A Texas judge’s decision in the case involving former University of Cincinnati quarterback Brendan Sorsby, blocking the NCAA from enforcing its rules on gambling, stunned many legal experts.
The June 8 order from a judge in Lubbock County, Texas, where Sorsby will now play his final collegiate season for Texas Tech, reinstated Sorsby’s eligibility, even though he has admitted betting on his own team in 2022 when he was at Indiana University.
“It is a completely unexpected ruling and flies in the face of every decision that has come before it related to sports gambling,” said Gabe Feldman who heads the sports law program at Tulane University’s law school.
For more than a century, an athlete betting on his or her own team has been considered “a cardinal sin,” Feldman said, and judges have almost uniformly recognized that sports leagues and entities like the NCAA need to maintain the integrity of the sports they oversee.
The NCAA itself has said in court documents that betting on one’s own team “has always resulted” in permanent ineligibility.
But Judge Ken Curry said Sorsby − the top transfer quarterback this year who will be paid a reported $5 million to play for Texas Tech − had shown he would suffer irreparable harm by being deemed ineligible. Curry also found that Sorsby was likely to prevail in the injunction he filed.
NCAA’s response to Brendan Sorsby ruling
The NCAA, which has filed a notice of appeal, issued a statement criticizing the ruling, saying it is “deeply concerned about the damaging, far-reaching and broadly destabilizing ramifications of this outcome, which undermines and corrupts the integrity of sports.”
The NCAA added that it is committed to supporting the mental health of student-athletes, “but must continue to aggressively defend against actions that defraud college athletics and threaten competitive integrity, such as betting on one’s own sport.”
Nellie Drew, director of the Center for the Advancement of Sport at the University of Buffalo School of Law, said the ruling is another blow to the NCAA, which has experienced a series of court defeats in recent years.
“How are you going to ensure the integrity of any sporting contest if you can’t discipline participants who gamble?” Drew said.
Brendan Sorsby’s gambling addiction
Sorsby’s attorneys said a gambling addiction that dates back to his freshman year at Indiana University, in addition to an anxiety disorder, caused his behavior. They also argued at a June 1 court hearing that prohibiting him from playing football would harm his mental health and impede his recovery.
Sorsby was UC’s starting quarterback for the 2024 and 2025 seasons, after transferring from Indiana University.
He acknowledged that his betting continued at UC − although never on the football team − and after he transferred to Texas Tech this year. He said he only bet on professional sports at Texas Tech.
When will Brendan Sorsby play?
Curry did impose a two-game suspension, which is the same penalty Sorsby’s attorneys had proposed to the NCAA.
Sorsby’s lead attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, said the NCAA should have accepted that two-game suspension “had it been true to its promises to prioritize the welfare of athletes.”
“Brendan gets to devote himself to his team and the education of athletes on the dangers of gambling addiction,” Kessler said. “He will continue his treatment, miss two games, and there is no injury to the competitive integrity of the NCAA.”
Assuming the ruling stands, Sorsby will miss non-conference games vs. Abilene Christian and Oregon State. His first game would be Sept. 18, his Big 12 debut against Houston.
NCAA president, others react to Sorsby ruling
NCAA President Charlie Baker used the ruling to urge more Congressional help in college athletics.
He called on Congress to pass the Protect College Sports Act, which he said would empower the NCAA to enforce rules, including gambling restrictions.
“There is no better example of why targeted intervention from Congress is necessary,” Baker said. “When you have schools and deep-pocketed supporters willing to look the other way on the glaring integrity threat of betting on your own team − and judges whose rulings effectively strip away our ability to stop them − only Congress can equip the NCAA to apply this common-sense rule to everyone fairly and consistently.”
Tom Mars, a prominent sports attorney who represented Justin Fields in his transfer case from Georgia to Ohio State and Trinidad Chambliss in his appeal for another season at Ole Miss, said the Sorsby decision could influence Congress to back the NCAA.
He told ESPN’s Pete Thamel: “In 40 years as a lawyer, I’ve never been as shocked and surprised by a court ruling.”
Michael McCann, director of the Sports and Entertainment Law Institute at the University of New Hampshire’s law school, said the Texas court’s ruling does not create a legal precedent that impacts other college athletes.
It only applies in one county in Texas, he said, and does not affect how other courts handle similar cases.
McCann said that means a judge in another state could review a case involving a different college athlete who was deemed ineligible for betting on their own team and potentially rule in favor of the NCAA.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: What judge’s ruling in Brendan Sorsby case means for NCAA enforcement
Reporting by Kevin Grasha and Scott Springer, Cincinnati Enquirer / Cincinnati Enquirer
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
By Kevin Grasha and Scott Springer, Cincinnati Enquirer | USA TODAY Network
