The college sports world was flipped on its head June 8 when a Texas district court judge granted Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby a temporary injunction allowing him to play for the Red Raiders in 2026.
Sorsby violated NCAA gambling rules by betting about $90,000 throughout his career, including wagers on his own team and teammates while at Indiana in 2022.
The ruling came just days after the NCAA denied Texas Tech’s appeal of its decision declaring Sorsby ineligible. A dangerous new precedent has now been set that most fans, media members and coaches believe is an extreme threat to the integrity of the game.
This is not the first example this year of a player using the court system to override an NCAA ruling. Ole Miss quarterback Trinidad Chambliss did so in March to get one more year under center for the Rebels.
While most legal cases against the NCAA — like Chambliss’ — revolve around confusing antitrust laws in the modern age of name, image and likeness policy, Sorsby’s case is different.
His talented legal team, headed by Jeffrey Kessler and Scott Tompsett, framed Sorsby’s betting as a mental health disorder, claiming he has an anxiety condition that manifested in compulsive gambling. Kessler argued banning Sorsby from playing this season goes against the NCAA’s own rules for supporting players with mental health conditions.
According to ESPN senior writer Dan Wetzel, Texas district court Judge Ken Curry’s ruling wasn’t that Kessler’s argument was better than the NCAA’s. Rather, Curry found denying Sorsby the opportunity to play before his argument is heard in court will cause “irreparable harm.”
This is how the loophole works. Sorsby’s court date is scheduled for February 2027, two weeks after the national championship. By then, the arguments won’t matter. The season will be over, and his eligibility will be exhausted anyway.
The same is true for the Chambliss case. By the time the legal process runs its course, it’ll be too late.
“The NCAA is now the only known sports governing organization on Earth that has been barred from punishing someone for betting on their own team,” Wetzel wrote.
Few people appear to respect the NCAA’s law enforcement anymore. Players and lawyers know they can use the slowness of the legal system to draw their case out and get what they want. It’s not a foolproof plan, but it’s worked enough times that it’s become common practice.
When the news of Sorsby’s legal win came out, the college football world was in disbelief.
Florida athletic director Scott Stricklin said he was “stunned” and referenced the 1919 MLB Black Sox Scandal, where players on the Chicago White Sox accepted bribes to lose the World Series to the Cincinnati Reds. Texas Christian University coach Sonny Dykes asked, “How is anyone ever going to trust the outcome of a game again?”
Schools like Nebraska and Georgia have instructed coaches to cancel scheduled games against Texas Tech — not just in football, but in any sport. It wouldn’t be surprising to see more schools follow suit.
The bottom line is this: Brendan Sorsby’s legal team has gotten away with the sports equivalent of murder. It is now reasonable to suggest any player can gamble on their own team — or break other rules, for that matter — and cry mental health disorder to avoid punishment.
With the legalization and seamless integration of sports gambling in recent years — especially targeted at high school and college-age men — it was only a matter of time before a scandal of this magnitude brought the integrity of sports into question. Yet this somehow feels like we’re only scratching the surface.
While Sorsby’s actions and subsequent lack of punishment reflect another spoke in the wheel of the NCAA’s loss of control as a governing body, it has much more deep-rooted implications for the future of sports integrity in general.
Cases like this can legitimately blow up the whole industry — and they aren’t going away anytime soon.
Contact Brayden Schultz at bschultz@alligator.org. Follow him on X @schultzbrayden9.
