In the case of National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma et al., 1983, the U.S Supreme Court ruled against NCAA's control over televised college football games. The NCAA had previously held a monopoly on broadcasting rights and limited the number of times a team could appear on television to protect ticket sales for less popular games. However, several universities filed an antitrust lawsuit arguing that this violated Sherman Antitrust Act by restraining trade and limiting competition in the market for college football broadcasts. The court agreed with these universities, stating that while some coordination was necessary to produce intercollegiate athletic events, it did not justify a complete restriction on individual schools' ability to sell their own broadcast rights. This decision led to increased revenue from television contracts for many colleges and universities as they were now able to negotiate their own deals independently.

In the dissenting opinion for NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, Justice White argued that the majority had misapplied antitrust laws and failed to recognize the unique nature of college athletics. He contended that these sports events are not typical commercial enterprises but rather an integral part of higher education with its own set rules and standards, including those related to broadcasting rights. The NCAA's television plan was designed to protect live attendance at games, ensure nationwide coverage for all teams regardless their market size or success level, and maintain a balance between academics and athletics by limiting exposure time on TV. According to him, this case should have been evaluated under a rule-of-reason analysis which would consider whether restrictions imposed were more restrictive than necessary in achieving legitimate objectives. He believed that there was no sufficient evidence showing such excessiveness in restriction or harm caused by it; hence he disagreed with striking down NCAA’s television plan as violating Sherman Act.