There is more to the Sorsby case than gambling

Rather than the typical offseason in which the entertainment is pointing fingers at their school, not ours, every time some 19-year-old with a hot car and more testosterone than brains gets arrested, we have the ongoing saga of college sports, complete with a cast of characters that could have been plucked from the 1970s sitcom “Taxi.” If we’re being totally honest here, then secretly, deep down, we are thinking this is every bit as entertaining as that “Taxi” episode when Reverend Jim plays the piano at a fancy party. He began with “Mary Had a Little Lamb" a bit off key then transitions into a flawless rendition of Chopin’s “Fantaisie Impromptu in C# Minor.” After a pause he declares, “I must have had music lessons.”

Never have we had an offseason for college sports like the one going on right now. It’s Forrest Gump’s box of chocolates because we never know what we’re going to get. The story changes daily and typically makes about as much sense as Reverend Jim, who at least had the excuse of a mind clouded by years of experimenting with hallucinogenic drugs. While we wait to see if Congress is going to pass its save sports bill and wonder out loud if the NCAA’s new eligibility rules will be confirmed by the voting majority we have the Brendan Sorsby case to keep us entertained.

Monday, the NCAA asked an appeals court to expedite a hearing intended to reverse the temporary injunction granted by Lubbock County judge Ken Curry that will allow Sorsby to play for Texas Tech after sitting out a pair of cupcake games to start the season. Curry’s injunction doesn’t expire until February, long after the 2026 season ends. The NCAA, showing its infinite wisdom, asked for a hearing prior to the August 28 start of the college football season.

Not to be outdone by the NCAA, the Big 12 Conference filed a Federal lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against Texas Tech, state of Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, school president Lawrence Schovanec, athletic director Kirby Hocutt and just about anyone else who breathes that has had anything to do with Brendan Sorsby. The Big 12 is asking for a declaratory judgment that will allow the league to enforce its own rules, rules, by the way, that Texas Tech voluntarily agrees to follow.

Sorsby’s gambling has gotten all the headlines, but the real problem is the rules and the ability to enforce them. Texas Tech doesn’t like the rules, so it has chosen to go the route of the courts in order to sidestep both rules and judgment for breaking them. Despite all its propaganda that insinuates Texas Tech is only doing what is right by rescuing a wayward young man who succumbed to the lure of gambling. They want us to believe Sorsby is nothing more than a victim who should be viewed with sympathy and understanding.

Not really. Sorsby is no victim and Texas Tech is using the courts to get him eligible to play in the fall because he can fling a football with the best of them. With Sorsby Tech figures to win the Big 12 and make a serious run at winning the College Football Playoff. With Sorsby, Texas Tech figures to rake in millions and set the foundation for more championships in the future. There is a ton of money involved, try $5 million shelled out to land Sorsby by former Texas Tech football player and oil bidness tycoon Cody Campbell. Campbell, who probably has more money ($30.8 billion but who’s counting?) than common sense or integrity, has been spending money like a drunken sailor on shore leave in Pattaya, all with the intention of bringing national championships to Texas Tech in any and every sport.

What neither Campbell nor Texas Tech failed to do was homework, as in a thorough background check that might have revealed Sorsby’s gambling issues. Sorsby had already transferred from Cincinnati and enrolled at Texas Tech when law enforcement broke the news that the QB charged with lifting the Red Raiders to the greatest heights of college football had been gambling for four years to the tune of $90,000 and more than 2,000 bets including more than 40 placed on his own team. Serious no-no there, one for which there is a precedent of harsh punishment no matter the perp, no matter the sport.

If Texas Tech had done its homework, perhaps it would have sought after and landed a talented quarterback without the baggage, but when faced with an untried redshirt freshman leading the way, the choice was made to defy the rules and win in the courts. If the ruling in the friendly local courtroom by a sympathetic judge stands, then Sorsby will indeed play but at what cost?

Organizations such as the NCAA and the Big 12 Conference would love to operate under the honor system, but since integrity is in short supply these days, they require the power to enforce their own rules. This is not some ticky tacky rule that Texas Tech is choosing to fight. This isn’t like the University of Florida being charged with major NCAA violations for assistant coach Hoss Adams buying a Sprite and a pack of Juicy Fruit for Dale Dorminey at Gainesville Regional Airport (yes, that actually happened).

This is gambling. Dating all the way back to 1919 and the Black Sox scandal that almost brought professional baseball to its knees, all sports have taken a stand against their own athletes gambling, particularly those that gamble on their own team, which Sorsby did. Maybe the example that most people relate to is Pete Rose, who gambled on the Cincinnati Reds while he was their manager. He got a lifetime ban that wasn’t lifted until he died. Pete’s stats as a player merit the Hall of Fame. His gambling will in all probability keep him out forever.

Texas Tech wants us to believe that Brendan Sorsby’s month in a rehab facility has cured him of his gambling addiction. It’s a tough sell and so far, only diehard Texas Tech fans are buying it. What is to prevent Sorsby from gambling on Texas Tech? What’s to prevent him from losing so much money that the gamblers get their hooks in him and try to force him to throw a game? You live in an alternative universe if you can’t see that as a possibility.

The gambling issue is serious but so is following rules that your membership in an organization is proof of your agreement. When you join you agree to follow the rules and you also agree to accept punishment when you get caught breaking the rules. Texas Tech has been caught and rather than deal with the consequences has taken to the courts for injunctive relief.

Why Texas Tech believes it can get away with this brazen attempt to flaunt the rules is two-fold: (1) Cody Campbell’s ego and money; and (2) the NCAA’s precedent of selective enforcement.

Cody Campbell doesn’t have a net worth in excess of $30.8 billion because he takes no for an answer. He is accustomed to having his way and both the cost of Sorsby and the other Texas Tech athletes whose bank accounts are filled with Campbell’s NIL money are mere drops in his proverbial cash bucket. By all accounts, Campbell has an ego large enough to apply for statehood.

Secondly, there is the matter of the NCAA’s history of dealing harshly with newbloods while turning a convenient eye to the wrongdoings of the bluebloods. Georgia spent more money on Herschel Walker than Florida did on those 109 violations that sentenced the Gators to life in the NCAA jailhouse. Georgia lost two scholarships, was still eligible for bowls and championships, and its games were televised. Post Dean Smith, North Carolina basketball players benefitted from 18 years of academic impropriety but when the NCAA acted it claimed academics were out of its realm to enforce. Oh really? Then why does the NCAA set academic standards for recruits? Why does the NCAA rule that a player with failing grades is ineligible?

Why do things like that happen? Because the NCAA, in its infinite wisdom, picks and chooses who it goes after. As Jerry Tarkanian once said, “The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky that they’re putting Cleveland State on two more years of probation.” It was funny, but Tark really wasn’t kidding.

Is it any wonder that Texas Tech thinks it can challenge the NCAA on Sorsby’s eligibility? If there had been any consistency then there would be little room for a challenge. The NCAA could win this one, probably should win this one, but it’s going to be dicey thanks to precedent.

The Big 12 actually has ground to stand on. Standing behind its lawsuit are the other 15 members of the conference. They know Texas Tech broke the rules and they are taking a stand that enough is enough. They are making a collective statement that should speak volumes in Federal Court. It would be helpful if the SEC, Big Ten and ACC would show support of the Big 12 by filing briefs in the Texas court stating their unanimous opposition to allowing a quarterback who gambled on his own team to play.

Of course, in standing up to a rules breaker, the Big 12 and everyone else in opposition needs to take a long look in the mirror and repeat the words of Jesus who said, “If any one of you is without sin, let him cast the first stone.” (John 8:7)

There is a reason we have rules. If we’re lucky, the Sorsby case might encourage a revival of integrity in which rules – even those that seem insignificant – are followed.