Welp...apparently now even gambling on your own team is not sufficient to lose college eligibility to....extort Donor money...I mean make legitimate NIL compensation.
Regardless of what you think of the whole situation, I think even the most stringent Pro-player advocates have to admit at this point this is too far and clearly bad for college sports.
Letting judges (some whom are clearly not without bias) set the standard for what is and isn't permissible is lunacy.
Like it or not, College sports needs the NCAA. Many of their rules are logical and make sense...i.e. not letting players gamble unfettered for years, then making an asinine legal argument that only playing football for Texas Tech will help them beat their addiction.
The lack of any actual consequences here, will only further encourage players to get involved in gambling schemes. Next step is a Rewind to Point Shaving scandals.
Comments
I don't understand how random low level college athletes have been charged by the FBI for betting on their own teams but that this guy is free and clear.
Let alone...
per Dan Wetzel article, including two bets against his own team that Sorsby testified he didnt recall making.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49001190/brendan-sorsby...
Remember when Alan Tisdale was suspended for half a season because he made a small bet on the NBA Finals and then told on himself after realizing he had violated a rule?
Now you're allowed to bet on your own team's games.
We kicked that Temple kid off our [basketball] team before the NCAA sanctions came down just last year....he only bet $437.
It was originally 9 games too
Yeah....
I don't know anything about the legal process here, but this is such a terrible look. Like you said the dude was gambling on his own team. That should be such a simple factor
Besides the legal aspects, there's no appearance of moral standards any more. I dont see Texas Tech stepping in and suspending him (he should be kicked off the team), nor do I see the Big12 doing anything either.
This used to be the kind of thing that got a player kicked out of D1 football and having to beg for a spot D1-AA/FCS team, and the team forfeiting games.
I would applaud Texas Tech if they suspended or just benched him, but they aren't going to do that. Winning is too valuable.
Also crazy that this is who this ruling is happening for. it'd be less shocking if Texas managed to finagle things legally to get Arch Manning back on the field. But this is a transfer qb with 1 year of eligibility left playing for Big 12 school Texas fucking Tech. People are dragging college football through the mud for this dude and this program. I get they have lots of oil money but damn
Yup. That's my issue. Football is more important than rules or morals... At least in Texas... and probably everywhere the makes up Big10 and SEC country.
Texas Tech is paying his lawyers is my understanding so they are doing the exact opposite. They are just as much an issue in this situation.
Let him play, just invalidate any wins Texas Tech has, and that will disqualify them from the post season, and make him ineligible for post season awards.
Let Texas Tech choose to play him then.
Agreed.
The CFP is legally separate from the NCAA.
If they had any stones, they would tell Texas Tech they are not eligible if they play Sorsby.
Unfortunately, no one in the situation is really interested in doing the right thing, it's all about everybody "getting their bag"
Texas Tech would sue, get a friendly judge to rule in their favor and get away with it just like we have seen absolutely everywhere lately.
Rules are only for poor people who can't bribe the judicial system
It used to be that those with the resources had the decency to try and hide that they could buy their way to whatever ruling they wanted and maybe toss an offender to the wolves if they were too egregious
We are reaching a point where it is just out in the open now.
Lately? Lol
yeah - attacking this differently with a simple memo from the B12 and/or NCAA front office stating that they will invalidate all games in which Sorsby participates in might correct this real fast.
Just transferring my comments so other thread can be deleted
Brendan Sorsby had been ruled ineligible by the NCAA after an ESPN reporter showed he had made thousands of bets on college football, including at least 40 bets on his own team. It was only after he was outed for gambling that he produced medical documentation that he suffered from addiction and then attended a 35 day rehab clinic.
A judge yesterday granted his temporary injunction to play this season.
Of all the cases that the NCAA has lost, this is the most ridiculous. Sorsby knew what he was doing was wrong because he didnt place the bets in his own name, he sent money to friends to place bets for him and also put $60K into a FanDuels account under his brother-in-laws name to place more bets.
While I think there is too close a relationship between all sports leagues and the gambling sites, it doesnt change the fact that there were clear rules here that he chose to ignore.
The door is now open for anyone with inside knowledge to place bets beneficial to them and claim a medical issue. Hopefully the NCAA appeals this and wins to shut this door.
1000% and that's what I can't get over here. The line between placing any bet on your own team and point shaving/manipulation is razor thin.
This should be an open and shut issue. And until NIL came into the picture it was.
But now that players are making money, there doesn't appear to be nearly anything that is sufficient to disqualify them. No Other Sports organization operates like this, certainly not the professional ones.
The legal argument is laughable... From the ESPN article:
This is like getting pulled over for a DWI and then arguing that life would be hard because you couldn't get a license again.
The guy knew the rules, willingly broke them and created a network to circumvent being detected, GOT CAUGHT BY THE FEDS, and now he's off the hook???
The Feds just need to put him in jail during the season.
The article I read made it clear this ruling is only applicable to the NCAA suspension and insinuated that criminal charges may still be pending.
Also noted that the NCAA regs here are clearly black and white - there's no gray area for interpretation. Lifetime ban for betting on your own team, period.
Oh I mean insider trading is legal within Polymarket and Kalshi, so this kind of thing was always inevitable
Unless you are a Soldier I guess...
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-soldier-charged-using-classified-infor...
Hot take apparently: this is 100% the correct decision.
NCAA, ESPN, etc are all deeply intertwined with the online gambling companies. The same organizations have done nothing (no lobbying, no contractual requirements, nothing) to suggest that these organizations should be limited. Because the NCAA wants to avoid the employment decision at all costs, they have done no collective bargaining or employment adjacent activities with their athletes, so they too are without recourse.
IMHO, this is very much a reap-what-you-sow moment.
it all needs to be torn down and rebuilt. The games are no longer the main attraction. The sideshow that is the news has now taken center stage.
The sheer volume of sports betting ads during NCAA events are insaneeeee. It was funny to see a couple ham fisted "don't attack the athletes when your bets lose" infomercials crammed in between the draftkings ads.
Yea, this is the point.
With all the data they have, Draftkings/fanduel are able to target users who are bad betters, and feed them bets they are likely to (a) enjoy and (b) lose.
These companies have the data to show that Sorsby is (presumably) spending dozens of hours each week at a college athletics building. There's no reason they couldn't location-gate his activity, or cut him off because he spends so much time near those buildings (side note - if he was winning bets and spending dozens of hours each week inside/near an athletics building, they'd kick him off the app asap).
But these companies will take money from anyone who is willing to part with it.
And ESPN is willing to take money from anyone who will advertise with them.
And NCAA schools are willing to take money from just about anyone.
So the NCAA and their member institutions are okay with these ads being shown during commercial breaks of their product, during the literal broadcast of their product, in the stadiums, etc (we haven't seen a gambling company on a jersey patch yet, but the NCAA has not proactively banned that) but they also want to make sure that their players, coaches, and other non-employee employees don't use the product?
That's wild.
Genuine question - how is this different than NFL, NBA, etc?
The pros are allowed to enforce their anti-gambling rules without judicial interference??
i think this is the correct answer. The pros have federal antitrust exemptions and can enforce their own rules. The NCAA does not.
The NFL acknowledges that the players are employees, and collectively bargains with them. Gambling is one of the things negotiated in the CBA. The players have agreed to:
The NCAA refuses to acknowledge that their athletes are employees, and does no collective bargaining with them. So the players must only obey their coach's rules (which are flexible) or state/US law (which - to my knowledge - don't place limits on who can gamble)
Yeah it's absolutely FAFO -- but it's also objectively wrong and obviously and seriously fundamentally broken when you have this outcome.
This is some twisted logic to me.
The NCAA, and most Pro Sports organizations are also deeply intertwined with a multitude of alcohol producers.
Does this mean that if an athlete decides to pound seven Modelos after a bad game and get behind the wheel of a Hyundai that they shouldn't bear any personal responsibility because the NCAA takes money from both of these companies??
At what point does personal responsibility enter the equation anywhere here?
It's like NIL has turned off any thought that college athletes should do anything but show up and get paid regardless of the circumstances.
When the opposite should be true, when you're playing to get paid, the expectations and burden of responsibility should go up, not disappear.
The guy gambled repeatedly on his own team. And then all of a sudden when he got caught, he got contrite and hid behind the "medical condition" rationale
100% Lifetime ban. There's no other argument that makes sense.
And if anyone truly cares about the effects of gambling app availability to young men (which is a huge, largely ignored problem), then not punishing this guy only subverts any effort to demonstrate for them the gambling can completely wreck your life.
But if he pounded 7 Modelos before the game, would that be considered point shaving?
But seriously, I agree with your take. The rule is clear and he chose to violate it. Now he wants to avoid consequences. If good still prevails in this world, the NCAA should win on appeal.
Lets check the justices on the appellate court the Seventh Court of Appeals of Texas in Amarillo....
Chief Justice Judy Parker.....from Texas Tech University School of Law
Justice Lawerence Doss....received his J.D. from Texas Tech University School of Law....current Treasurer of the Texas Tech University School of Law
Justice Alex Yarbrough.....Texas Tech University School of Law
Justice Laura Pratt....magna cum laude, from Texas Tech University School of Law
yeah this should go well
Every now and then, I have hopes that people can put aside politics, parties, etc and actually rule on law.
"At what point does personal responsibility enter the equation anywhere here?"
I'm old enough to have lived at least 4 decades, getting close to 5, where I was old enough to really understand the concept of personal responsibility and consequences of it. Sadly, with almost every passing year, we seem to get further and further from it. Things that parents would have smacked you so hard you would not sit for a day or your nose would be on the back of your face like after Elmer Fudd shoots Daffy Duck in the beak are today accepted or even defended. Remember the Philadelphia area coach trying to defend his players for stealing in Florida and that they should be allowed to play?
This is just 1 more symptom of that rot.
Not only did he want them to play, he wanted the charges for shop lifting to grand larceny dropped. He thought it was wrong to charge minors for stealing when they were caught red handed by security videos.
Yeah, it was disgusting. But honestly, not terribly surprising. With Philadelphia the way it is, he was probably shocked that the kids had any consequences. There were interviews later on here on the local news where the coach backed off and said he hopes they learn that there are consequences and he was deeply disappointed and, blah, blah, blah. That was all only after he was slammed for his comments.
Yeah, like the parents had to schlep the kids back to Florida for their trials and sentencing. Even if they plead out they are going to arrest records.
Another incident to think about...Liangelo Ball got suspended at UCLA for an entire season for stealing sunglasses while playing an exhibition game in China...he eventually just dropped out of school.
This was pre-NIL, because if it happened now, there would have been an immediate lawsuit filed and the case shopped around circuits until they could find a friendly judge who would rule that he would be "economically damaged" by not being allowed to play.
Again, the more salient point here is 99.7% of these players will never play pro what lessons are we teaching them as 18-24 year-olds? That the world owes you money just for showing up? That consequences only matter if you are a 3rd stringer or play D2?
Definitely lessons that will carry them far going forward...
So a smattering of thoughts that sort of address most of your points:
But if someone has a gambling addiction, they're not going to say 'oh look that slightly above average QB who played on 3 different teams got kicked out of school for gambling. Maybe I shouldn't gamble' - the individuals being targeted here aren't thinking logically.
I used to be a very pro-legalize gambling apps, but I've really changed my stance recently. After learning more about how they operate (both technically and organizationally) it just really makes me uncomfortable. Which kinda sucks because I've always liked gambling but now I feel very conflicted about giving these businesses my money.
If you find this topic interesting, two things I really enjoyed:
Look, I'm not going to spend a ton of time debating the novella you posted, but when literally 99.7% of college football fans, opposing ADs, and even the Conference Commissioner are not supportive of the decision, you know you are on the wrong side.
You can't possibly believe that because TV Networks freely advertise Gambling Apps during CFB broadcasts that individual players are not at any fault for knowingly, repeatedly breaking Gambling Rules that have existed for decades.
It's not a hot take, its just an extremely illogical one. I feel like Skip Bayless is on the other end here.
Sorsby absolutely knowingly broke rules. But the institutions that made those rules have failed to make those rules enforceable because for decades now, they have prioritized making money over staying true to their alleged values. Now they are paying price for it. This entire fiasco could've been dealt with outside of courts if the ncaa member schools weren't so stubborn for so long.
Btw - there's zero chance ttu was ignorant about Sorsbys addiction. They knew what they were getting into before taking him out of the portal. Thy didn't care then, they just care now bc they're getting fucked. And I fully support the other schools for refusing to play ttu.
and this is the unfortunate truth. Legally speaking, Sorsby didn't break any laws. He broke institutional rules (not laws), and now a judge has found that the legal argument made by Sorsby's attorney was sound and that an injunction was warranted.
I hate this.
However this is the bed that the NCAA, athletic conferences, universities, and the Mouse have been making for years and it has now resulted in this train wreck of a situation.
The really unfortunate part is that I expect this to get worse before it gets corrected, if ever.
Preach brother.
I firmly believe Sorsby is doing some that he knows is wrong (not unlike an alcoholic knowing it's wrong to get in a car a drive when intoxicated. However, unlike an alcoholic he didn't actually put anyone's safety at risk).
Anyways i cant sit here and act like he is the only (or even most) culpable party. And there is ZERO effort to go after the betting companies, the NCAA, or TTU (until peer programs started speaking out/making threats).
I'm not going to stand here and say I'm happy that sorsby is going after those other parties, but I'm certainly not disappointed.
Props to the other ADs/coaches going after TTU.
Wouldn't having access to non-public information and betting on a result whether you are using that information or not be illegal? Insider trading is rarely punished but it is illegal.
He is also under 21 and placing these bets.
I'm surprised the third parties aren't in trouble from a legal perspective either. It would be similar to buying a minor alcohol and then them going out and getting a DWI.
Most of the time they are trying to chase the little fish to the bigger fish. So the guy taking his bet (outside "legal" means" won't be punished if he gives up his bigger fish. And these things take time, so it could be years before they even attempt to charge someone else.
Umm have you not heard of Polymarket?
It's technically against their ToS. Definitely something they're enforcing uniformly and without problems.
He used fake accounts and used his brothers to place bets for him. How is that not fraud?
The first part of this statement is patently false. The NCAA Bylaw 10.3 on Gambling is remarkably clear regarding gambling on any NCAA event and a permanent ban for any betting on ones own team. And the Conferences and school are all required to educate every player on the Bylaws, monitor, and self-report any suspected violations. Suggesting that they are in bed with Gambling Operations is (at the very best) disingenuous.
Regarding ESPN, yes, they and nearly every other broadcaster have a plethora of Gambling App ads during nearly every bit of Programing including NCAA Sports. But the NCAA has zero control over advertising during non-NCAA-controlled events (i.e. March Madness). ESPN, Fox and others sell their ad time to the highest bidder. Alcohol producers, Car companies, and Gambling companies are all heavily featured.
But this is utterly irrelevant to an individual player making a decision to knowingly break Bylaws. To make a leap of logic that because ESPN airs Gambling App commercials that they somehow have some vicarious liability for Brendan Sorsby Gambling 60,000 times is utterly ridiculous.
Its the same kind of leap of logic that one would have to take to be convinced that using Sports Gambling as a treatment for anxiety makes even one iota of sense.
Sometimes the world needs to call a spade a spade and the truth here is that Sorsby got caught gambling then scrambled to create an illusion of remorse and used a P.R. team and lawyers provided by Texas Tech Boosters to concoct a story that was nothing but utter bullshit.
Amen
We seem to be entering (in?) an era when any semblance of personal responsibility can be easily explained away by the simple pressures of society and consumerism.
How can you say this is a personal responsibility issue when Texas Tech is doing everything possible to keep this kid eligible?
Why do we not
askexpect our institutions to be equally as responsible?Holy shit dude.
Sorsby personally chose to gamble perpetually using a "patsy" account to do so. In doing this, he tacitly acknowledged that what he was doing was not permissible. He understood it was his responsibility to not do this, yet he personally chose to do it anyways.
His own personal decision to do this is the only reason his eligibility is in question in the first place.
Beyond just choosing to gamble, he made the conscious, personal decision to gamble on his own team.
If he placed 60 or 60k bets on NBA and MLB games, this is a non-story.
There is no one else here to blame but Brendan Sorsby. Period.
No institution, not Indiana, not Texas Tech and certainly not the NCAA forced him to choose to gamble. They, in fact, discouraged him from doing so, yet he personally chose to ignore this.
At this point, Texas Tech probably has already paid out some portion of his NIL... and there is probably at the very least some effort to prevent losing out on their investment.
Beyond that, Sorsby is an adult who has every option to ignore Cody Campbell et al. and enter the NFL supplemental draft, acknowledging that what he has done questions the Integrity of every competition he's involved in going forward.
But I forgot, he's a college athlete and deserves no scrutiny of his behavior whatsoever-- just a bag of money and a free lawyer every time someone refuses continue to pay him to play.
Its the difference between true contrition and "going through the motions" while hiding behind a dubious mental disorder in order to keep paychecks rolling in.
Sorry but Texas Tech as an NCAA member institution agreed to follow all NCAA rules. They are actively working to subjugate the NCAA rule. They should have a morals clause that would allow them to terminate both NIL/Rev Share agreements with Sorsby. If they dont, they deserve to take the hit. If they do and are choosing to NOT terminate, it shows a complete lack of integrity. Choosing to support Sorsby with recovery doesn't require they plan to play him yet that is exactly what they are pushing for showing Ws are more important.
Hopefully the other conferences follow through with banning Texas Tech, hopefully the Big 12 considers expelling them. Leave them out in the cold. How much would that cost them? Significantly more than paying Sorsby to go away just in lawsuits to try to force their way back in.
Agreed fully...
Texas Tech, LSU basketball with Will Wade's semi-pro team, and Alabama basketball who started the Bediako mess all deserve to be criticized. Pavia for his ridiculous "JUCO doesn't count" argument can be thrown in there too.
But when you have Courts that knee-cap the NCAA such that there are essentially no rules, you leave plenty of room for bad actors to exploit a "system" that really only comes down to finding a friendly judge.
College Sports needs a Regulatory body, period. The NCAA was and is far from perfect but chaos is not a plan. Having unrepentent gamblers and 25 year old NBDL dropouts being paid to play College Sports is not a sustainable plan. Expecting schools to police themselves clearly isn't a plan. Having judges who are alumni, donors, and season ticket holders in charge of college sports is not a rational plan.
Look, even from the athlete standpoint this is capricious and unfair. How is Brendan Sorsby's mental health argument valid to maintain eligibility when Chandler Morris' was not? (For the record, both were clear bullshit). And Diego Pavia successful when Joey Aguilar was not? It's just a roll of the dice and about shopping your case to the right judge.
There needs to a governing body with the teeth to maintain rules on eligibility. Whether you call at the NCAA or something else doesn't really matter.
Honestly Pravia had the best case of them all not because of his argument that he lost money but that the ncaa allowed 4 seasons to play and the juco league isn't the ncaa. So he got an extra year to play 4 seasons of ncaa football. Its also why the ncaa is trying to go age based. He still suck though.
That particular point wasn't necessarily about the merits of Pavia's argument (which I think were poor) but more so the fact that Aguilar essentially made the same argument with different results.
If someone is really an advocate for the players, they should be an advocate for a system that treats them equally. Not one that delves out decisions based on who can afford the best lawyer and manipulate the system to get their case in front of the friendliest judge.
Why isnt it BOTH?
Sorsby was wrong and deserves to take the hit for personal responsibility.
Texas Tech is wrong for pushing to let him play violating an NCAA rule they agreed to as a member institution.
It absolutely is both!
But (at least in my bubble) Sorsby is getting about 99% of the blame. No one is talking about anyone else involved.
I'm gonna guess he is the one getting 99% of the blame because he is the one who did it. Sure TTU or any other institution should be better. I agree that it is both.
But there'd be no issue if he hadn't done this. It started with him. This wasn't some joint thing where he and some other institution teamed up to break the rules that kicked off this whole thing.
THANK YOU!!!
Bob goes to convenient store and buys a case of beer. Proceeds to drink half the case then decides to hop in his car, gets busted for DUI.
Who do we blame here?
The convenient store clerk who sold Bob the beer? The Brewing Company that created the beer that Bob drank? The TV Network that aired commercials with fun, attractive young people drinking the same beer that Bob consumed? The car company that manufactured the car that Bob drove drunk? Bob's Attorney who argued for the lightest penalty possible for Bob?
Or Bob who knew what he was doing was wrong yet chose to do it anyways. Sorsby is Bob here. This isn't a hard concept.
We do hold bartenders accountable if they over-serve someone. Dram shop laws are a thing...
In the sorsby case, he (sorsby), TTU, and the gambling companies are all acting irresponsibly/unethically IMO. I know Sorsby was using his BIL's account to place bets, but he was doing it from his device.
I have a friend who was kicked off the apps for being too good at betting, and beating the house over and over again, so he has mules who place bets for him. The companies don't give him or his mules 165 bets - he's getting between 3 and 35 before getting kicked off and/or has his max wager limited.
To me, this is no different than cigerette companies hiding information on addiction, or how Meta and YouTube were recently found to be negligent.
EDIT: friendly reminder that prize picks flagged Sorsby and stopped him from creating account in 2025 - The attempt triggered an alert from ProhiBet, an app-monitoring software installed on all NCAA student-athletes' phones (source). So UC knew about this. Prize Picks knew about this. Other schools/companies could have figured it out and didn't care to.
And this happens very rarely as the legal threshold to prove such is quite high. Essentially it has to be proven that the bartender knowingly served someone who was clearly and obviously intoxicated. Establishing this without doubt would commonly require a witness to testify to the offenders obvious intoxication.
Can you prove this as factual? Yes, the Big12 requires Student Athletes to download ProhiBet but I can find nothing that states that Institutions are required (or are even able, given privacy laws) to share information on any flags that may come up for individual Student Athletes. Additionally, I cannot imagine any scenario where PrizePicks or any other Gambling Operation is going to willingly provide user information to a University without some legal compulsion (i.e. subpoena) to do so. Could they (shoud they?) do so willingly, is a different question.
Could Cincinnati have been more proactive here? Maybe, but neither of us knows how much Cincinnati knew. Per the best data I can find, there were more than 100 Prohibited Betting cases in 2025 alone, so let's not pretend like having a ProhiBet flag was an extremely rare event.
Moreover, what is Sorsby's responsiblity here? By all accounts, he attempted to be surreptitious while gambling (but was too dumb to use a burner phone) and then continued to attempt to hide the gambling until April when he was essentially compelled to.
Again....where is the personal responsibility and accountability for being grossly deceitful? Oh...wait....I forgot....he is a college athlete....nevermind.
Yeah, except the Sorsby case is equivalent to someone showing up at a bar and telling the bartender they're drunk and planning to drive, the guys friends are saying he's drunk and planning to drive, then the bartender continuing to serve him.
Is Sorsby the root of all this trouble? Of course. But Texas Tech is at fault for this continuing. As soon as they found out, they had the institutional responsibility to kick him off the team.
Interested to know how you come to this conclusion? He was having wagers placed on multiple Gambling apps, using his Brother-in-law's information, and transferring money to multiple friends to make bets for him. His obvious goal here was to make it difficult for any tracking app, Gambling company, or School to figure out he was making the bets.
A more akin metaphor to this would be like having a friend come with you to the bar, repeatedly order 2 drinks and bring you one well after you were clearly hammered. Don't think any bartender can be blamed there.
If Cincinnati did indeed have significant information regarding large-volume illegal betting by Sorsby, then they absolutely deserve a share of the blame, I would say still only a minority, but clearly some. But there has been no credible report beyond "Cincinnati" in August 2025 "being alerted" of Prohibited activity by Sorsby---no details at all about who was notified, of what, and to what degree. I don't think anyone is in a position to make clear declarations about their culpability with the amount of information available.
And with regards to Texas Tech, they clearly knew about his gambling in April, their activity (or lack thereof) since that time is IMHO pathetic. But to suggest that there was a clear, established process or due diligence that they willingly ignored prior to Sorsby's transfer isn't fair or supportable by what is known.
At some point, there cannot be a reasonable expectation that a Univesity provide athletes with a free education, free academic support, free nutrition, free athletic training, free equipment, gear, and clothing and in addition be expected to also be responsible for protecting Athletes from their own vices. What is next---do they have to co-sign for their first Mortgage???
It's wild that you're coming to the conclusion of supporting Texas Tech in this. You're all about "personal" responsibility, but feel like the institution bears none? Give me a break. As soon as it was clear that Sorsby was gambling on his games, it was Texas Tech's RESPONSIBILITY to ensure he never plays a down for them. Instead they're doing the opposite. The fact that you're supporting their decision is insane.
To quote myself: ( you may want to read an entire statement to understand the intent and context)
And with regards to Texas Tech, they clearly knew about his gambling in April, their activity (or lack thereof) since that time is IMHO pathetic
I have zero support for Texas Tech not immediately dismissing him. My point was that the idea that they could have easily detected or known about Sorsby's Gambling when he transferred isn't established or clear.
He clearly wasn't forthcoming or going to be until he was forced to. There was nothing requiring Cincinnati to disclose information to them and the idea that they just could have called HardRock Bet and asked for any information linked to Brendan Sorsby to be disclosed to them is not rational.
Texas Tech is a Bad Actor in the NIL/TransferPortal/NoRules era. They have made it clear that their goal is to buy their way to a Championship. Everything about the way they conduct their Athletic Department is contrary to the spirit of meaningful competition.
But to imply that they could have easily detected Sorsby's activity and simply chose not to is not based on anything evidential.
I haven't read every word of every response, but is anyone claiming that TT's main fault is not knowing prior? All the hate I've seen is for TT standing by Sorsby. They've even started threatening legal action against any school/conference that tries to exclude them. Fuck Sorsby and fuck TT
So..uh..yeah thats the problem. When you blast people without reading the sequence of comments, you lose the context of what is being said.
The comment you referenced was a response to bar1990 vaguely alluding to the fact that because there was some notification to UC in 2025 about Sorsby's being flagged via ProhiBet that Texas Tech could have easily found out as well--prior to allowing Sorsby to transfer. And they possibly could have..how easily isn't known though.
Additionally, throughout the course of this thread I've made recurrent comments demeaning Texas Tech including saying that the CFP committee should exclude them from consideration if they play him at all this year...
Sorry, like I said, I didn't read the whole tread and maybe the tone of your responses didn't translate over text, but I read them as Sorsby bears near total responsibility for the current situation. Again, sorry if I misread.
I don't think he's saying that at all. Maybe he's not hammering on Texas Tech hard enough, but he appears to be separating the offenses as they are related but not the same. The individual did a number of things to skirt rules, regulations, best practices, etc. to do an activity that he knew was not acceptable. Texas Tech may be guilty of not punishing him for doing this, but I think the point is their culpability in his initial action is small. They do own 100% of how they handled the situation based on the how they proceeded once they were aware, but that doesn't have much to do with the initial offense.
Bar them both from NCAA if they put him on the field would be fine with me and likely the vast majority who have commented.
You beat me to it. Sorsby becoming ineligible should have had somebody at TT saying okay, we revoke any further NIL payments and sue him to recover what has already been spent. He signed a NIL contract under false pretenses knowing he wasn't eligible due to gambling.
It can be an issue of personal responsibility and Texas Tech can also be 100% wrong in what they're doing at the same time. Unless Texas Tech was actively influencing the young man to make bets that violate a number of clearly published rules governing the league in which he plays, I don't see how they have anything to do with the original issues. They 100% own how they handled the issues on their end, and I hope there are severe consequences for not simply kicking him off the team, but the two scenarios are not the same.
So the other point to understand here is that Texas Tech inherited this problem.
By all accounts I can find, they were not aware of the gambling until April when they were tipped off by a law enforcement investigative process.
This is when Sorbsy all of a sudden came clean about the devastating anxiety that only Sports gambling could solve while he was at his prior schools.
The kind of crippling anxiety that makes it totally possible for you to throw touchdown passes under intense pressure while being chased around by 310 lb defensive lineman and screamed at by 80,000 fans on the stands....
Now could and should have Texas Tech have handled this completely differently? Yes. Would we all like to think that 98% of the rest of college institutions would have cut Sorbsy loose? Hopefully.
But when there are no rules that are actually enforcable, you leave that decision to the venerable academic institution that is Texas Tech University.
And if anyone thought they were going to do the right thing, I have beachfront property in Alaska for them as well.
But if the NCAA were allowed to actually enforce rules that I think 99.9% of us can agree are more than reasonable, you leave Cody Campbell and his shitty oil money out of the equation entirely.
Cody Campbell showed he is absolutely tone deaf to what's going on by posting on Twitter promoting the Protect College Sports Act that he has been trying to get passed and an op ed he wrote for USA Today as if his involvement in the Sorsby matter didnt happen.
I find this so hard to believe.
The difference between what they know and where there is documentation of what they know.
Okay...but what evidence is there to the contrary??
More so, do we really think even a school with as loose of a moral compass as Texas Tech was going to pledge $5 million dollars to a kid that they knew had a gambling investigation upcoming beforehand? That they knew bet on his own team and would probably be ruled ineligible?
In light of any compelling evidence to the contrary, I'm going side with the established reporting that suggests Texas Tech knew on April 14th.
The opposite explanation that they knew long beforehand, gave the kid the money anyways, and then concocted an elaborate plan to sue the NCAA to maintain his eligibility simply isn't logical, particularly as the outcome definitely wasn't assured.
And even if it was, why not announce all this in January and get ahead of the story, instead of waiting until April??
They found out April 14th, had two weeks to concoct a story and legal strategy then they executed it.
Suggesting otherwise is baseless.
I'm not sure ttu knew he was placing bets on his own team. I have zero doubt that they were aware of the gambling addiction.
Just about every D1 program uses some combination of Sterling/Teamworks/Front Rush to run background checks and validate eligibility on players. They interview previous coaches, people around the player.
I don't think this is the moral failing of TTU; I think it's arrogance to believe they could 'change him' and/or keep it under wraps.
I think the moral failing (for lack of a better term) occurred when TTU said 'we're going to fight to keep this kid - who know broke the rules that we agreed to - eligible so we can do better football'
I think the last paragraph is good and was compounded by their egregiously tone deaf interviews/press conferences yesterday full of false equivalencies. The basis of their argument right now is that the NCAA has done a bad job of disciplining players so their player that clearly broke the rules shouldn't be disciplined.
Agreed. Put them both in the corner. Not the Liberty corner, the other one.
teamworks boy here
I think that statement is true.
The ncaa has no legal means to enforce their bylaws because they avoided collective bargaining, paying their labor market rates, etc. They left themselves legally exposed for decades in pursuit of maximizing revenue under the guise of amateurism, and now, when a problem comes along that they are actually fit to solve, it's too late; they've burnt all of their social capital. They have no choice but to try to get legislation passed in the most divided political landscape of my lifetime.
They probably could've gotten an anti-trust exemptions two decades ago with very friendly terms, and this would all be a non issue. But they held out because they didn't want to revenue share with their labor.
Congrats you played yourself
They first requested an anti-trust exception before the 2005 season. They have requested it multiple times per year since. Congress for two decades has chosen not to act. NCAA has no forcing function on Congress.
I'm curious what the ncaa was willing to give up in exchange for said exemption. Were they willing to share revenue with their labor force, for example?
Were they even asked? My understanding was they got a flat no for at least the first decade because college sports "are amateur" sports.
A couple of thoughts:
1. This is an injunction. It's not ruling on whether the penalty/ban is appropriate, but whether he should be held out of college football while his court case is proceeding. Injunction rulings are based on a number of factors, including: showing a likelihood to win on the merits (doesn't have be more likely than not, but has be better than very unlikely); whether there would be "imminent and irreparable injury" if the penalty/ban was enforced WHILE the legal proceeding is ongoing; balancing of interests; and public interest. Not all factors are equal and the judge can lean on one or another.
2. The injury here is loss of NIL and playing experience. The injury is in fact imminent (happens this fall) and is irreparable (he will be out of eligibility if held out). Essentially, the outcome of the lawsuit would have no bearing on the player because it would be decided too late. The judge leaned on this factor heavily to make his decision.
3. I'm a little surprised the other factors were not as heavily considered, as they weigh against Sorsby. I don't know whether the mental health argument is a winning argument, but I guess this judge found it compelling enough that he decided it was compelling enough that the Sorsby could win the case on this outcome. The other two factors weigh heavily against Sorsby as there are balancing interests to keep gambling out of sports and public interest to keep-insider gambling out of sports.
4. The appeal will be interesting. And I think many powerful entities will support the NCAA here, including NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, etc. I also think the sporting books would have interest to support the NCAA here, but would they do so publicly? They definitely want to keep their partnerships with professional sports and public confidence strong (i.e., confident that the bets are fair and not affected by insiders), so we'll see.
5. I don't gamble because I don't enjoy it. But I say let the schadenfreude go wild. Kalshi should set prop bets on the appeal outcome and whether Sorsby will be eligible? Let Sorsby gamble on these prop bets. And let's also have the appellate judge place a bet. Why not?
This is an incredible idea.
Ah yes, I believe the word the judge is looking for here is "consequences." Used in a sentence like: "The decision of the player to break the rules resulted in consequences."
I wonder how much emotional harm he will suffer when he finds out this is his last year playing football on any type of semi-pro level. No professional team is going to take a swing on a player that bet against his own team.
His lawyers will use that to strengthen their argument of irreparable harm.
I think in this case the harm is already done.
NO NFL GM in their right mind would touch this kid. He's already demonstrated poor decision-making. Add a gambling addiction on top of it and now he's on every GM's "DO NOT TOUCH" list.
He's going to have to go to another country to find work as a professional football player.
Canada isn't far enough for a GM to be interested.
Does Russia have a football league?
in soviet russia the balls foot you
Stunned isnt the correct word as it appears the NCAA is nothing more than a fickle face for a sport anymore. Their legal team is in an unwinnable position as it's not even hard to figure out the judge is fully biased in this situation.
All we can hope is fellow big 12 teams and others quit scheduling and cancel games. Or let them field ineligible players and pray the football gods have a sense of justice and let the trash talk at games begin
Abilene Christian should take the money texas tech is paying them and bet on that the game is forfeited. That could fund them for a lot of years.
Fu(k Sorsby, that is all...
And Texas Tech. He doesn't get to suit up if they don't give him the opportunity
I am a stringent pro-player advocate, and I agree this is ridiculous.
The judge that was initially assigned to this case recused himself due to being a TTU grad. Ken Curry was designated as the "emergency judge", who have less qualifications than typical district court judges. Curry retired in 2012, and most of his work was in property and tax disputes. From what people smarter than me have said, you must prove two things for an injunction: 1) irreparable harm and 2) likelihood of success should the case go to trial. The judge never commented on the second aspect, that the NCAA committed a breach of contract, so we have no way of understanding his reasoning.
All that to say, this case may well have been improperly decided by a less-than-qualified judge (again, going based on people that know law). This is an indictment of Texas Tech, who is going to bat for a player that bet on his own team, but it may equally be an indictment of our legal system.
I am open to hearing opposing viewpoints since this is completely above my head. Unfortunately, even if the NCAA's appeal is successful, it won't be decided until after the season is over.
Good stuff.
The wild thing is Texas tech fans are aghast as to why everyone in college football hates them right now.
Most are, a small portion are questioning why TT chose this hill to die on.
The bad actors of the NIL shitshow era deserve to be shunned. Texas Tech, LSU and Alabama basketball all front and center.
I did learn this morning that since he's eligible they're contractually obligated to pay his $5M, so that does change things a little bit but still think you could get an attorney in there with him and come to an agreement to save face, they're easily the most hated team in college football right now.
Also they have a highschool like schedule this year I'm sure they'll roll through that and get dominated by the first real team they play anyway Sorsby or no Sorsby.
It is likely going to cost them more than the 5M in the long run. Schools refusing to either play them or demand highway robbery levels of money. Their own conference is upset with them. Expect to see the worst schedules, most travel, etc.
I hope it does.
and that may be the angle Sorsby and his legal team are playing. He probably knows he's done and has wrecked his chances in the NFL, and this is his one shot to get his bag. He probably doesn't care about playing, he cares about the NIL money. TT has the donors to pay him the NIL money and make this problem go away immediately, which is a far lower figure than dealing with the long-term financial impacts (lost game revenue, legal fees, etc) of trying to push through this.
Even if he gets the NIL money, I'd bet that he gambles it all way anyways. You can't convince me that someone would do what he did without some level of gambling addiction. Well, hey, at least the lawyers will get their cut I guess.
This is good news. But it is the Big 12 that really needs to say we won't play them in any sport. Hopefully it spreads to them.
If you are caught betting on the outcomes of your own games it absolutely must be a lifetime ban from sports competitions.
I'm a honestly shocked that the casinos aren't pushing for the ban to happen. The absolute last thing they want is public confidence in the legitimately of the outcomes of the games they can bet on to be questioned. That's how they lose a lot of money in the long run, so Sorsby being allowed to play completely undermines their entire business model.
They will take his money as a gambling addict and just not allow betting on any TT games in which he is involved?
Per ESPN, the trial date for this has been set for February 8, 2027. Which is after this year's CFP.
I've been waiting to see where this goes, because there is a real argument that he's injured by not getting to practice before this is fully resolved on the merits. While the merits might be nonsense, no one is hurt by him practicing and then not playing. He would be hurt by not practicing and then getting a ruling that he could play. You can see the logic. The idea that this doesn't get expedited at all, given the nature of the lawsuit, and that the date is set AFTER any possible ruling could have any effect seems pretty fucking shady.
Link: https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49010107/big-12-talk-op...
With the clauses cited in the article the Big12 could impose some very significant penalties on Texas Tech.
Immediate forfeit of any game the ineligible player plays in
Postseason ban
Revenue distribution penalties
Ban from television and streaming
Scholarship penalties
The article said it - the only limitation in what the Big12 could do for punishment is their own imagination. They can make this the new SMU death penalty.
Maybe. But then TTU could sue, who knows how that shakes out. Just because the Big12 isn't implicated in the current lawsuit doesn't mean it couldn't be in a future one. It would also take the other ADs (or whoever the representatives are they send to vote on stuff like this) going nuclear to do that. Not sure how much they'd want to open that can of worms. What goes around comes around and whatnot.
Seems this is the date for Soresby's suit against the NCAA. The date for the NCAA's appeal of yesterday's injunction hasn't yet been set.
If they prevail on appeal prior to the fall, he may be out for the season before having his day in court over the lifetime ban.
Yeah, that's right. But what's the point of a trial date after the season at all? It will be fully moot at that point.
If he doesn't play this season, he can, and likely would, argue for negating the lifetime ban and regaining the final year of eligibility.
Not sure what school would touch him after that, but wouldn't shock me if one does.
I am still angry that Miami and UNC didn't get the death penalty. Miami for boatz and hoez and UNC for academic fraud. It would have been a horrible look for the ACC, but those schools deserved it.
Remember the old Notre Dame-Miami rivalry? 'Catholics vs. Convicts' back when SI was a real magazine that still had real reporters doing real stories.
There was also the Barry Switzer Oklahoma days. Was an article (I think it was SI) with the image being a play diagraming the Oklahoma offense running a play with the defensive players being symbolized by police cars and how the blocking scheme would let the Oklahoma back get through the cops.
...and likely if he plays, he drops the lawsuit at seasons end
This, if the court date stands he will never get a ruling cause there wont be a case.
Hopefully if he drops it, the NCAA vacates all Texas Tech wins
There's an easy way to fix this. Just legalize all betting. Prop bets for every damn player.
The players will have no fucking clue what to do
Late stage capitalism... EVERYTHING comes down to a dollar. That's all that matters any more.
I disagree, this is early stages of changing amateur sport into professional sport.
These are all the things that need to be worked out as the NCAA needs an exemption from anti-trust but it hasn't been granted so, the old amateur control structure is not able to move with the new pay structures.
I think the original comment had less to do about football and more to do about the state of the country
Somehow every discussion topic falls back into politics...
Feels like two side of the same coin to me. Or more maybe accurately, a particular instance exposing a larger systemic dysfunction (feature?) of LSC.
If I wasnt already rooting for Texas Tech to face plant for this, their fanbase significantly reinforced my position with all their deflecting and playing the innocent party on social media today. Heavy does of "we did nothing wrong" and "we supported our guy, which every school in the country would do the same" compounded by "why isnt anyone upset with Cincinnati and Indiana too?"
The topper is denying Texas Tech had any involvement with Sorsby's lawsuit and are "just following the judges ruling".
No where in his ruling did it say Texas Tech must allow Sorsby to participate going forward, it just forbade the NCAA from preventing it if Texas Tech continues to have him.
I think that since the judge ruled he can play, for now, Texas Tech would get sued by him with the exact same suit he filed against the NCAA. TT may win in the end but, they'd have to play him or pay him above and beyond his contract.
Then, when the player loses the lawsuit, NCAA will punish TT for the games he actually hit the field.
Their fans have no clue of the bind that TT is in. There is no good scenario now for TT.
Why did they write such a shitty contract? If this is for NIL then that takes a huge hit if he is not eligible, and honestly, he's tanked his value with this whole thing. TTU should easily be able to break the contact if they wrote it well. Or at the very least pay him less as he just tanked his value.
With all this money being thrown around we've only seen a handful of players getting screwed because the contract is well written, the rest of the time it's either the "school" didnt hire a good lawyer for the contract or they don't care about anything but winning.
I suspect - don't know, but suspect - a main reason for the contracts being written so heavily weighted towards what the players want and so poorly structured from the school's standpoint is that the schools believe (probably correctly) that if they offered more balanced or school-friendly terms, the players would just go somewhere else and no one any good would sign with them. Being responsible in spending NIL money or contracting it only works if everybody else is doing that. If 20, 50 or even 80 schools are being responsible, the better players are just going to sign with the ones that are not.
It varies a lot by school. B10 has a standard rev share contract template and gives schools the option to make the contract between the school, the conference, and the player. The schools still tweak it.
I would also argue that most of these contracts are slanted heavily in favor of the school. From the NACUA:
In the Sorsby case - I think this is just a case of TTU/Cody Campbell wanting to win at all costs. Last year QB play was arguably what held them back. Now they want to fix that.
If Texas Tech didnt insert a morals clause in every agreement then they deserve to take the financial hit of paying Sorsby his agreed upon sum. If they did insert it and are choosing not to exercise their right to terminate it shows they have zero integrity as an NCAA member school. The rule is still in black and white regardless of the court ruling.
From a Texas Tech viewpoint, what would be cheaper at this point? Paying Sorsby his $5M to go away or losing the ability to schedule opponents in ALL sports from half of Division 1 if the conferences follow through. Big 10 met twice yesterday and are expected to meet again today to finalize their decision. SEC is working to schedule a meeting to make a decision. Big 12 is planning to meet to discuss all potential pathways regarding Texas Tech. Jim Phillips has made some comments but have not seen any plans for ACC to meet. Even if none of those happen, the social media shitshow is likely going to cost them as well as there are people at work pushing Texas Tech sponsor companies to drop their agreements with the school.
NIL contracts have minimum playing time guarantees??? There's no way.
Found this on reddit. Texas Tech is denying their involvement to those who call in. I'm just surprised they're not making any public statement in order to get out in front of this.
Reddit: To all Red Raiders and Texas Tech fans that do not support Sorsby or our admin....
Reading into that quote and the email addresses in the reddit post, it looks like
the ADthe AD's assistant is trying to influence the football people under the AD and the AD himself.Seems to me like he could make this really easy and suspend Sorsby, but doesn't want to be seen as doing that for fear of getting sued. This is just getting ridiculous. Have some stones, Hocutt!Edited as I didn't read the quote that closely.
2nd Edit: There's a Georgia Tech grad that commented: "Shoot, I am a Tech grad! Not gonna tell them which Tech tho"
I wonder if TT can put all his NIL money in an escrow account payable if he wins his court case and claim it back if the court case fails.
Either he is market or not, the court case has nothing to so with those payments. Now if there is revenue sharing in there then that you might be able to withhold.
Texas Tech administration continuing to dig the hole, this time the coach...
Not sure whether this or statement from the AD are more cringeworthy.
Either way, it's pretty clear that Texas Tech is not going to suddenly develop a conscience.
They should be sanctioned into oblivion.
If only we had an authority with a neat 4 letter acronym who could dole out punishments to shitty rogue programs....but nah, we decided to ditch them for a random assortment of county judges to set our rules.
Completely agree...the AD statement was such a crock
What a bunch of BS. To be clear, addictions are a real issue. Having an addiction should entitle you to receive help to try and recover from said addiction. It does not mean you are entitled to avoid the consequences of your actions.
Bingo. This is the part that has the mental health community railing at Texas Tech for its approach. Part of recovery is processing the consequences of your actions.
They released a coordinated interview that is even more "we and Sorsby are the victims here and we're just doing what the court says" If you have to release a 20minute scripted video to tell the world you're not doing anything wrong...you're probably doing something wrong
President starts off by saying Sorsby made a mistake. Was the mistake getting caught? Not the 9,000+ NCAA infractions....
If he was suspended just 1 day for each infraction, he would be almost 50 by the time his suspension ended and they are still investigating and finding more.
24.6 years and counting.
Their number 1 guiding principle - "Do the right thing."
Interesting take on what the right thing is in this case.
coffee went up my nose when they said that
what happens when unregulated, uncontrolled 3rd party money combined with ethically loose biased local judicial courts come together? final nail in coffin for the fallacy that is "student athletics". This should be neither surprising nor will it be the most egregious middle finger in the slow death of ncaa. Pete Rose wished he played in the era of NIL.
The NCAA should have been burned down to the roots long long time ago. While I also don't believe this shithead should be playing organized sports I am all for this hopefully changing the future of how the sport is managed.
Take a big swing and start putting up guard rails or kiss college foorball bye bye forever. The NCAA should abandon its case to prevent him from playing and pursue a criminal case against him in conjunction to whichever friendly court they work with. Send a message.
Treat TT like Rome treated Carthage!
How long before a player stops on the 1 and yeets the ball into the stands? This is kind of an all or nothing situation
Will the NCAA be able to enforce next-game suspensions for targeting, or will they too get enjoined? If we can get a judge on the sidelines, is anything impossible? ("Your honor, my client's future prospects would be greatly diminished by a completion rate below 65%. Calling that pass incomplete is an infringement on his economic freedom")
I feel like this whole thing is a live action sequel to The Last Boy Scout.
Starting to think all of this has been orchestrated by LSU to take the heat off of them and put it somewhere else. In the process TTU sold off whatever was left of their soul.
Mizzou will be hammered hard for this
Sorsby's case already being cited by a judge in South Carolina justifying a TI for a Clemson WR seeking JUCO years back.
Now have Texas AG threatening the Big 12(which includes 3 other Texas schools in TCU, Baylor and Houston) with lawsuits if they act against Sorsby or Texas Tech...but crickets on when he plans to charge Sorsby with illegal gambling and wire fraud.
Oklahoma AG assures Big 12 he will act to defend them in event Texas AG sues with countersuits including naming individuals involved such as Campbell, Sorsby's lawyer etc
I realize states can act but unless I am mistaken illegal sports betting by active players is also a federal crime. NCAA, big12 or whoever has vested interest should bypass the Texas AG altogether.
They need the FBI to arrest and charge him before they can argue that unfortunately. He has admitted to it but no law enforcement action has been taken by any state or the FBI at this time.
yeah for sure. but I would think a little lobbying from the upper ups across NCAA could find a friendly FBI office willing to take it on. almost as easily as finding a local judge who has no qualms about blatantly destroying college football.
As I understand it, for it to be a crime, there has to be intent to manipulate a result:
The act of simply placing a bet is not enough for a federal crime (I am not a lawyer, I just listen to too many CFB podcast).
While its hard to show intent, he bet on his own games while using some one else's account. Had he bet on other games and not his own would not make me think there was zero intent, but when you bet on games you play in. At least McPherson at FSU always bet on FSU winning.
He conducted interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities by moving money across state lines to place bets for him. This is similar to what they convicted Vick for.
Yes - the crime isn't gambling; it's fraud. If he had placed all the same bets himself, there wouldn't be a crime.
There actually would but it would probably be minor in results, such as diversion program and community service.
In Indiana and Ohio he was not yet 21 placing bets so considered Gambling as a minor, although he could be charged for every bet.
In Texas gambling is still illegal so he would potentially be charged for every bet placed at Texas Tech.
Right, there were a number of (potentially) criminal acts committed if you follow the money.
Underage betting in Indiana and Ohio, but those are likely minor charges-- a DA may or may not care to take time to investigate.
Although the volume of bets could possibly increase the severity of the offense, but I don't know nearly enough about Ohio or Indiana laws and statutes to do more than speculate.
Honestly the place where he would have the most Jeopardy for serious charges is likely Texas as online gambling is illegal there. Because it is known he was still betting while at Texas Tech and was sending money to proxies (presumptively in other states) in order to place bets for him. This could potentially be a serious charge.
Although, given the recent comments by the Texas Attorney General I would highly doubt he has any intent to pursue.
Both the Indiana and Ohio Gaming Commission's have been reported to be investigating
Add the Kansas and Utah Attorney General backing the Big 12
NCAA pushing all members to push the Save College Sports Act because it provides specific controls regarding gambling and eligibility. They believe they will be able to nullify all existing TIs with the Act being passed.
Big 12 filed a lawsuit against Texas Tech today in Federal Court. They individually named the Chancellor of Texas Tech Universities, the Texas Attorney General, President of the school and Athletic Director. Surprised that Cody Campbell was not named as Rector of their Board.
They cite that by refusing to pursue action against Sorsby for his crimes, as their school Bylaws state that gambling requires probation or expulsion, they aren't even following their own school requirements.
Haven't found a copy of the entire brief yet but glad to see the Big 12 followed through and love they entangled the Attorney General that threatened them.
the recruitment battles of the next decade are going to center around jurors
I hate the college football has devolved into continuous lawsuits
finally, something sensible
ESPN article... https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49072316/big-12-files-s...
While I'm not surprised, what makes (to me) this interesting is that the Big 12 is headquartered in Texas making this response to the Texas state AG's threat last week even juicier. This is also a federal lawsuit :-)
Yeah AG thats running for Governor with Cody Campbell's backing.
By threatening Big 12 he also threatens 3 other Texas schools. Baylor, TCU and Houston are all Big 12 members.
Don't think he thought it through much but he has his own criminal history to show that is norm for him.
Yeah... Google and Wikipedia had quite a bit to say about the AG's shady background.
Amazing. This bravo levels of drama. I love it.
I personally love the fact that they referenced they aren't even following their own Bylaws. I want to see them try to defend the fact that they are ignoring their own requirements.
If they arent filling their own bylaws then it sounds loss od institutional control and the NCAA can out a show cause on the coach
... which will be great until a local judge gets involved and places an injunction on the head coach's termination because the termination will cause irreparable harm.
It also wouldn't surprise me if TTU re-writes their bylaws to retroactively skirt this issue.
There are employment contracts there and you want a texas judge to say a company can't fire some one, thats going against how the state runs.
NCAA filed its Emergency motion for an expedited Appeal of the Sorsby TI today as well
We did it! We saved college sports!
https://www.on3.com/news/brendan-sorsby-texas-tech-mutually-part-ways-af...
I guess he's just going to file for the supplemental draft, deadline is 22 June.
Edit: saw this tweet
Updated: His application has to be approved by the NFL. If it is, he is not allowed to withdraw his name but seeing how he loves to sue the NCAA wouldnt put it past him to sue for his eligibility again if he goes undrafted
Realistic chance any NFL team even gives it a second thought?
ZERO after this shit show.
That's what I don't get I don't see any teams no matter the desperation of the NFL taking a flyer for this. I'd also ask if the NFL will allow him to enter or if they would even flag the gambling issue?
Seen alot of speculation on the NFL treating him like they treated Terrelle Pryor. Prior had to serve a 5 game suspension to start his NFL career because he ducked out on his five game suspension at Ohio State to enter supplemental draft. Not sure what amount they might hit Sorsby with. Would think at least a season since Ridley got that for betting on the Falcons while he was away from the team.
If thats the case even less likely a team takes a risk on him.
Would be entirely on brand for the UFL to play him for a year.
To be fair, if the NCAA said he's out of eligibility, they can't really suspend him. He's the one banging on the door trying to get back in, then decided to go down the street. The NFL may hit him with something, but that is yet to be seen...
My feeling is some team will toss a few dollars at him (may be a pay cut for him, but that's not our problem.) He was projected a first rounder, so he's got a better chance of making it than some others floating around camps now.
As a Browns fan, toss a 7th into the supplemental for this kid. Those are basically throwaway picks anyway. Cost would be minimal. The biggest downside would be spitting reps one additional way just to evaluate the kid.
Interesting hypothetical scenario... IF OU/UT are still in the B12, and Sorsby was on one of those teams, does the B12 react the same way/apply the same pressure?
It's obviously a moot point but a fun hypothetical (IMNSHO).
How much do you think he has bet on himself becoming a Brown?
Isn't there a "first supplemental pick" every year? Is he going to be drafted higher than first?
Not sure if you're joking or not, but the suplimenal draft is a silent auction where teams bid future draft picks on eligible players. I think it's pretty rare to see a team give up a day 1 pick in the supplemental draft, but it's happened before
Wasn't joking, was just totally ignorant of supplemental draft procedures. Thanks!
Same here. Had to study the article on ESPN about the draft process. Silent auction is a good comparison. Nobody has to put a first round pick in (and in this case I don't expect it to happen). In reality, there could be a draft with zero bids from any team... or someone like the Cardinals could put a lone 7th round bid in and win. Or if the draft happens and he isn't selected then he becomes a UDFA and can sign anywhere.
Moral of the story: bullying works
Texas Tech announced they are mutually parting ways. Sorsby gets to keep the $5M.
Sure sounds like they paid him to go away.
Few thoughts:
1) This is the right outcome. There is no planet on which Sorsby should be playing College Football again.
2) It's very sad and says a lot about the current state of College Sports that it took this much for the people involved to do the Right thing.
3) A bit Surprised Texas Tech is allowing Sorsby to keep the money without some effort to claw back....are we sure he is getting the full $5mil or just the portion paid so far? Internet rumors suggest he has probably received somewhere around $1.5-1.7M so far...
4) So either Texas Tech truly knew almost nothing about his gambling accusations or knew and were simply too careless to place any kind of mitigating language for loss of eligibility/actions detrimental to the team. I suspect they had a very limited (if any) insight into the gambling and were in such a rush to sign him that they didn't do enough due diligence. It is very hard to imagine they signed him for $5 million, knew about the gambling, didn't specifically address that in the contract, and also didn't sign a "back up plan" from the Portal.
4) Fuck Texas Tech. Regardless of the above, I have ZERO sympathy for them.
5) Cincinnati's role in this could also be fascinating. What they knew and when could put them in significant NCAA Jeopardy--meaning they could be punished, but will then sue the NCAA and then have the punishment annulled by a TRO--there is also strong "internet innuendo" that Cincy was the whistle blower on Sorsby when he left for TT.
6) On to the next Lawsuit---next up on the docket---Players suing to dissolve the House Agreement. Welcome to the new era of College Sports---endless lawsuits occasionally interrupted by some actual sporting competitions. NIL and the Transfer Portal have truly been tremendous for the fans!!
Been pretty promising for VT fans the last few months. Sad as that reality is.
I would suggest that James Franklin has been the source of promise for VT fans. The results and sustainability of the cash inflow are still TBD.
Yeah. What we've acquired is hype. We find out in 2 1/2 months if it's real.
We don't get most of our current recruits without the transfer portal though. Possibly not even Franklin. You can't really separate the two.
Portal/NIL are also the reason we got the most entertaining CFP final four... ever?
I'll die on this hill - The game the best it's ever been if:
NILpay for play remains unchanged from how it is todayPoint #1 - NIL is fine, but what's being practiced now is decidedly not NIL. It's pay-for-play and nothing more...honestly pay-for-showing-up would be more accurate. There somehow, someway needs to be a reasonable framework for how players get compensated and reasonable standardized contracts that are transparent. Maybe the CSC will become that, but so far it seems most are simply annoyed by it and are exploring ways to try to get around it. IMHO we should be able to FOIA NIL contracts to determine what is real and what is not rather than relying on hearsay and thinly-sourced media reports.
Point #2: Agree. But with one exception--for Juniors or Seniors that want to transfer down a level--i.e. FBS to FCS or D2-- they get a 2nd "free transfer" I have no problem with guys who simply want a chance to be on the field and compete, I have significant qualms with guys hopping in the Portal every offseason to field NIL offers.
Point#3: Agree wholeheartedly. Everything about conference realignment has been bad for college sports--ridiculous travel and logistics, killing natural rivalries, and generally making the conferences geographically idiotic.
Eligibility: there need to be firm, enforceable rules. 5-for-5 is fine, I suppose. I don't know why anyone really needs more than 4 years playing college spots but it at least would set a consistent standard.
Do these things and 90% of my gripes would be gone. I'm getting exhausted at this point trying to follow the trail of Lawsuits to determine who can play/can't play/might be able to play until the next appeal.
> I don't know why anyone really needs more than 4 years playing college spots but it at least would set a consistent standard.
Every player that can cut it at the college level but would never make the pros, basically. I totally get that a large number of these players are being told "you have five years of high earning potential and then welcome to the worst job market in decades".
What we view as entertainment and fairness in sports, they view as their livelihood.
When my dad played golf in thr 60s he couldn't play his freshmen year and engineering was s 5 year degree for just about everyone that couldn't take 24 credits a semester which was 95% of engineers.
Also only about 39% us students graduate in 4 years with 56% in 5 years and 62% graduate in 6 years. So 5 makes a lot of sense from scholarship/attending class standpoint.
We already allow 4.3 years of play. Just remove red shirts and be done.
I love this idea. I haven't seen this proposed before.
I think they should also keep the transfer available for graduates who want to go to graduate school.
yes, we should promote getting a degree
The rule already existed — at least in the old system when transfers were regulated. Players could transfer for free to FCS/JUCO provided they had at least two years of eligibility.
I've known about it forever because growing up as a fan of VMI (who generally can't get transfers), we would always play teams in our league that got FBS transfers who could play right away. Needless to say, it did not turn out well. (Though it appears the Keydets do have a few transfers this year... interested to see what they look like on 9/5).
My guess is that when the B12 sued them, they basically 'settled' with Sorsby. "hey kid, this isn't going to work out for us, or you. I, Cody Campbell, am worth billions, so I will gladly throw $2m-5m your way if you just make this problem disappear.'
I have no doubt they would have lost a lot more than $5m if they pushed the issue further.
completely agree
This is ultimately what I thought would happen when he got the injunction. TTU has the donors to make this problem go away, and they did. If Sorsby were smart (jury is still out on that one) this was all orchestrated to get him the $5M, not about playing.
The big question is - what kind of parlay he's going to blow it all on?
Maybe he had a prop bet on himself already. That would have been the "smart" move.
Anyone know the Kalshi odds???
Can't wait for NCAA 27 release!
Makes me want to vibe code an NCAA Lawyer Simulator.
Extra Points should be all over this.
Is there an Oil Baron Fairy Godfather mode? You get all the players you want with your unlimited bankroll? Of course that didn't exactly pan out for Oregon last year.
Now Sorsby's agent is telling the world that Cincy knew all about his gambling and did nothing. Cincy denying everything...
What are the writers of this series going to think of next?!?
Last I checked, Cincy didn't sue anyone to keep him on the field.
Cincinnati is still suing Sorsby for $1M for breaking his NIL/Rev Share deal with them.
Not really sure what the Agent's angle is here....
It doesn't necessarily make Sorsby look better per se.
Seems to lend some credence to Cincy having blown the whistle on Sorsby to the NCAA but waiting until he entered the Portal to do so. At one point, they were Suing Sorsby for breach of his NIL contract there, so it clearly wasn't an amicable parting.
So I guess this is the Agent trying to make Cincy look bad--which if they did hold on to the Gambling info for more than a year before reporting what they were made aware of, that is pretty underhanded.
Lawsuit is still pending.
Sorry if I dont put much credence in the word of an agent that chose to continue representing Sorsby, apparently with full knowledge of what he was doing. He put these allegations out there but provided ZERO evidence to back it up. Color me skeptical. If he knew, the NCAA should seek a way to bar him from representing any NCAA players.
Sorsby in dropping his suit is saying Texas Tech told him they couldn't play for them too. So much for all their shenanigans.
So let's play count the Lawsuits:
1) Cincinnati Suing Sorsby for Breach of NIL Contract
2) Sorsby Suing NCAA to try to Overturn Loss of Eligibility
3) BIG XII Suing Texas Tech and Ken Paxton
One Player, 3 associated Lawsuits--in a 6 month span no less. Who is NIL really helping more....College Athletes or Law Firms???
With zero actual rulings so far. Curious if Big 12 follows through to establish its rights regardless that Sorsby is gone.
I think for every big blow up in eligibility/payment shenanigans we hear about there are probably dozens of instances where a relatively unknown player gets to have a few bucks in their pocket where they would previously be unable to buy a coffee for fear of "impermissible benefits". Most NIL deals are really not all that much.
Obviously there need to be more guardrails, but remember the days when a student on a swim team scholarship couldn't host a summer swim camp for kids for fear of losing a scholarship?
Or the kid on the golf team gets suspended for washing their car by the cart barn.
While this case is a circus, it hasn't harmed the thousands of other athletes that have benefitted from the NIL and loosened rules. I'd dare say the ones hurt here are the ones that decided to attempt to invest millions into a kid in a wildly unregulated market...but they made a conscious decision on their own to do so.
A true NIL would benefit more a charismatic guy like Rogers that was a Fullback that ate through our hearts to become a respected leader and real lunchpail guy.
My comment was meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek and maybe I should have made that clear.
And "NIL" is more of a moniker for this entire era of Paying Players, Unlimited Transfer, and Erratic Eligibility rulings, because one doesn't know what else to call it.
The point is that Rules and Standards need to exist so that we don't have schools suing former players, Players suing the NCAA, and Conferences suing their members as the pathway to enforcing any Regulations.
While this situation may be "extreme"---it's also a clear demonstration of how off the rails that this "system" has become. And it essentially opens a pathway for a player to break any rule that they want and simply sue and posture until someone (in this case Texas Tech) decides the legal bills are too costly to be worth it.
Unfortunately, even with rules, I think with the amount of money being thrown we're going to continue to see a lot of litigation and backdoor settlements. We live in a very litigous society, and rules and laws don't keep people from hiring a lawyer and filing suit for anything they think they can get a dollar for. Watch daytime television or look at the billboards off the interstate in a metropolitan area. We're living that dream.
Agreed. But to be fair, a few lawsuits here and there aren't really out of line. Everyday people bring lawsuits for employment issues outside of the NCAA. The ones involving NIL just get more ink and hype because it's a new thing. I'd guess the percentages of NIL issues in litigation are in line with the rest of society. All this did was give the lawyers a new pool to swim in.
I tend to agree. But NIL "issues" carry far more $$$ than getting fired from a blue collar job for what may or may not be just cause. I think the amount of money and the lack of clear "job duties" make it ripe for litigation.
I also think we're at the high tide of money being thrown and things will settle down over the next few years. There's no way fans, even rich ones, want to take $5M and give it to a kid with a gambling problem that never plays a down. Unless the wild transferring and lack of tangible results tied to compensation changes, I think the wallets are going to start closing up a bit.
Billable hours ain't play nobody PAWLLL
He has to drop the lawsuit in order to enter the NFL supplementary draft. You can only enter the supplementary draft if you are in poor standing with the NCAA or otherwise ineligible.
Because of the injunction, sources be was eligible, so now he has to withdraw the lawsuit and become ineligible again
The draft will be mid-July, so about a month away. This gives him ample time to test the temp of teams interested (or not) and to drop the suit. And I'm sure he has a worst-case scenario of the UFL or CFL. He's already pocketed the $5mil, so that will tide him over.
Not really - he has to finalize his decision by June 22nd (source)
Ah, giddy up. Guess that means he has to make a an adult decision quickly. Although give his track record, it's up in the air.
I mean, the decision has already been made, that's why he's withdrawing the lawsuit.
A coin flip?
I really, really hope his career is over. Gambling on your own team is over the line for me.
I fully expect him to be behind center for the Dallas Renegades next season. After that, I think its a toss-up on whether he'll move on to the Frankfurt Galaxy or join the new, yet to be named EFA expansion team in London.
New Director of Compliance for DraftKings College Division
I've mentioned it before but hear me out...it's a bit Black Mirror coded, but what if there were full prop bets on every single player and the players could place bets themselves too. What happens?
the fans lose
Only if you bet on the wrong horse!
And now the NFL is declining to have a Supplemental Draft, making him ineligible to play in the league until after the 2027 draft. The NFL wanted no part of this whole thing, haha.
Love it but I think
he can sign as a UDFA if a team invites him. He is past all other criteria. There is a rule in the NFL CBA that portion (d) states: "No player shall be eligible to be employed by an NFL club until he has been eligible to be selected in an NFL draft."Will be curious if that rule has ever been ignored, such as an international player seeking a tryout. If so, you can be sure Sorsby's lawyer will find all the examples.
I'm not 100% sure on the rules surrounding it, but that doesn't seem to be true from all the reporting. Presumably they have rules in the CBA about bypassing the draft and then attempting to declare to avoid people skipping the draft process entirely and just signing as UDFAs.
Apparently his lawyer is saying it is illegal and a violation of the CBA and he is going to take it up with the NFLPA.
Can the entire football world get a restraining order against this guy already?
Given that Sorsby is very much a non-NFL player right now, not sure what the NFLPA has to do with it.
That is the NFL owners politely getting together and saying move on we don't want your cheating ass in our league either.
They've had separate international pathways and whatnot in the past (I know Washington had some TE from Chile who never did anything that came in as an international prospect), but I assume this is pretty ironclad in the CBA. It's a pathway that is absolutely rife with possibility for abuse if it isn't. The folks writing these aren't dummies. They don't want draft eligible folks being able to dodge the draft. Breaks their whole business model.
Assume this is the NFL folks in comparison to the NCAA folks writing 'contracts' lol......
Yeah, the NFL lawyers ain't playing school Pawl...
The NFL's letter to Sorsby is a masterclass of some of the rudest legalese I have seen in a good while.
Link
This letter from the General Counsel of the NFL Management Council is a thing of beauty:
Can't drink but will raincheck.
Talk about not mincing words...
I have to imagine hitting "send" on this one felt pretty good
Bravo. Chefs Kiss.
This is pure gold.
Translation: Sorry, kid but being good at football doesn't mean that you are entitled to do what you want without repercussions.
This is what professional sports really is--there are rules, regulations, and standards.
Maybe rather than having college athletes play in a make believe sandbox where money grows on trees and rules don't exist, we should actually set up a regulatory authority, so that when the very few of them that actually have the skills to play professional football transition to that level, the world doesn't smack them in the fucking face.
This was what I thought would happen and why I didnt get the whole he would walk right into the NFL without question. I get it that the NFL is a bit two sided to all the sudden set a standard here but its a bit of a beautiful chefs kiss to see this happen.
For sure, all of the major Sports Leagues are talking out of both sides of their mouths on this one.
But the rules are also very, very clear among each organization. And those players that have been implicated previously--Pete Rose and more recently Jontay Porter and Terry Rozier have been dealt with decisively and severely.
I don't see how the NFL maintains credible authority with the players by letting a Rookie QB come into the league who has clearly broken those standards. Sorsby is IMHO a low-level Starter or Back-up talent to start with.
I suspect the NFL continues to make it very difficult for him to gain entry, he likely never takes a meaningful snap in the NFL and probably is headed to a UFL team near you...
Houston Gamblers seems like a natural fit...
I am enjoying Sorsbys legal team threatening a suit on the NFL to put the cherry on top after this ruling. Billable hours stay undefeated and to try and go up against one of the richest sporting institutions that will have far superior legal power and lawyers to anything the NCAA could even sniff at makes me laugh. Id almost consider letting them have a supplemental draft just for him to go unpicked so he can try and sue for collusion.
Yeap. The nfl leadership cares too much about their brand to let in someone with a gambling issue. If it were any other crime/accusation that didn't involve jail time, and he was actually good enough to play, he would've been given a shot.
I love the fact that they allude he should still be facing criminal prosecution for his mis deeds.
Yeah, I kinda hate that.
This is the league that helped turn Ray Lewis into an adorable figure after he helped murder someone. Jameis Winston is another personality at the NFL relies on who at the bare minimum has made light of sexual assault.
I agree that Sorsby acted irresponsibly and unethically, and I don't have a problem with his punishment(s) but I don't think anybody can look at his betting patterns and suggest that he was ever trying to fix a game. (Simultaneously, I can also recognize that any result from any game he ever plays in again will be tinted).
And despite all that, I think his actions are significantly less reputable than murder, sexual assault, driving under the influence, etc. - all of which the NFL has varying levels of interest in punishing players/personalities for.
I think the NFL took an unusually aggressive approach relative to the "crime" because (1) it was actually a bigger threat to their brand than any of the actual crimes that I would find quite concerning, (2) it's an easy way to score points with the public, and (3) Sorsby isn't that good of a player. (sidenote, I bet the NFL takes a much gentle approach if the player is Joe Burrow or Cam Newton or Caleb Williams or some other quarterback with real potential to be the face of the league)
TLDR I think this is quite a bit of moral grandstanding from the NFL
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but I think there is a core difference in that the crimes of the others are specifically the purview of law enforcement whereas the integrity of the game is specifically the purview of the league. That doesn't absolve the NFL for the way they have blatantly ignored the actions of terrible people if they are good at playing ball.
However, the punishment for those crimes should be meted out by the justice system (theoretically). If the sports leagues do nothing about gambling, it could destroy the entire game. If people stop watching because they believe it is "fixed" ad revenue will dry up and the entire sport could wither and die. A singular player's reputation might mean fans find another team or skip a few games. If every game becomes questionable, it is an existential threat to the entire league. They won't shift to another team, they'll stop watching entirely.
Complete agreement - But they should have said that. Instead of saying:
The league could have said something to the effect of:
Goodell chose to personally admonish Sorsby because it was the easy/popular thing to do. Instead he could have been honest. The end result would have been the same, he just chose to be a grandstanding dick.
I do agree that it is some unearned moral grandstanding by the NFL. However the dickishness feels kind of necessary or warranted after Sorsby and co attempted to make a complete joke out the of NCAA and their rules that they can't enforce. To me, the NFL being so decisive and simultaneously mean about it feels like the smackdown this situation needed to convey a message like "the rules do matter even if you don't like them. you fucked around and now is time to find out"
Sure the NFL is corrupt and all, but i think college sports and fans needed a moment like this
I think that sells the situation a bit short. I think there were several factors here that lead to the overall tone of the correspondence as well as the fact that it was almost certainly deliberately leaked by the NFL to the media.
I do agree that Goodell and the power brokers are extremely protective of the NFL Brand and that played a part here. But you need to look no further than the NBA to see that the dangers of gambling effecting gaming integrity are real. Having anything other than a Zero Tolerance policy is extremely dangerous and sets an awful precedent. Adam Silver has taken a significant toll in the media over the last year or so between the Gambling scandals in the NBA and the obvious Cap circumvention in the Leonard situation----Goodell was making it crystal clear he's not going to be that guy.
Furthermore, I read this not as simply a message to Sorsby but to all of the potential future Brendan Sorsby's. The message was: The NFL will not be used as a pathway to circumvent rules and escape punishment. And let's be honest, all of the efforts of the past 2.5 months on Sorsby's part have been largely just to do exactly that--keep playing football, keep making money, and move on like nothing happened. I will continue to grandstand that the current Lack of any Regulation in NIL and Eligibility in College Football is completely short-sighted and prepares College Athletes neither for life as Professional Athletes nor as Professionals in any other occupation and I see this saga as a clear reflection of that. Sure, you get a bag but once that bag is gone, where are you going next? The repeated uses of the words "accountability" and "responsibility" were not accidental.
Finally, I think anyone looking at this situation objectively has to acknowledge a pretty extreme amount of hubris coming from the Sorsby camp. While not stated politely, I think the major point of suggesting that filing this paperwork with 72 hours to spare and what sounds like nearly zero supplemental documentation was more than reasonable. Sorsby & Co. looked at this situation as simply announcing your intentions, filing some paperwork, and then scheduling some workouts. Long and short, they felt that this was a formality that Sorsby was entitled to when, in reality, the Supplemental Draft is completely voluntary and generally outside of normal operations. The NFL clearly took exception to that. Then you add in the agent comments attempting to throw Cincy under the bus a week or so ago and then the Lawyer yesterday stating that the CBA had been violated (when it clearly and absolutely hadn't)--whether directed by Sorsby or not, the people who are representing him make him appear both ungrateful and unrepentant.
My take: while this could have been done in a much more congenial manner, in the real world when you are trying to peddle bullshit sometimes you are going to get called on it and that's what happened here. Happens to many people everyday who don't have NIL deals so my sympathy is pretty limited.
I was talking to a friend about this – and I think this is the piece that hasn't registered with me. From my perspective, it kind of seemed like every other party in this entire saga demonstrated a great deal of hubris, and the only reason that Sorsby caught backlash is because both fans and the power that be are not use to players acting this way.
Meh if that was the goal then they should've just limited the response to 'gambling is a special time of crime that hurts our brand' - I think that would prevent gamblers more than this.
This is rich, because that historically has been the point of the supplemental draft.
Fair. I get this.
Yea, I get this too. I like i realize that I tend to unwisely hold institutions to a higher standard than individuals. Like I would think the NFL would be above taking unnecessary shots. Guess not.
I certainly think hubris was part of it but I think it's more to do with Soresby expecting the NFL to do as he wants. As the message said he applied late, gave weak arguments as to why, didn't address his legal issues with NCAA or the original criminal gambling issue. Soresby had an expectation that the NFL would simply do it.
I don't think if he was fully honest and contrite it would have meant NFL would open the supplemental but he definitely wouldn't have gotten the dress down. And to the NFLs point he hadn't learned anything and his immediate reaction was to pursue legal action against the league.
I think the other thing that strikes me reading the NFL response is their implication of how little information was included.
While the public doesn't have the body of the application, the implication certainly is that there was little to no detail included regarding a plan to continue to avoid gambling.
For instance, some sort of agreement on Sorsby's part to either continue in counseling, accept electronic monitoring of his devices, or some other concession regarding the League's ability to monitor for any improper activity (or all of the above). He and his Camp have taken the angle that his issues were related to mental health, and gambling certainly has high recidivism, yet it doesn't appear they acknowledged that in any substantial way.
If you take the example of Aaron Hernandez who had a "complicated" college career-- but he agreed to additional drug testing and contractual stipulations upon his entry to the league.
Taken as a whole, I suspect the application came across as abrupt and self-serving without much (or any) contrition.
And while, yes, part of the purpose of the Supplemental Draft is to avoid having to sit out a year, most of the prior examples have been related to academic ineligibility without the additional elements of gambling, repeated lying, and then suing the sports' governing body.
I think the lack of any admission of this by Sorsby reflected particularly poorly upon him.
Ray Lewis and how the Raven's treated him is the basis of my hatred for that team.
I'll probably regret this, but as our resident Ravens fan i'll chime in. Ray lewis isn't some amazing guy or stand up citizen, but it's been made pretty clear he didn't murder anyone based on the google-able articles. Expecting the ravens or the NFL to not advertise him or try to profit off of him was a pipe dream.
He and his associates where involved in a fight where two people died. He flipped on his buddies for a plea deal after he was found to be obstructing justice. It is true the people that died instigated the fight. Obstruction of justice is a pet peeve of mine.
That makes you hate the ravens?
You said it yourself, the two guys who instigated the fight were the ones who died. His two friends were charged with murder but were acquitted in a few hours of deliberation because it was ruled self defense - again because they were attacked by those two guys.
I get it; this isn't the behavior of a model citizen, but i think it's common for people to go "lol he murdered 2 guys and got to stay out of prison because he was a good football player - what a joke of a system" but that isn't really accurate
If you and your friends get attacked on the street in the night, should you lose your job because your friends attacked back in self defense? Again, I know i'm defending an unpopular guy who is no saint - honestly it's just a pet peeve of mine
TL;DR Translation:
1) The NFL will not hold a supplemental draft for Sorsby.
2) The NFL has sole right of determining whether a supplemental draft exists. It's an extreme rarity for the NFL to have a supplemental draft.
3) Sorsby's petition did not meet the NFL's expectations. It is incomplete and lacks the information for the NFL to make an informed decision, including the reasons why the NCAA has declared Sorsby is ineligible.
4) It is publicly known that gambling was the reason for Sorsby's dismissal from the NCAA. The petition does not address this issue or how Sorsby intends to abide by the NFL's policies governing integrity of competition.
5) It is clear that Sorsby is attempting to skirt the rules and accountability.
6) Sorsby can participate in the 2027 draft.
Talk about a good ol' "Fuck off & fuck you" lol
And they left it with a See U Next Tuesday as well telling him to kick rocks until 2027.
CFL ruled Sorsby will not be allowed to play in that league at this time either...
CFL Teams Not Permitted to Sign Sorsby
What a wonderful day.
Couldn't have happened to finer criminal degenerate litigious gambler