Neal Pilson, former president of CBS, testified Thursday in the Ed O'Bannon vs. NCAA case and said paying student-athletes would be dangerous for college athletics.

According to the Associated Press, the former TV executive said sharing revenue with players for use of their name, image and likeness would start a "land rush" of sorts. He claimed colleges would start wildly throwing money at the nation's best football and basketball players, ruining the game altogether.

The trial is set to go into its fifth day Friday, CLICK HERE to follow ESPN's live feed of instant updates on Twitter from within the courtroom.

"I have a substantial concern it would change the fabric of the sport," Pilson said on the stand. "A significant number of people in the public see one concept of college sports being that young people are playing for the joy of the game would convert into a sense that, well, this is just another professional sport."

Pilson said wiping out the NCAA's strict model of amateurism would change college athletics' public perception. The former CBS chief said his job for 20 years was to figure out what sports viewers wanted to watch and why. He said people enjoy college sports because they believe the players are playing for their passion for the game while they attend school.

O'Bannon, the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit against the NCAA, and his legal team have argued that student-athletes on Division I "power conference" football and basketball teams are not playing to earn a degree. They are also arguing that these student-athletes are devoting far more time to their sport than to their academic career.

Pilson was the NCAA's witness and he testified a day after Roger Noll, a Stanford professor emeritus in economics, testified for the plaintiffs. One of Noll's main arguments was football and basketball coaches have benefited from college sports' skyrocketing popularity over the past 30 years while the players have not.

When O'Bannon's legal team cross-examined Pilson, the former CBS leader said he did not have an idea of how much money players would have to make to hurt the integrity of the game. He also said he was not sure if paying the players upon their exit would be as harmful as giving them an annual salary, but Pilson said it would be huge adjustment.

Earlier in the fourth day of the trial, the plaintiffs called Edwin Desser, a media consultant with more than 30 years of experience, to the stand. He said that the media industry already does not distinguish much of a difference between college and pro sports when negotiating TV contracts.

"The telecasts go on the same networks, produced by the same people, and the contracts have the same provisions," Desser said on the stand. "They exist in an ecosystem that is the same. College sports programs and pro sports programs compete for the attention of fans, compete for the attention of advertisers, and compete for the attention of television networks that connect them."

Read more