Big XII options for sanctioning Texas Tech

[ScottyP]

I am curious what options the Big XII has for sanctioning Texas Tech regarding the Sorsby situation. Tech is threatening litigation for any potential sanctions or penalties. Do you think the conference is able to impose anything? If the conference does nothing, does that tarnish Yormark's legacy as commissioner?

 

[Cyclonepride]

I don't think doing nothing is an option. Their legal team needs to figure out the harshest way to penalize them that would actually stick in court and go with that.

 

[spierceisu]

I am all for throwing the book at them per say but wondering if teams refused to play them, would the TV networks come after the conference for money lost due to the games not being available for TV inventory?

 

[twojman]

I'm going to guess there is something in the by-laws about upholding institutional values/integrity or not embarrassing the conference etc...where Sorsby would be considered guilty and the conference could suspend for conduct detrimental to the conference.

 

[SCNCY]

I am all for throwing the book at them per say but wondering if teams refused to play them, would the TV networks come after the conference for money lost due to the games not being available for TV inventory?

Then couldn't the conference recoup that money from the teams that refuse to play Tech since they didn't hold their end of the contact?

Overall, a lot of lawyers are going to get rich off of this ordeal.

 

[Drew0311]

I don't think it will get to the point that teams will actually not play them. To much money involved to not play a team because of one player. Teams might play under protest though. Not sure what that would do. Maybe at the end of the season they take away all of Techs Protested wins.

The Lawyers will figure something out. Maybe fine them every game they play with him at QB. Probably the amount of money they would make in that game.

 

[SCNCY]

I had a thought on my way home about this. I think it would have been a bold move if Yormark had come out and said something along the lines of Sorsby won't be allowed to play IF all conference sign a contract to ban players for gambling. We all know that the Big 10 and SEC want to play by different rules, and if this happened to them (court ruling and everything) they'd be acting the same as Tech. The Big 10 and SEC are trying to be the good guys here when they are not. I'd like if Yormark called their bluff with the following proposal.

All conferences sign a contract banning playing players who gamble. To enforce this, all conference put money into an escrow account. If a conference fails to ban a player from playing who has broken the rules, the other conference receive a payout from the escrow of the conference who broke the rules portion of the escrow. Conference needs to refund escrow to continue competition. Essentially make the Big 10 and SEC put money where their mouth is.

 

[BMWallace]

I think most realistic is for Tech to forfeit any conference payouts for any games where Sorsby is rostered/dressed. That is max 10 games. And Tech might be fine with that, so long as the have sugar daddy Campbell.

For the post-season, the CFP should just come out and say that they will not consider Tech for a spot in the Playoff if Sorsby is a participant in any game.

 

[intrepid27]

The conference(s) can levy fines for things like court storming or coaches criticizing officials. I'd say a $1M fine for every game you play a player that the NCAA deems ineligible sounds about right.

 

[harimad]

Can’t the conference just suspend him?

 

[WIBadger]

I had a thought on my way home about this. I think it would have been a bold move if Yormark had come out and said something along the lines of Sorsby won't be allowed to play IF all conference sign a contract to ban players for gambling. We all know that the Big 10 and SEC want to play by different rules, and if this happened to them (court ruling and everything) they'd be acting the same as Tech. The Big 10 and SEC are trying to be the good guys here when they are not. I'd like if Yormark called their bluff with the following proposal.

All conferences sign a contract banning playing players who gamble. To enforce this, all conference put money into an escrow account. If a conference fails to ban a player from playing who has broken the rules, the other conference receive a payout from the escrow of the conference who broke the rules portion of the escrow. Conference needs to refund escrow to continue competition. Essentially make the Big 10 and SEC put money where their mouth is.

But would it have even gotten that far? It didn't at Iowa State and Iowa. Based on past experience, I think almost anywhere else they would have just cut the guy and moved on

 

[KidSilverhair]

I don’t know, if betting on games you play in is legal, then putting up NIL money as a bounty to knock somebody out of a game should be legal, too, know what I’m saying?

 

[spierceisu]

Can’t the conference just suspend him?

If the NCAA can't suspend him the conference wouldn't be any different. I do think the NCAA will appeal and win, but I really have no clue any more since this case seems obvious and it still went a different way.

 

[Cyhig]

Double secret probation

In all seriousness, I don't have a legal background, but the Big 12 should do whatever they can to punish TTU to the fullest extent possible. I'd personally be open to expulsion from the conference. It's that serious IMO

 

[ScottyP]

If the NCAA can't suspend him the conference wouldn't be any different. I do think the NCAA will appeal and win, but I really have no clue any more since this case seems obvious and it still went a different way.

The problem with the appeal is that it won't be heard in time for it time make a difference. I listened to the Audible podcast and they said the shortest appeal timeline in history for the court in Amarillo is 4 months, which would be sometime in October.

 

[WIBadger]

Can’t the conference just suspend him?

Maybe? I think they do under the bylaws, but it seems like the court could say that the Big 12 was like the NCAA (a collection of schools) and rule the same way.

My other thought is do you sanction Tech to try and remove Sorsby from the equation. Try to find a way to do it so that he can't seek an injunction. Which I don't know if that's even possible

 

[BoomerClone]

I think TTU truly feels like they hold all the cards and are the top dog of the Big 12. Much like Texas of old. But the fact is, Texas actually held the cards and Tech is a wannabe with a rich daddy. The Big 12 needs to throw the book at them and don't worry about what Tech might do, The SEC and Big 10 aren't going to take in a trust fund baby with zero life skills or they would have snagged them already. So they aren't leaving the conference. Let them sue, eventually daddy's money will dry up.

 

[loyalsons4evertrue]

I just cannot believe Tech is doing this much for a qb who's barely above average....I mean do we think if they had Sorsby last year that they beat Oregon in the CFP? Maybe they actually score a point but their OL being dominated by Oregon's DL was just as problematic as the qb play during that game.

 

[Cloneon]

The players voted to not play the bowl game. If they voted not to play TT, I can not see a litigious scenario for TT which won't dramatically hurt them. I wonder what the players think of all this. Anyone know?

 

[Die4Cy]

I just cannot believe Tech is doing this much for a qb who's barely above average....I mean do we think if they had Sorsby last year that they beat Oregon in the CFP? Maybe they actually score a point but their OL being dominated by Oregon's DL was just as problematic as the qb play during that game.

Well for starters they ****** up and don't have another healthy quarterback. This whole episode is pathetic. The NIL and transfer rulings proved that in the absence of a grant of antitrust protection, any NCAA rule can and will be adjudicated in court. This sport as we have known and loved it is over without Congress fixing it. We are well down the slippery slope.