Far Reaching Impact of 1984 Supreme Court Case on College Football

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Some of you might not remember this, maybe a lot of you, but this was a big, big deal back in the day where Georgia and Oklahoma (under the CFA) challenged the NCAA's authority to limit the ability of schools to negotiate their own t.v. packages.

Did you have any idea in 1984 that the case you were arguing would end up producing more than 100 additional games the following year?

No, I did not. There has obviously been an explosion in the marketplace, but what is interesting is that there seems to be an ever-growing appetite for college football. Today's young people would find it difficult to believe that at one time you would get one or two games at most a week. As Justice [John P.] Stevens said one of the faults of the NCAA television program was that it was insensitive to viewer preferences, which meant you got what the NCAA determined was going to be the game that week. Now of course, you can basically watch your favorite team play on television most of the time.

http://www.footballfoundation.org/News/NewsDetail/tabid/567/Article/55873/far-reaching-impact-of-1984-supreme-court-case-on-college-football.aspx

[Inhogswetrust]

A HUGE effect on college sports. The other big thing was Title 9..................

[MuskogeeHogFan]

A HUGE effect on college sports. The other big thing was Title 9..................

As big of a future impact as Title IX had on college sports, it pales in comparison to this Supreme Court decision that opened the flood gates for schools and conferences to negotiate their own t.v. contracts, which in turn, vastly increased conference revenue sharing.

[Inhogswetrust]

As big of a future impact as Title IX had on college sports, it pales in comparison to this Supreme Court decision that opened the flood gates for schools and conferences to negotiate their own t.v. contracts, which in turn, vastly increased conference revenue sharing.

I agree. The thing is that Title 9 helped some students that otherwise wouldn't have received any help.....I.E. women. Those better TV contracts is what helps pay for Title 9. That money without Title 9 probably would have gone to football and other mens sports. As we all know football is the one sport that pays the bills for the others except in a few places where basketball helps pay the bills.

[Boss Hog in the Arkansas]

Some of you might not remember this, maybe a lot of you, but this was a big, big deal back in the day where Georgia and Oklahoma (under the CFA) challenged the NCAA's authority to limit the ability of schools to negotiate their own t.v. packages.

Did you have any idea in 1984 that the case you were arguing would end up producing more than 100 additional games the following year?

No, I did not. There has obviously been an explosion in the marketplace, but what is interesting is that there seems to be an ever-growing appetite for college football. Today's young people would find it difficult to believe that at one time you would get one or two games at most a week. As Justice [John P.] Stevens said one of the faults of the NCAA television program was that it was insensitive to viewer preferences, which meant you got what the NCAA determined was going to be the game that week. Now of course, you can basically watch your favorite team play on television most of the time.
Well I wasn't born yet so I definitely don't remember, but I found this very interesting. I think that these cases are the reason that the NCAA has kinda stepped back and let schools do what they want to a certain extent, especially the blue bloods. No one from the NCAA would ever admit it, but the schools have more power than they do. Honestly, they don't need the NCAA anymore

http://www.footballfoundation.org/News/NewsDetail/tabid/567/Article/55873/far-reaching-impact-of-1984-supreme-court-case-on-college-football.aspx

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Boss Hog: "Well I wasn't born yet so I definitely don't remember, but I found this very interesting. I think that these cases are the reason that the NCAA has kinda stepped back and let schools do what they want to a certain extent, especially the blue bloods. No one from the NCAA would ever admit it, but the schools have more power than they do. Honestly, they don't need the NCAA anymore"

This challenge was the foundation of the money that college football sees flowing into their accounts today. Some of us remember the days when you were only able to watch 1 or 2 games each weekend and why college football scoreboard/highlight shows were such a big deal back then. People who couldn't atted games were glued to the radio if the game wasn't one of the two being broadcast. This decision at least doubled the number of games broadcast the following year. Football fans felt like every Saturday was Christmas. Now, we are inundated with games every weekend.

[Inhogswetrust]

They still need the NCAA or at least some form of organization. Letting all schools do whatever they want and go it alone would invite disaster. All the stuff that went on before is one reason why the NCAA was formed to begin with. Of course the NCAA could do better at some things but remember they ARE the schools themselves and thus make up their rules collectively. Sometimes that means some schools might not like what the NCAA is doing.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

They still need the NCAA or at least some form of organization. Letting all schools do whatever they want and go it alone would invite disaster. All the stuff that went on before is one reason why the NCAA was formed to begin with. Of course the NCAA could do better at some things but remember they ARE the schools themselves and thus make up their rules collectively. Sometimes that means some schools might not like what the NCAA is doing.

I'm not advocating for the elimination of the NCAA at all. But the formation of the CFA (College Football Association) at the time, certainly served its purpose and has certainly paid great dividends to the P-5 schools and some of the lesser schools as well. I will say however that if there is going to be an NCAA they certainly don't need to pattern their speed of effort and efficiency after that of Congress.

[Inhogswetrust]

I'm not advocating for the elimination of the NCAA at all. But the formation of the CFA (College Football Association) at the time, certainly served its purpose and has certainly paid great dividends to the P-5 schools and some of the lesser schools as well. I will say however that if there is going to be an NCAA they certainly don't need to pattern their speed of effort and efficiency after that of Congress.

I completely agree that the NCAA could do some things better. I also think that at some point IF things don't change then the P5 schools might break away from the NCAA and form their own organization. The only thing maybe that could stop it would be politicians getting involved.

[EastexHawg]

I thought it was one of the five greatest events in world history.  Every year the college football TV schedule would come out and we would look to see how many Razorback games would be televised.  The Texas game was almost always on the list, most of the time a national broadcast.  We might have one other game and if we couldn't attend in person those were the only times the rest of us got to see the Hogs play until the bowl game.

If I am not mistaken the 1969 team that spent almost all season near the top of the polls after beating Georgia in the Sugar Bowl the season before was on TV twice...Texas Tech on or around Thanksgiving Day and the Big Shootout against Texas in the next game.  We opened the season in 1970 in a nationally televised game against Jim Plunkett and Stanford.  That meant, counting the bowl game, the Hogs were on TV in four straight contests.  That was pretty much unheard of in those days.

I'm digging deep into the memory bank now, but I believe there may have even been a rule that no team could appear on TV more than twice.  Let's say Oklahoma played USC, Texas, a Colorado team that finished in the top three, and eventual national champion Nebraska in the same season.  Only two of those games could be televised, so you were either going to miss the Red River rivalry game against a Texas team that had spent most of the last decade winning or contending for national championships, a #1 vs #3 matchup against Colorado, the second Game of the Century against Nebraska, or a huge intersectional matchup against USC.

Of course USC also played an Alabama team that went undefeated and played Nebraska for the national championship as well as Notre Dame and UCLA, so even if you wanted to show Oklahoma's game with them you might run up against the "twice on TV" rule from that direction.

As the article stated, as a college football fan it was like Christmas Day when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the College Football Association and paved the way for more games on TV.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I thought it was one of the five greatest events in world history.  Every year the college football TV schedule would come out and we would look to see how many Razorback games would be televised.  The Texas game was almost always on the list, most of the time a national broadcast.  We might have one other game and if we couldn't attend in person those were the only times the rest of us got to see the Hogs play until the bowl game.

If I am not mistaken the 1969 team that spent almost all season near the top of the polls after beating Georgia in the Sugar Bowl the season before was on TV twice...Texas Tech on or around Thanksgiving Day and the Big Shootout against Texas in the next game.  We opened the season in 1970 in a nationally televised game against Jim Plunkett and Stanford.  That meant, counting the bowl game, the Hogs were on TV in four straight contests.  That was pretty much unheard of in those days.

I'm digging deep into the memory bank now, but I believe there may have even been a rule that no team could appear on TV more than twice.  Let's say Oklahoma played USC, Texas, a Colorado team that finished in the top three, and eventual national champion Nebraska in the same season.  Only two of those games could be televised, so you were either going to miss the Red River rivalry game against a Texas team that had spent most of the last decade winning or contending for national championships, a #1 vs #3 matchup against Colorado, the second Game of the Century against Nebraska, or a huge intersectional matchup against USC.

Of course USC also played an Alabama team that went undefeated and played Nebraska for the national championship as well as Notre Dame and UCLA, so even if you wanted to show Oklahoma's game with them you might run up against the "twice on TV" rule from that direction.

As the article stated, as a college football fan it was like Christmas Day when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the College Football Association and paved the way for more games on TV.

In those days of two games each Saturday there were always a group of games that you knew were going to be televised every year, at least in my area. Oklahoma-Texas, Oklahoma-Nebraska, USC-Notre Dame, Ohio State-Michigan, Michigan-Michigan State, USC-UCLA and Texas-Texas A&M are a few that come more immediately to mind, but I think I also remember being able to see Arkansas-Texas televised every year, just because of the region I grew up in. I don't remember Alabama-Auburn or Georgia-Florida being broadcast that often in my area of the country.