I would not be worried if I was MSU. MSU is enough in the middle or on the right side of the value line.
But reality is the profitability of these media deals for those companies is bad. It's a bubble. CFB fandom isn't growing, certainly not at the rate needed to swing these media deals into wildly profitable ventures.
The other reality is to this point the 800 lb gorilla has been reasonably competitive with the SEC giants. What happens if OSU goes another 3-4 years with the gap between them and the SEC growing. How about the slightly smaller gorilla in Michigan seeing it's pretty obvious they don't belong with the top of the SEC. They just aren't on the same level, and frankly they aren't close, and something drastic needs to change for them to compete for national titles.
You think if someone at Michigan thinks, if we had $30M more per year than the top of the SEC we might be able to outclass them with assistants, divert more donor money to NIL to compete on recruits, they wouldn't do it? Because it's not going to be difficult to get it done.
And this idea that unequal revenue causes problems is kind of a dumb thought because it has always been the ones making the money that are unhappy and leave. 100% of the problem was that UT and OU (and back in the day A&M and Neb) were getting more than equal money, but they had better options, so they took them. Michigan and OSU have no option to make more money in another league. Yet they could basically snap their fingers and make more with a reasonable proposal that gets enough teams a favorable cut that they'll get on board. WTF is Minnesota, Purdue, Illinois, NW, Rutgers, Maryland going to do if they are faced with a deal that gives them $40m/year? It's still the best option they have by MILES. WTF is Iowa going to do if faced with the option to get $60M? It's the best option they have by MILES.
The reality is Ohio State and Michigan could propose a media distribution that is unequal and is still literally every team's best option available to them by a significant margin. They haven't done it yet. But they also haven't had a significant period where they are clearly not competitive with the SEC. There also has been a massive diminishing returns prior to NIL, where donors can provide NIL instead of giving to the AD. It's not like this diversion of donations isn't something everybody understands. So it's not like the universities even need to do anything illegal. Donors know this is a path to improving the utility of their donations in terms of wins/losses.