“The lawsuit is based on the NCAA maliciously attacking his character through a completely false and highly offensive statement that was widely reported in the media and substantially and irreparably damaged his reputation,” according to a statement from law firm McCathern, PLLC.
The NCAA statement in question was issued to ESPN, along with other media outlets, on July 28, 2021, in response to an inquiry about the possibility of Bush having his records and participation restored in light of changes to name, image and likeness rules that went into effect earlier that month.
“Although college athletes can now receive benefits from their names, images and likenesses through activities like endorsements and appearances, NCAA rules still do not permit pay-for-play type arrangements,” an NCAA spokesperson said in that statement.
[That was two years ago. It’s probably still within the statute of limitations, but if that was a defaming statement, why not address it in 2021 or 2022? Furthermore, this complaint seems to parse the NCAA’s language to a breaking point. Bush’s legal team says that he never entered into a “pay-for-play” arrangement with USC — but the investigation did show that he and family members got cash, a rent-free home in San Diego, and $10,000 to furnish it, ESPN notes later. That may not be precisely pay-for-play, but it’s at least reasonably in the same ballpark. FWIW, I think Bush got treated a lot more harshly (and unjustly so) than USC did by the NCAA, and the stripping of the Heisman was ridiculous. Bush’s play earned that. – Ed]
Join the conversation as a VIP Member