Meet the man who believes he'screwed up' college football by winning the Supreme Court case
- 10 months ago
Meet the man who thinks he 'screwed up' college football with a Supreme Court win
Andrew Coats, the lawyer who convinced the Supreme Court in 1984 to allow universities to maximize football revenue, leading to a sweeping upheaval today, looks back with regret on the landmark case he successfully argued.
As a century-old college sports conference teeters on the brink of extinction and student-athletes brace for exhaustive cross-country travel, the attorney arguably responsible for these drastic changes says he's not particularly happy about it at all.
Andrew Coats, the lawyer who convinced the U.S. Supreme Court in 1984 to allow universities to maximize football revenue, leading to a television-driven money-grab and today's sweeping upheaval, now looks back with regret on the landmark case he successfully argued.
“I think I screwed up college football across the board, because I think the case did it,” Coats recently told NBC News, reflecting on his role in NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma.
America’s highest court ruled in favor of Coats' clients and said that the governing body of intercollegiate athletics couldn’t restrain the trade rights of schools and their conferences.
Now, the once-stable world of college football has turned into a near-nonstop swap meet in which universities constantly change conference affiliations, seeking more lucrative TV contracts. As a result, the Pac-12, a 108-year-old conference, will be reduced to four schools, and likely dissolve altogether.
These massive deals have caused the value of televised college football games to skyrocket in recent decades, largely at the expense of student-athletes who, in all sports, regularly travel thousands of miles for routine games once within reach of short plane rides or bus trips.
A 'complete disaster'
Earlier this week, Notre Dame Athletic Director Jack Swarbrick called the conference shifting a “complete disaster."
“I think the decision-making has lost its way in terms of the focus on the student-athlete and what’s primarily best for them,” he told “The Dan Patrick Show” on Wednesday. “I’m all for more regional scheduling. I think it makes a load of sense.”
While the 1984 case concerned football on TV, the practical impact has been on all programs — with athletes of nonrevenue and Olympic sports bearing an equal or greater burden of long travel.
Oregon softball player Paige Sinicki recently winced at the new reality of conference games as far away as New Jersey, a cross-country trip she suggested she didn’t sign up for when committing to the Ducks.
“I picked to play in a high level softball conference where being close to home would allow my parents to come watch my games,” Sinicki said recently on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. "It’s unfortunate to hear that my senior year I’ll be playing as far as New Jersey-Rutgers as well as other east coast schools."
“Just hope that us student athletes will be taken care of for al
Andrew Coats, the lawyer who convinced the Supreme Court in 1984 to allow universities to maximize football revenue, leading to a sweeping upheaval today, looks back with regret on the landmark case he successfully argued.
As a century-old college sports conference teeters on the brink of extinction and student-athletes brace for exhaustive cross-country travel, the attorney arguably responsible for these drastic changes says he's not particularly happy about it at all.
Andrew Coats, the lawyer who convinced the U.S. Supreme Court in 1984 to allow universities to maximize football revenue, leading to a television-driven money-grab and today's sweeping upheaval, now looks back with regret on the landmark case he successfully argued.
“I think I screwed up college football across the board, because I think the case did it,” Coats recently told NBC News, reflecting on his role in NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma.
America’s highest court ruled in favor of Coats' clients and said that the governing body of intercollegiate athletics couldn’t restrain the trade rights of schools and their conferences.
Now, the once-stable world of college football has turned into a near-nonstop swap meet in which universities constantly change conference affiliations, seeking more lucrative TV contracts. As a result, the Pac-12, a 108-year-old conference, will be reduced to four schools, and likely dissolve altogether.
These massive deals have caused the value of televised college football games to skyrocket in recent decades, largely at the expense of student-athletes who, in all sports, regularly travel thousands of miles for routine games once within reach of short plane rides or bus trips.
A 'complete disaster'
Earlier this week, Notre Dame Athletic Director Jack Swarbrick called the conference shifting a “complete disaster."
“I think the decision-making has lost its way in terms of the focus on the student-athlete and what’s primarily best for them,” he told “The Dan Patrick Show” on Wednesday. “I’m all for more regional scheduling. I think it makes a load of sense.”
While the 1984 case concerned football on TV, the practical impact has been on all programs — with athletes of nonrevenue and Olympic sports bearing an equal or greater burden of long travel.
Oregon softball player Paige Sinicki recently winced at the new reality of conference games as far away as New Jersey, a cross-country trip she suggested she didn’t sign up for when committing to the Ducks.
“I picked to play in a high level softball conference where being close to home would allow my parents to come watch my games,” Sinicki said recently on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. "It’s unfortunate to hear that my senior year I’ll be playing as far as New Jersey-Rutgers as well as other east coast schools."
“Just hope that us student athletes will be taken care of for al