Marc Dunham 🌵 🌵

The Sorsby decision was never about only one student-athlete. We are already seeing downhill effects in other eligibility cases in which state courts are allowing student-athletes to circumvent longstanding eligibility rules, citing Sorsby outcome as part of the court’s precedent. Another example of why we need Congress to pass the Protect College Sports Act, authorizing the association to apply common sense eligibility rules consistently for all student-athletes and schools, regardless of the state or local court system.

The Sorsby stuff has been "taked" to death but here is mine after sitting in it for a few days. Barring a change on the legal side, he will be a member of the team in the fall. That's not up to TTU. If he is on the team, he will likely (per contract) earn his full revenue share/NIL money. TTU has no choice in that matter either. The only question then for Texas Tech, is if he plays or if he sits on the bench and earns a paycheck. So what the rest of the country is asking Texas Tech to do, is to pay him to practice, to be on the team, and not play football. This, they say, will protect the integrity of the game. But what did he do that supposedly compromised the integrity of the game in the first place? He placed bets...from the bench. So what we're really talking about isn't protecting game integrity in 2026 at all. We're talking about punishment. Punishing Sorsby for 2022. Punishing Sorsby by paying him $5 million to not play. That's not much of a punishment if you ask me. When you tear away all the bluster and moralizing, what they are really asking is for Texas Tech - and Texas Tech alone - to be punished. Not Sorsby, not Indiana where it happened, not Cincinnati who played him after. Texas Tech alone. The rest of college football would love nothing more, and would be laughing the entire time. Our program should evaluate his mental and physical fitness, and his compliance with the order put in place. We should make sure that, all else being equal, he is our best option before going out on that field. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But we should not let bullying, threats, and emotion (from those who already wished us harm) to have any bearing on that decision whatsoever. Strip it all away and they are really asking for Texas Tech to be the only party in this scandal to be punished. The only party who, by any objective measure, has done absolutely nothing wrong. Do that, and the outrage from the peanut gallery will not turn to adulation, or even silence. It will turn to mockery.

Texas litigator here. Unless and until the Amarillo Court of Appeals or the Texas Supreme Court stays or dissolves the valid temporary injunction obtained by Brandon Sorsby, Texas Tech would be well within its right to take legal action against any entity—the Big XII Conference, the CFP, other universities—that attempts to “punish” Tech for complying with with the controversial-but-lawful TI. Sorsby has been reinstated by a lawful order from court of competent jurisdiction, and while Tech is not obligated to play Sorsby, it currently has the right to do so. And the NCAA’s interlocutory appeal of the TI order is unlikely to be resolved prior to the end of the college football season. Against this backdrop, any organization that attempts to step in for the NCAA to exclude Sorsby is inviting a lawsuit from Sorsby and/or Tech, with Tech taking the position that it is merely complying with the TI order and that it can’t be punished for doing so.

The Sorsby decision was never about only one student-athlete. We are already seeing downhill effects in other eligibility cases in which state courts are allowing student-athletes to circumvent longstanding eligibility rules, citing Sorsby outcome as part of the court’s precedent. Another example of why we need Congress to pass the Protect College Sports Act, authorizing the association to apply common sense eligibility rules consistently for all student-athletes and schools, regardless of the state or local court system.