Jay Bilas rants about NCAA?s apparent greed

By LAURA KEELEY Raleigh News and Observer August 8, 2013 12:36PM

FILE - In this April 13, 2013 file photo, Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel (2) stands on the sideline during the first half of the Aggies' Maroon & White spring NCAA college football game at Kyle Field in College Station, Texas. ESPN says the NCAA is investigating whether Manziel was paid for signing hundreds of autographs in January. Citing unidentified sources, ESPN's "Outside the Lines" said the Heisman Trophy winner signed items in exchange for a five-figure fee during his trip to Miami for the BCS championship game. (AP Photo/Houston Chronicle, Karen Warren, File) MANDATORY CREDIT

storyidforme: 53260431
tmspicid: 19657863
fileheaderid: 8966530

College basketball analyst Jay Bilas drew national attention this week for exposing the NCAA?s hypocrisy. The embattled governing body of college sports said in recent court filings that it does not sell specific player jerseys and profit from an athlete?s likeness, just from generic representations of their respective schools.

Bilas blew that apart by demonstrating that you can enter a player?s name into the search function for NCAA?s online store and find specific jersey replicas. For example, a search for Mason Plumlee led to a screen full of Duke No. 5 jerseys and shirts. The same occurred with searches for other prominent athletes, like Texas A&M?s Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel and others (until the function was taken down after Bilas exposed it).

This is a critical time for the NCAA, as it deals with a federal antitrust lawsuit that challenges its right to profit from an athlete?s likeness, and faces a potential investigation into allegations that Manziel profited from selling his signature to autograph dealers. Bilas spoke about those topics and the NCAA in general:

Q: That was quite the Twitter sensation you had (about the jerseys).

A: I didn?t intend for any of that stuff to happen. I just went to the site and tweeted about it when I saw it.

Q: Did you just have some time on your hands and decide to check out the search options?

A: No, what happened was I had gotten a message from somebody that included a screen grab. I had said something about Manziel and his jersey, so they sent me a screen grab of that site of a Manziel jersey that had Texas A&M and 2 on the front and then a big number 2 and football on the back where a player?s name would usually be.

And that really caught my attention. It was pretty clear that they?re using his likeness and image without his consent. And I just happened to catch in the upper right-hand corner, I saw that Manziel was in the search box. I thought, ?That can?t be. You can?t search by name and come up with that.? And I tried it myself, and it came up. I tried (Jadeveon) Clowney, and it came up. I tried A.J. McCarron, and all these came up. It was unbelievable.

Listen, it?s perfect business sense. It?s smart business. Never once have I complained about the amount of money the NCAA makes. They should make all they can. It?s great that Mark Emmert makes $2 million a year. More power to him, the more he makes, the more everybody else makes.

The problem I have with it is the rhetoric that they use and the fact that everybody in the sport, at every level, is getting compensated at market rate, and while they?re doing that they?re restricting the revenue drivers, the players themselves.

Q: You?re a trained lawyer, what are your thoughts on the O?Bannon case and what it could end up meaning? (Former UCLA basketball star Ed O?Bannon, along with a few current student-athletes, is taking the NCAA to federal court in attempts to receive compensation for the organization profiting off their likeness in perpetuity.)

A: First of all, I would prefer that the NCAA make changes in policy because it?s the right thing to do. I don?t like it that we?re having to go through this litigation. It puts a lot of people in a bad position. It puts a lot of NCAA people in a bad position of having to justify policies that, in my opinion, are unjustifiable. Just like in that filing, when they made the argument that those jerseys are not representative of players; that?s clearly not true.

Q: Do I think that the O?Bannon plaintiffs are right?

A: I tend to believe they are, yeah. But the courts over the years have given great deference to the NCAA because of this idea that it?s an educational pursuit and sports are an integral part of education. I don?t agree with that, either, but courts have deferred to that. I?m not sure how much longer, given the commercial model as the money is continuing to rise, the courts are going to continue to buy that. ... As the money grows and the players stay at zero, the tension is going to grow.

My guess is that, if we really look into this autograph thing, Johnny Manziel is not the only one those guys got autographs from. We?re going to see a bunch of players in that, and we?re always going to see that.

Q: But do you think that athletes should be able to profit from signing stuff for these guys?

A: I do. I don?t think that they should be restricted from doing it. When you restrict someone from operating in the same market that everybody else operates in, it needs to be within reason, and we don?t have good reason. There?s no reason for it. If you don?t want to pay and provide them with compensation outside of the scholarship, they should at least be able to benefit outside the university. There?s no reason they shouldn?t be able to have autograph signings, do commercials, make appearances, to benefit off their names and likenesses. No other student is told they can?t do that, not even students on scholarship.

Source: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/colleges/21807307-419/jay-bilas-rants-about-ncaas-apparent-greed.html

temperance world bank kim kardashian flour bomb hunger games box office xavier joan crawford joan crawford