that’s certainly one of the benefits). It’s about protecting your institution’s interests, ensuring alignment with your strategic objectives, and fostering innovation that might not emerge from a one-on-one negotiation. By inviting multiple development teams to participate, institutions can create a market-driven environment that encourages creative thinking, realistic financial proposals, and transparent risk sharing.

Aligning with your strategic objectives

Before going to market, it’s critical to ask: What are we trying to achieve with this athletic district? Is it purely about generating revenue? Is it about enhancing the game day experience for our fans? Or is it a broader initiative that supports recruitment, community engagement, and academic integration? When we work with institutions on these projects, we always advise them to start by defining their vision and goals. Once you know what success looks like, you can craft a process—and ultimately a partnership—that aligns with your vision.

Creating leverage through competition

A competitive solicitation process creates a strong foundation from which to select a preferred partner, in part by highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal (and proposer).  With this clarity, the institution is better equipped to select the right long-term partner, as well as leverage the accrued market knowledge through the process to drive towards more favorable deal terms such as higher ground leases, revenue-sharing models, or expanded programmatic benefits.  Simply put, when multiple qualified developers are bidding for a project, the institution is in the driver’s seat.

Navigating higher ed complexity

Higher education environments are complex. They involve multiple layers of governance, from boards and presidents to CFOs and general counsel, not to mention stakeholders such as faculty, students, and community partners. A competitive process helps manage that complexity by creating transparency and accountability. It gives your stakeholders confidence that the project is being pursued in a way that aligns with the institution’s values and long-term vision.

Advice for universities exploring athletic districts

During our NACDA panel, we talked about both the opportunities and the challenges of athletic district development. Here’s my advice for universities considering these transformative projects:

• Start with your strategic goals. Define what success looks like from strategic, campus community, and financial perspectives before you talk to potential partners.
• Engage key stakeholders early. Presidents, boards, CFOs, faculty, and community members need to be part of the conversation from day one.
• Define your required outcomes. Know what you want the project to achieve so developers can focus on solving the right problems—instead of guessing what you need.
• Create a clear and competitive process. Draft an RFP that reflects your goals and invites creative proposals from multiple developers.
• Evaluate proposals holistically. Look beyond the financials—consider design, community integration, long-term operations, and alignment with your mission.
• Protect your leverage. Even if you have a preferred partner, don’t skip the competitive process. Market tension will ensure you get the best terms.
• Manage stakeholder expectations. Keep your community and leadership informed throughout the process to build trust and avoid surprises.

Building a project that lasts

Ultimately, our goal—and the goal of any good advisor—is to help universities create athletic districts that stand the test of time. These projects are more than just facilities; they’re opportunities to transform parts of campuses and strengthen the relationship between the university and its community. By selecting the right partner through a competitive process, you set the stage for success: a district that supports your athletic programs, serves your students and faculty, and generates previously unrealized revenue for decades to come.

The excitement—and pitfalls—of athletic districts

During our NACDA presentation, we talked about the excitement and potential of athletic districts—and we also talked about the pitfalls. Chief among them is the temptation to rush into a relationship with a single developer who may not fully understand your institution’s needs. The stakes are too high for that. By embracing a competitive approach, universities can get the best ideas, the best terms, and the best outcomes. Ultimately, our goal—and the goal of any good advisor—is to help universities create athletic districts that stand the test of time. These projects are more than just facilities; they’re opportunities to transform campuses and strengthen the relationship between the university and its community. By selecting the right partner through a competitive process, you set the stage for success: a district that supports your athletic programs, serves your students and faculty, and generates revenue for decades to come. And that’s what will make these projects a success story for everyone involved.

Chris Dunlavey, FAIA, is a seasoned architect and co-founder and Co-CEO of Brailsford & Dunlavey, renowned for leading the development of major sports venues including Nationals Park and Audi Field. With an MBA in real estate development and finance and a professional background that spans feasibility, planning, design, and program management, he founded the B&D Venues practice and provides strategic leadership for sports venue projects. Recognized in 2005 as one of Sports Business Journal’s “Forty under 40,” Dunlavey has overseen over $1.5 billion in arena and stadium construction and continues to shape high-profile athletic district and campus recreation developments.