Brendan Sorsby ruled eligible despite gambling

[Sibster]

Yesterday, a Texas judge overturned the NCAA's decision to deny Texas Tech QB Brendan Sorsby another year of eligibility because he bet on college football games and even his own team.   

I am shocked and appalled that this happened.   I remember not too long ago that if you were gambling and/or fixing games, you would be banned for life.

What is this country coming to?   

[Sunstroke]

I think the CFP, and not the NCAA, is going to shut this idiocy down before it torpedoes any credibility the NCAA might still have.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Breaking News:  Massive Ice storm in hell.

In other news:  I agree with the NCAA.

[Sibster]

College sports as we knew them are dead and gone.  Now you have athletes entering the transfer portal and being offered millions in NIL in sports that barely generate any revenue.  And you now have guys who bet on their own team and are still allowed to play.

[Spider-Dan]

I think the CFP, and not the NCAA, is going to shut this idiocy down before it torpedoes any credibility the NCAA might still have.

I think whichever court ruled that the NCAA could not deny Sorsby eligibility would rule just as quickly that the the CFP cannot deny Sorsby (or Texas Tech) eligibility.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I think whichever court ruled that the NCAA could not deny Sorsby eligibility would rule just as quickly that the the CFP cannot deny Sorsby (or Texas Tech) eligibility.

How exactly could a judge do that?  The CFP has a very subjective selection criteria as evident by teams going undefeated and still not invited.     

Also, I doubt a judge can order a college football team to play Texas Tech. And several schools have stated that they are canceling all games against texas tech in all sports.   

[CF DolFan]

The NCAA is now run by whatever the teams want to do. They all have local judges in their back pockets to overrule pretty much everything. If someone is ineligible for transfer the school who wants them has a judge overrule it and so on. It's beyond ridiculous. The NCAA is the only billion dollar industry who have no rules to follow.

[Sibster]

The NCAA is now run by whatever the teams want to do. They all have local judges in their back pockets to overrule pretty much everything. If someone is ineligible for transfer the school who wants them has a judge overrule it and so on. It's beyond ridiculous. The NCAA is the only billion dollar industry who have no rules to follow.

The NCAA is going to appeal this decision.   And the appellate court that will be hearing the case has a panel of three judges that are all UT graduates.   That tells me this decision will be overturned.

[CF DolFan]

And several schools have stated that they are canceling all games against texas tech in all sports.   

I don't disagree people are saying that but I'll believe that when I see it.

[CF DolFan]

The NCAA is going to appeal this decision.   And the appellate court that will be hearing the case has a panel of three judges that are all UT graduates.   That tells me this decision will be overturned.

It's already on the schedule and it's after the National Championship. Will have little effect on him.

Edited to say the official trial for the lawsuit has been scheduled for February 8, 2027, well after the 2026 college football season concludes.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

The NCAA is going to appeal this decision.   And the appellate court that will be hearing the case has a panel of three judges that are all UT graduates.   That tells me this decision will be overturned.

They may have all gone to UT for undergrad, but they all went to texas tech for law school. 

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

It's already on the schedule and it's after the National Championship. Will have little effect on him.

Edited to say the official trial for the lawsuit has been scheduled for February 8, 2027, well after the 2026 college football season concludes.

The appeal of the TRO will likely be heard well before the season. 

[Spider-Dan]

How exactly could a judge do that?  The CFP has a very subjective selection criteria as evident by teams going undefeated and still not invited.

Any action that the CFP could take wouldn't have the intended effect if it's not clearly and intentionally retribution for Sorsby.

Like, if CFP excluded Texas Tech but the Red Raiders also just weren't very good, then it's not clear that excluding them is a response to Sorsby, and maybe the CFP doesn't even care about him?  It's somewhat like intentionally hitting a batter in baseball: if it's looks like it's a genuine accident, then you aren't sending the intended message.  You're just giving the opponent a free base.

Also, I doubt a judge can order a college football team to play Texas Tech. And several schools have stated that they are canceling all games against texas tech in all sports.

These programs all have existing contracts to play games, and any school that cancels a contracted game would need to provide a legally justifiable reason to do so.  So again: if the courts have ruled Sorsby can play, they would also likely rule that a school which breaks their contract because they don't think Sorsby should play (or: for "no reason") owes Texas Tech whatever penalties are laid forth in that contract.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Although there is judicial review the NCAA suspending a player for misconduct.  There is no judicial review of the NCAA when they vacate a team's wins.  And they do have a history of vacating wins for considerably minor infractions.  (See UMASS women's tennis championship over a phone bill.)

NCAA's next step should be to vacate all wins of Texas Tech in all sport during the time Sorsby was a student at the school citing the unreliability of the results.       

[Spider-Dan]

Courts tend to look dimly on organizations retaliating against parties that have won judgements against them.

There is a fundamental conflict here, which is that it is impossible for NCAA/CFP/etc. to make an example of Texas Tech while somehow also leaving ambiguity as to what it is that they are doing.  Any action that is taken that is clearly linked to Sorsby will invite a reaction from the courts.

To make this point easier to understand, imagine that this ruling was instead that a gay player must be allowed to remain on the team.  The CFP or NCAA then immediately then coming out and finding some reason to disqualify that team or their wins would be obviously seen as an attempt to sidestep the ruling, and would invite a much worse backlash from the courts.  This is functionally no different (from the standpoint of the court).

You and I can disagree with the court's ruling, but that doesn't mean it can be ignored or disregarded.  If the NCAA or CFP try to sidestep this ruling and punish Texas Tech anyway, it's not going to work out well for them.