Expert answer:Why Politics Matters

Solved by verified expert:Read the recruitment carefully and please make sure everything correct and no no plagiarism at all please Why Politics Matters: Government in Action Essay ActivityRead the account on the Supreme Court case, NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma (1984), and then write a three to five paragraph essay in response to the following questions.In your opinion, what is the judicial significance in protecting competitive balances in collegiate television agreements?Can you think of any other industries where emerging monopolies threaten economic competition?
government_in_action.docx

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Government in Action: NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of
Oklahoma (1984)
Background: For many years, the NCAA governed television rights for collegiate football, with the
aim of maximizing exposure for the greatest number of teams. The NCAA limited the number of
televised games in which teams could appear and restricted the overall number of college football
television broadcasts. However, a number of schools with large football programs, including the
Universities of Oklahoma and Georgia, believed that they would be better off pursuing their own
television broadcast deals, so they formed the College Football Association (CFA) to advocate for
their needs. The CFA negotiated a separate deal with a competing television network, so the schools
could broadcast more games and receive more money than they would through the NCAA plan. In
response, the NCAA threatened sanctions against any teams that went outside of the NCAA
television broadcast deal. The CFA member schools sued in federal court, claiming that the NCAA
television plan constituted an illegal restraint of trade under the Sherman Antitrust Act—an act that
aimed to prevent illegal monopolies and preserve economic competition. After a district court and an
appeals court found that the NCAA’s plan was illegal, the NCAA appealed to the Supreme Court to
seek the preservation of its television broadcast agreement.
Question: Does the NCAA’s television broadcast plan for college football constitute an illegal
restraint of trade under the Sherman Antitrust Act?
Petitioner’s Argument: The NCAA argued that limiting the number of televised college football
games was necessary to preserve college football ticket sales and maintain a competitive balance
across the NCAA’s member institutions. At this time, the only way for a fan to see the vast majority
of the games was to purchase a ticket for each game and see it live, which guaranteed revenue to
member institutions. Further, the NCAA argued that it had no power to affect supply and demand,
making it impossible for the NCAA to impose an illegal cartel. Rather, the NCAA’s television
agreement was a cooperative joint venture that made the sale of college football television rights
possible by eliminating inefficiencies.
Respondent’s Argument: The respondent’s attorneys argued, on behalf of several institutions, that
by limiting the opportunities for football programs to appear on national television, the NCAA had
engaged in an illegal restraint of trade. When the NCAA threatened sanctions against schools that
pursued contracts that were in their and the consumers’ best interests, instead of competing against
other television networks in a market system, it created an illegal cartel. In essence, the NCAA was
engaging in illegal price-fixing. The district court held that there was significant evidence, notably
the agreement between the CFA and NBC, that many more college football games could be
broadcast and some schools would be able to make more money through individual agreements.
Result: In a 7–2 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the appeals court, finding that
the NCAA’s television broadcast agreement constituted an illegal restraint of trade. In the majority
decision, the Court found that while maintaining a competitive balance among teams was a legitimate
argument for the purpose of the NCAA, the television broadcast agreement did not pursue that end.
Further, the Court noted that men’s basketball was able to maintain a competitive balance without
entering into a restrictive agreement. In fact, the Court noted that more televised games would likely
be more beneficial to maintaining a competitive balance. In his dissent, Justice Byron White wrote
that the Court erred in treating intercollegiate football competition as a primarily commercial
venture; rather, it was reasonable for the NCAA to enter into the television agreement as a function
of its role in regulating amateur collegiate athletics in the United States.
Consequences: Colleges and athletic conferences are now free to enter into contracts to broadcast
football games as they see fit. Today, consumers can enjoy a virtually unlimited choice of college
football contests over the course of a week, rather than perhaps two games on Saturday afternoons. In
the year prior to this Court decision, 89 college football games were televised; in the year after, more
than 200 games were broadcast. Contrary to the NCAA’s fears, attendance at live college football
games has increased over time. There is some evidence that market saturation has dropped the value
of some broadcast rights, however, more schools now have access to broadcast agreement funding.
Today, as cable television sports networks have expanded, individual conferences sign agreements
with broadcasters and several athletic conferences and schools, including the PAC-12, Big Ten, and
University of Texas–Austin, have started their own exclusive television networks.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

How it works

1. Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
2. Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions 
3. Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
4.  Download the paper after the writer uploads it 

Will the writer plagiarize my essay?

You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.

Is this service safe?

All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades