Big XII options for sanctioning Texas Tech
- Thread starter ScottyP
- Start date
While not gambling it's still on the eligibility front, LSU's MBB team has quite a few players that are likely to be deemed ineligible to play. So, they will get their turn again to be the center of attention. Maybe the governor will get involved again.
I heard an interesting take from Andy Staples related to this point. He made the case that conferences might have better luck in the courts when it comes to banning players, because it can be argued that an individual conference doesn't control a majority of the labor force.
I doubt the Big 12 would have the desire to fight those legal battles, but it could be interesting to see what happens if someone tries it.
This kind of flies in the face of the comments Texas Tech isn't doing this, that it is all Sorsby suing the NCAA.
Tech's offense is not that they have a player with evidence of gambling on games while he was on the team. It's that they will not abide the NCAA's ruling that is clear from the bylaws of the organization, of which they are a member, that such a player is not eligible to participate.
This should have been over 20 minutes after the NCAA made their ruling.
Bingo. I've got a good friend whose son was a really good FCS D Lineman. He got recruited on the field after games for two years. There's just no shame.
NOT AN ATTORNEY, JUST MY .02
Tech's judge shopping ultimately found them one that would put an injunction on the NCAA until after the college football championship game. The only way imaginable to expedite the courts is to defy their order. That requires the Big 12 and NCAA to put teeth into a violation of this type and force an immediate hearing that can be appealed. I think Yormark has to issue a new bylaw that makes it possible for the league to vote by supermajority to reverse wins for violating this kind of NCAA bylaw, and dare Tech to play Sorsby, and see what Tech decides to do.
So much of the game Tech is playing right now is, "we are supporting the player, we don't need to do anything right now" treating it as a hypothetical which may be factually true but is quite full of ****. This only comes to a head if they play him. It is reasonable for the Big 12 to establish consequences for this hypothetical situation before the season just to make things perfectly clear.
Texas attorney general claims trying to do anything like this would lead to the state taking them to court, but it may not even be a legal issue. The conference establishes all obligations and penalties for its members by vote.
Tech's judge shopping ultimately found them one that would put an injunction on the NCAA until after the college football championship game. The only way imaginable to expedite the courts is to defy their order. That requires the Big 12 and NCAA to put teeth into a violation of this type and force an immediate hearing that can be appealed. I think Yormark has to issue a new bylaw that makes it possible for the league to vote by supermajority to reverse wins for violating this kind of NCAA bylaw, and dare Tech to play Sorsby, and see what Tech decides to do.
So much of the game Tech is playing right now is, "we are supporting the player, we don't need to do anything right now" treating it as a hypothetical which may be factually true but is quite full of ****. This only comes to a head if they play him. It is reasonable for the Big 12 to establish consequences for this hypothetical situation before the season just to make things perfectly clear.
Texas attorney general claims trying to do anything like this would lead to the state taking them to court, but it may not even be a legal issue. The conference establishes all obligations and penalties for its members by vote.
I heard that the appeal is set for Feb, 2027. GREAT . . . . . . . Just in time to matter.
My guess is the QB ranks behind him is pretty thin. Tech is really high on Sorsby, like Playoff and maybe Nat Champ high.
I agree. I was never crazy about him as a player, but he was the top QB prospect in the portal IIRC, and I'd imagine held multiple high $ offers outside of Tech.
ISU and Iowa also didn't try. They made no effort to rock the boat whatsoever.
The consistent trend throughout time with the NCAA, and especially nowadays, is that those who cooperate the least and fight back the most tend to win out in the long run. If Sorsby is successful, he'll be the blueprint for schools to follow for next time.
While they may not be legally-culpable, they're still the enabler overall. I'd like to call it short-sighted by them, but frankly, I'm not convinced it is. As soon as Sorsby plays a game, they'll be proven correct.
Along those lines. Outside of a conference or individual school denying someone their civil rights, what power would a court have to overrule a decision by a conference enforcing their rules written and agreed to by all member schools?
Tech as a Big XII member, agrees to abide by the conference rules. Breaking those rules carries potential consequences. The dude abides.
Yeah, but if I remember right, he did bet on games when he was a backup, including one where he bet the under on passing yards. So it’s more luck that he never bet on a game that he played in.
I don’t think he will, because I think most schools recognize the danger that this can cause. It’s in their self-interest to cut the player loose
What's the danger, exactly? If he plays, then there was no real danger. Recall that the scope here for TTU is they believe he's the piece taking them to the Playoff, that's why they paid him so much. How many teams are willing to throw that away with a court ruling already in their favor? I'd bet you it's close to zero for real competitor-level teams.
The danger used to be that the NCAA could compel you to not compete at all. That seems to largely not be the case anymore.
At his position though, barring an injury it was probably a good bet he wasn't playing. I think he only played a little bit in one game. He probably knew the plan was to use the redshirt on that season
