The wild west of college sports grew even wilder on Monday, when the 99th District Court in Lubbock County, Texas granted Brendan Sorsby eligibility for the upcoming football season.
Sorsby, the now reinstated quarterback at Texas Tech, admitted to gambling not only as a college athlete, but on teams that he was a member of. Sorsby admitted himself into a gambling addiction recovery center earlier this year and immediately began the process of pleading for mercy from the NCAA. His pleas were denied and Sorsby lost eligibility to play for the Red Raiders this coming season.
Athletes gambling has been the cardinal sin of college sports — the uncrossable line that would never be crossed. If the introduction of unregulated NIL contracts and the transfer portal over the last couple of years has turned college sports on its head, the injunction granted to Sorsby just declared the proverbial end of times.
The armageddon of college football as we know it.
That may be a little dramatic. But maybe it’s not. The Sorsby ruling really has changed everything, if it can survive the inevitable appeal from the NCAA.
Gambling in college athletics has been strictly prohibited and enforced for years. And frankly, it's been a no-brainer, if an athlete bets on their own team that's it: end of story, no questions asked. The NCAA’s power in this aspect has been absolute, and rightfully so.
However, the Sorsby injunction has just shown the world that in today’s era of unregulated college athletics, not even the NCAA can protect the integrity of its sports. That is a serious problem.
“The NCAA strongly disagrees with the court’s ruling in Sorsby's case and is deeply concerned about the damaging, far-reaching and broadly destabilizing ramifications of this outcome — which undermines and corrupts the integrity of sports,” said the organization via X, after the news of the ruling first broke.
The organization continued, acknowledging the serious effects of mental health and addiction on student-athletes, the reasons set forth by the court for its grant of Sorsby’s injunction.
“The NCAA is committed to supporting student-athlete mental health but must continue to aggressively defend against actions that defraud college athletics and threaten competitive integrity, such as betting on one's own sport," finished the statement via social media.
Any form of addiction is concerning and should be taken seriously. Sorsby, who bet for, and against, his university’s teams during his time at both Indiana and Cincinnati, and his legal team explained the betting as compulsive and the result of a legitimate and serious addiction.
However, the NCAA said during the June 1 hearing, that does not permit breaking the rules.
“Whatever the reasons for [his] behavior, he broke the rules and should not receive an exception that no other athlete, in history, has ever received.”
But now that Sorsby has received an exception, what does that mean for the future?
Well, it opens up the NCAA and the world of college athletics to a whole new kind of hurt.
Accusations of tampering have already hit the media throughout the offseason. Last-minute transfers in search of more money have flipped player development and team loyalty on its head.
Players winning eligibility for additional seasons like Ole Miss quarterback Trinidad Chambliss. Coaches leaving their teams before the season is over, like Lane Kiffin going to LSU.
Players betting for or against their own teams. The NCAA being powerless to stop it and the federal courts overturning rulings involving athletes who admitted to breaking the rules.
What in the world is happening to college sports?
Does the Protect College Sports Act need to add a new clause addressing athletes betting on their own teams?
Is this a glimmer of hope as we march steadily on towards collapse?
Ironically, that glimmer of hope is this very case.
Almost everyone, outside of Sorsby, his legal team and the Lubbock County court, can agree that this has gone too far.
All those other issues mentioned previously are serious, but clearly weren’t enough for college and conference administrators to band together and make a change. This case is the perfect opportunity to do so.
The gears are turning to try and make a change with the Protect College Sports Act. The proposed legislation has been backed by former Alabama head coach Nick Saban, a legend in the college sports world.
“I really want everybody here to know that I’m not here to represent a conference or a team, but to preserve college athletics as a whole,” said Saban to a U.S. Senate committee on June 3.
“I think we all have to ask ourselves a question, ‘What is our guiding principles for the future of college athletics, including olympic, women and non-revenue sports,’” said Saban in his testimony supporting the Protect College Sports Act.
Now, the Protect College Sports Act is by no means perfect. Like any attempt to fix a major systemic issue, it has its pitfalls. However, never has that question posed by Saban rang louder in the ears of college sports.
Are our guiding principles the allowance of gambling, tampering, unregulated use of NIL money and the broken transfer portal? Are we a pay-for-play system?
The Sorsby case has given everyone an opportunity to take a step back and really think about where they want college sports to go. Those in favor of wrangling the beast that it has become must capitalize on this opportunity.
This has gone too far.
Instead of letting Monday’s ruling change the college sports that we know and love, let it be a way of saving it.
The end of times or the moment that changed history? It’s up to fans, administrators, conference leaders and now government leaders to stop the bleeding and save college sports.