It's important to note that the trial has not happened and will not happen until after the football season. The Judge issued a Temporary Restraining Order which prevented the NCAA from keeping him from playing.
Big XII options for sanctioning Texas Tech
- Thread starter ScottyP
- Start date
IMO this problem goes beyond sports, and is just representative of the larger problem of judicial overreach in our country.
When you voluntarily join an organization, fully knowing its rules and governance policies, and when those policies don't work in your favor, you should not be able to sue said organization to stop them from enforcing their rules (provided those rules are not breaking any laws). That's just nuts, but where we are today.
A private organization shouldn't need an antitrust exemption to enforce its legal governance rules.
Tech is so obsessed with winning this battle that they can't see they're going to lose the war.
And all for a QB who has a 14-21 career record. Wow.
Tech's AD has been on record he believes Sorsby should keep his eligibility despite wagering on his own team. That's the biggest outcry against Tech IMO. Vast, vast majority of other schools would inform the athlete they can no longer compete with the university
We have seen gambling scandals in both the NBA and MLB in the last year. In those instances, players were suspended from future competition by the leagues. The players did not have any legal avenue to combat those suspensions because they are employees of the league who are bound to contractual obligations.
Because that sort of arrangement isn't allowed and does not exist in college sports, the players are able to go to the courts and claim their rights are violated, as happened with Sorsby.
The State of Iowa would never go this hard for us or Iowa.
We're probably not too far from Tech using Sovereign Immunity a second time.
I'd play hard ball if I'm the rest of the Big 12. Tech thinks they are the big dog now - very similar to what Texas did in the old Big 12. The only difference is, no one else wants Tech. If the Big 10 or SEC wanted them, they would have them already. And now they won't touch them. Yes, Tech may sue the league. But play hard ball anyways.
But the only reason you have that is because didn’t kick him off the team. Something other schools have and would do
I'm actually glad the state wouldn't. Just a colossal waste of resources for the state to be involved in something like this. But Texas gon' Texas.
Can we kick these MF'ers out of the conference? They have done more harm to college sports than any other school. I don't care if it hurts financially at this point.
Im with some of the others in the thought that this is a lot of time/energy for a mediocre QB. I realize that Tech has no one behind him and their 2026 season may depend on him playing but the ramifications go further than 2026.
If only there was some sort of legally binding document that allowed for provisions to be set between two parties about behavior and conduct. That sort of thing really could have helped in a situation like this.
In Tech’s defense, it’s hard to due diligence on transfers in a climate where mass movement all happens within a one or two week span.
I still think ire needs to be directed at the lack of a system/coherent calendar, rather than Tech. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
Now if evidence surfaces that they knew about the gambling issues ahead of time, then I think I’d be on your side.
I'm actually with you on this. People have gotten overly dramatic about this story, and the story has been blown up beyond its proportion by a sports media that are happy to dunk on the big 12 and the school that has the big money to be competing at the top level.
He didn't bet on any games he actually played in, unless new evidence comes to light. At most he was an insider gambling, which is more of a problem for the casinos than any actual game integrity questions, and is something that doesn't go away even if you have 100% athlete compliance given all the non-athlete insiders there are.
The courts don't see it as truly voluntary when that organization controls such a large percentage of the labor marketplace that it is essentially coercion to either agree to other terms or not be able to realistically compete in the marketplace. That is what has been getting most of the NCAAs rules shot down, and will continue to happen until they get an antitrust exemption
You have to view this more as labor and employers than purely joining a sports org.
The TT AD proudly asserts that the university was in no way a party to the legal challenge and decision. That it was 100% Brendan Sorsby vs. the NCAA. So why wouldn't whatever the Big 12 decides to do in terms of sanctions/punishment/etc. be focused 100% on Brendan Sorsby and not TT?
I'm no legal mind but if part of Tech's justification is that "hey, wasn't us" in terms of the court's ruling, how could they suddenly jump in if the conference's ruling was against the individual and not the institution?
I'm no legal mind but if part of Tech's justification is that "hey, wasn't us" in terms of the court's ruling, how could they suddenly jump in if the conference's ruling was against the individual and not the institution?
You think recruiting actually only starts once players are officially in the portal?
That is fair. And there is an alternate timeline where this is all occurring at LSU, which would have been another wild element on top of a bonkers year for them.
That's honestly a fair point. Thanks for adding that context for me.
