NCAA vs Board of the University of Oklahoma and University of Georgia

It all started back in 1951. According to quimbee.com, during this time period, studies showed that television had a huge effect on college football game attendance. According to crowedunlevy.com, the NCAA, or National Collegiate Athletic Association, came out with a report concluding that they should come out with a plan in order to increase the amount of attendees to their games. The NCAA adopted a plan that allowed only one game per week to be broadcast in each area. This idea limited each institution to two television appearances per season. From the mid-1960s to the late 1970s, ABC held the right to telecast college football games (quimbee.com). In the year 1981, under this plan, the Television Committee allowed ABC and CBS to negotiate and contract for the broadcasting of games without the NCAA’s consent (cowedulevy.com). 

NCAA Logo

The NCAA; however, allowed both ABC and CBS to have the rights to telecast college games for the next four seasons. The agreement that both the NCAA and these networks made allowed each team no more than 6 television games per year, and split the games between the networks (crowedunlevy.com). According to caselaw.findlaw.com, “Each network agreed to pay a specified ‘minimum aggregate compensation’ to the participating NCAA members, and was authorized to negotiate directly with the members for the right to televise their games”. 

In 1981, the regents of the University of Georgia brought a private antitrust action against the NCAA seeking an injunction to prevent the NCAA from enforcing its plan. The issue started with smaller courts, but ended up being such an issue that it was handled by the Supreme Court. The U.S Supreme Court disagreed with the NCAA’s plan, remarking that  the plan constituted a restraint upon the way a free market is supposed to work (crowedunlevy.com). The court also found that the television plan had raised prices and reduced output during its time in action (crowedunlevy.com). In response to this evidence, the NCAA found nothing to justify the television plan. The Supreme Court, just like every court before, predicted that without the plan, the output would go up. 

Oklahoma Sooners Logo

The NCAA might’ve thought the television plan was a good idea then, but now, almost every college game is on TV, and the output has increased dramatically. Instead of having only two networks for college sports, now twenty networks do! Not only do many people tune into games on television, but even more join the crowd to see the games live! If it weren’t for the Supreme Court’s decision, college football would not be the same today.

Thank you all for reading, I hope you all enjoyed, and please subscribe below for notifications on upcoming articles. God bless!

“The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.”

-Psalm 18:2

Works Cited

“FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court Case and Opinions.” Findlaw, caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/468/85.html.

“NCAA v. Board of Regents of the Univ. of Oklahoma and Univ. of Georgia Athletic Ass’n – Case Brief.” Quimbee, www.quimbee.com/cases/ncaa-v-board-of-regents-of-the-univ-of-oklahoma-and-univ-of-georgia-athletic-ass-n.

“Earthquake”: Board of Regents v. NCAA – Howard Chudacoff

University of Illinois Press – 04 / 2017