The legal battle over the eligibility of Brendan Sorsby has begun.
Via Pete Thamel of ESPN, Sorsby’s lawyers have filed a lawsuit against the NCAA seeking a court order restoring his eligibility for the 2026 season at Texas Tech.
The suit, filed in Lubbock County, Texas, accuses the NCAA of having a “deeply hypocritical” position on gambling, and of “wholesale abandonment of its obligations and duties to promote the well-being” of Sorsby.
“The NCAA has weaponized his condition to shore up a facade of competitive integrity, while simultaneously profiting from the very gambling ecosystem it polices,” Sorsby’s lawyers allege in the complaint.
The use of the term “irreparable harm” in Thamel’s article suggests that Sorsby wants a preliminary injunction that restores his eligibility while the litigation moves forward.
The case was filed despite the NCAA not yet making a final decision about Sorsby’s eligibility. Via Thamel, the NCAA said Monday that it had not received a reinstatement request from Sorsby. Still, it sounds as if the NCAA is inclined to not let him play.
“The Association’s sports betting rules are clear, as are the reinstatement conditions,” the NCAA statement said. “When it comes to betting on one’s own team, these rules must be enforced in every case for the simple reason that the integrity of the game is at risk. Every sports league has these protections in place, and the NCAA will continue to apply them equally because every student-athlete competing deserves to know they’re playing a fair game.”
Thamel notes that Sorsby’s lawyers had a call with the NCAA on Friday, May 15, during which the NCAA said it is requesting that “precise amounts that were bet and how much money was won or lost on certain bets” be included in a set of stipulated facts for his request for reinstatement.
Sorsby currently is receiving in-patient treatment for a gambling addiction. In an affidavit filed along with the complaint, Sorsby admits to betting on Indiana while on the Indiana roster. Sorsby’s lawyers contend that his violations of the rules “undisputedly did not raise any integrity issues” because he did not bet against Indiana’s interests.
The filing seeks a hearing by June 15, citing the June 22 deadline for applying for the NFL’s supplemental draft.
“The NCAA has manufactured an impossible bind: it delays its reinstatement decision while the NFL deadline closes in, forcing Mr. Sorsby to choose between surrendering college eligibility he wants to retain, while risking the loss of a full year of competitive football entirely,” the filing contends. “This is not equity. Mr. Sorsby has diligently pursued every alternative avenue for relief, but he is not obligated to continue doing so in light of the irreparable harm he now faces.”
By suing in a Texas state court in the county where Texas Tech is situated, Sorsby gets the built-in advantage of having the question resolved by an elected judge who may be inclined to issue a ruling that helps the local college team. Indeed, the lawsuit points out that, without a clear ruling on Sorsby’s eligibility, “the program cannot plan, prepare, or build around its starting quarterback.”
In other words, a ruling for Sorsby helps Texas Tech. Which makes the local citizenry happy. The same local citizenry that elects the judge who will resolve Sorsby’s case.
Read the full article here
