When the NCAA’s lawyers stepped into a Lubbock courtroom Monday alongside lawyers for Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby, both sides claimed the mantle of fairness. But they clashed on what that meant.
Update: after this story was published, visiting judge Ken Curry ruled in favor of Sorsby. Click here to read the ruling.
Sorsby has been ruled ineligible for this coming season – his senior year – after freely admitting he placed “thousands of bets on everything and anything” including college sports.
He sued the NCAA to get back his eligibility, claiming in part his behavior was driven by a mental health disorder and should be treated like – quoting from NCAA rules – “an education-impacting disability.”
Visiting judge Ken Curry didn’t make a ruling on Sorsby’s request for a temporary injunction against the NCAA’s decision, saying he would take everything into consideration. Curry took the case when 99th State District Judge Phillip Hays recused himself.
Sorsby did not attend the hearing.
Sorsby transferred to Texas Tech from the University of Cincinnati in January. Before that, he was with Indiana University. While with Indiana (but not yet suiting up and traveling with the Hoosiers) he bet on his own team. The NCAA played into that heavily.
“Mr. Sorsby didn’t come forward. He got caught,” said Taylor Askew, an attorney with the NCAA.
But Sorsby’s legal team, which includes Lubbock attorneys Ted Liggett and Dustin Burrows, pushed back – saying Sorsby did bet on his own team, but it was never while he dressed for or traveled with the team. And he never bet against his own team.
Jeffrey Kessler, one of Sorsby’s attorneys, said, “He did not engage in behavior that threatened the integrity of the game.”
Sorsby faces a June 22 deadline to enter the NFL supplemental draft.
“That is why there is an urgency,” Kessler told the judge.
Kessler asked him to rule before June 15.
Money or irreplaceable experience at stake
National news outlets like ESPN and Forbes estimated Sorsby’s time at Texas Tech is worth $5 million or more in NIL or name image and likeness deals.
But Kessler argued monetary compensation is no remedy.
“He will lose the irreplaceable experience of playing for Texas Tech – striving for a national championship,” Kessler said.
“You can’t get that experience back again,” he added.
It’s the same argument Burrows filed in court before the hearing.
“Each day the NCAA unlawfully refuses to reinstate him for his final college season permanently deprives Mr. Sorsby of experiences that can never be recaptured or fully compensated through monetary damages. Each game and practice that Mr. Sorsby misses reflects an irreplaceable experience he can never regain,” Burrows’ written request said.
Mr. Sorsby has been diagnosed with a mental health condition in the form of a gambling addiction.
jeffrey kessler
This is a Hail Mary by Mr. Sorsby …
taylor askew
The NCAA was quite happy to remind the court that Texas Tech takes gambling seriously.
“Just six months ago, the NCAA membership – including Texas Tech – voted to reject a proposed rule amendment that would have allowed student-athletes to gamble on professional but not collegiate sports, choosing instead to retain the broad prohibition on sports wagering,” the NCAA’s written response said.
Askew said in the hearing, “The first bet he made on his own team made him ineligible. He should not have even been playing the last few years.”
Others have been punished more harshly for lesser violations, Askew argued.
“He’s not done playing football. He’s just done playing NCAA football. … Actions have consequences,” Askew said.
Claiming the NCAA owes Sorsby protection
Kessler argued the NCAA rules require protection of student athletes – and it’s contractual. Sorsby did not sign but Texas Tech did and state law, Kessler argued, gives him the right to enforce rules for his benefit in court.
“Mr. Sorsby has been diagnosed with a mental health condition in the form of a gambling addiction,” Kessler said.
And that changes the rules. Kessler said the NCAA wants to punish Sorsby for his condition rather than help him. The rules call for reinstatement when possible – not automatic banishment.
Sorsby checked himself in to get treatment, court records said.
Askew said, “There’s no victory lap by the NCAA. The rules are what the rules are.”
Askew also said Sorsby’s claim tries to make a weird exception that by violating the rules over and over, you get by with it. But he emphasized betting on your own team even once is enough to make a player ineligible.
“You can’t gamble on your own team. You can’t do that. … Whether you did it because you had an addiction or because you were bored, it doesn’t matter. It’s a distinction without a difference,” Askew said.
“This is a Hail Mary by Mr. Sorsby,” Askew also said.
The Agne case
Sorsby’s team claimed unfair treatment and used the Brett Agne case as an example.
The NCAA announced last year Agne, a former women’s volleyball assistant coach at Indiana University, placed more than 700 bets. Of those, 27 were on Indiana football or men’s basketball.
His penalty was a 10-game suspension and “meaningful sports betting education,” according to the NCAA’s official notice.
Kessler declared, “Thirty percent of the season. That’s it! … This volleyball coach violates this same policy.”
He called the NCAA’s treatment of Sorsby by comparison “arbitrary and capricious.”
Askew said that was a different kind of case. The official NCAA notice said he bet on other Indiana University teams – not his own.
“It doesn’t apply to this kind of dispute,” he said.
Askew said the NCAA “followed its rules to a T.”
“He cannot point you to anywhere in that contract where the NCAA didn’t follow its principles,” Askew said.
Judge Curry asked for more information on the Agne case before calling the court into recess.
