Grant Hill and Raftery compared to Bilas? Not fair to Grant and Raftery to be thrown into the same class with Bilas. Apples and oranges. They are not arrogant, condescending, all-knowing. I did not make a statement about "all outside observers"; I merely explained why I do not assign any credibility to Bilas in has rants about the NCAA, just like I do not assign any credibility to your opinion that the NCAA is a
"corrupt organization". Maybe when the Justice Department and the FBI initiate an investigation into alleged NCAA corruption, I might change my mind. I understand your disagreement with certain NCAA policies and actions and acknowledge your right to freely express it. That does not mean that anyone who disagrees with you is a dope or ignorant. Alert me when and if Bilas says something positive about the NCAA, and I will factor it into my opinion. Right now I cannot think of anything.
The only one I discredited was Bilas, and it was not because he did not support my opinion whatever you are guessing it is; it was because I did not feel that he had the experience and facts to support his opinion. Thus, I was in total agreement with K's response to the recent legislation in California regarding players' rights to market their images under certain conditions. Credibility is a function, in large part, of qualifications. K's qualifications justify reliance on his opinions regarding the NCAA. In my mind, Bilas's do not.
Finally, the fact that I listed K as a supporting source for the way I feel, does not mean I that I cannot credit an opinion which differs from mine which comes from someone who is qualified to express it.
Finally, your last paragraph perfectly describes the situation during the impeachment proceedings wherein Adam Schiff would not allow the Republicans to call their own witnesses, limited the scope of their cross-examinations of the witnesses who were called, and refused to call witnesses whose testimony would have been unquestionably relevant, to include the alleged "Whistleblower".
