By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Donald Trump has issued an executive order mandating an exclusive broadcast window for the annual Army-Navy football game in December. The order directs relevant officials to coordinate with college football organizations and media partners to prevent any conflicts with College Football Playoff (CFP) or other postseason games. This directive aims to ensure the Army-Navy rivalry receives undivided national attention, especially as potential CFP expansions could necessitate earlier playoff scheduling that might otherwise overlap. The policy underscores the importance of maintaining the prominence of this historic matchup played by the nation’s Military Service Academies.
Read the original article here
It appears there’s been some discussion around a recent executive order purportedly issued by President Trump, aimed at preventing conflicts between broadcasts of the College Football Playoff (CFP) and the annual Army-Navy game. The sentiment surrounding this executive order seems to be overwhelmingly one of incredulity and dismissal, with many questioning its purpose, constitutionality, and the President’s authority in dictating such matters.
The core of the issue, as perceived by many, is the idea that the President is stepping into the role of a television programmer or regulator, dictating broadcast schedules for college sports. This is viewed by some as a bizarre overreach, with questions raised about whether the President has become the “president of TV.” The very notion of an executive order being used for this purpose seems to strike many as fundamentally misguided, especially given the other significant challenges the nation might be facing.
There’s a widespread belief that executive orders, in this context, are being devalued and are becoming “pointless.” A significant concern raised is the constitutionality of such an order, with many asserting that it oversteps the President’s executive powers. The understanding from many is that executive orders are not actual laws in themselves and are more akin to directives or suggestions, lacking the force of legislative action.
The timing and relevance of such an order are also heavily debated. Some commenters point out that the Army-Navy game typically takes place in early December, often before the major conference championships and bowl game selections are fully settled. The idea that it would inherently conflict with major CFP games, which usually occur later in December and into January, is questioned. This leads to the perception of it being “more fluff” or a distraction from more pressing national issues.
A recurring theme is the President’s perceived desire to control every aspect of the country, extending even to the scheduling of sporting events. This is seen by some as a manifestation of a larger tendency to seek absolute control, and the use of an executive order for something so specific and seemingly minor fuels this perception. The thought that the next President might have to spend their initial time reversing such orders also highlights a perceived unseriousness to this particular directive.
Many are expressing a strong sense of “nobody cares” regarding this executive order, implying that it is not a priority for the general public or for the entities involved in college football broadcasting. The suggestion that the College Football Playoff committee should simply “tell Trump get lost” reflects a sentiment of defiance and a belief that the order should be disregarded due to its perceived illegitimacy or irrelevance.
The perceived disconnect between this executive order and more critical national concerns, such as economic affordability or ongoing international conflicts, is a significant point of criticism. The sarcasm in remarks like “Finally, he does something that really matters!” underscores the feeling that this is a trivial matter being addressed with a tool that should be reserved for significant policy decisions. The comparison to other potential presidential priorities, such as releasing classified files, further emphasizes the perceived misplacement of focus.
There’s also a strong reaction to the idea of the President dictating broadcast content, with some labeling it a sign of fascism or an authoritarian tendency. The glorification and idolization of the military through such an order, without apparent genuine public demand or need, is also a point of contention. The dismissive attitude towards the military’s actual engagement with such directives, suggesting they “don’t care,” further diminishes the perceived impact of the order.
The practical enforceability of such an executive order is questioned, with many believing that entities like the NCAA are not beholden to them and would likely ignore such a directive. The notion that executive orders are merely a “wish list or suggestion at best” appears to be a common understanding. The frustration is palpable, with some resorting to expletive-laden dismissals of the President and the executive order.
Some are also framing this as a continuation of a pattern where the President “always wanted to control football,” suggesting a long-standing interest that is now being acted upon through this executive order. The fact that such entities often ignore presidential directives on sports matters is seen as a testament to their independence, and perhaps a relief for those who believe in limited government intervention in such areas.
Ultimately, the prevailing sentiment surrounding this executive order is that it is an unnecessary, possibly unconstitutional, and largely irrelevant directive that distracts from more important issues. It’s viewed by many as a performative act, a piece of “fluff,” that reveals a President attempting to exert control over areas beyond his purview, with little to no practical effect. The overall tone suggests a deep skepticism about the President’s motivations and the efficacy of such executive actions.