I think it's insane that a state judge can temporarily tell the NCAA they aren't allowed to enforce a rule that every student-athlete agreed to follow. I say temporarily because this is just an injunction, and I'd wager the NCAA would (will?) ultimately prevail at trial.
I also don't think betting pennies on your own team from the literal stands warrants losing out on a season 4 years later, when there's a 100% chance that the integrity of games was never compromised. It's a really harsh penalty.
It is difficult to rationalize those two thoughts. But it is possible to believe them at the same time.
Regardless, the notion that Tech Football should seppuku itself by not playing Sorsby is hilarious. After all, a conference opponent that knowingly played Sorsby lobbed this grenade into Tech's lap. And we're only a few years removed from conference realignment meaning Tech Football could be in the Mountain West or WAC. They tried (and are still trying) to kill us.
There is no honor to restore in college football.
The Brendan Sorsby ruling should be the tipping point that pushes college football to the obvious conclusion (which isn’t the bill in the Senate).
https://t.co/1Bzz7F1tZ4
I don't understand why some are conflating the outrage over the Sorsby decision with Congress potentially passing an #NIL bill.
The Sorsby ruling centers on a state court’s temporary injunction allowing Sorsby to play despite documented gambling on college sports, including his own teams.
You could argue that raises legitimate questions about NCAA enforcement authority and competitive integrity.
But the Protect College Sports Act addresses separate issues such as capping NIL compensation, limiting third-party payments, restricting the transfer portal, and giving the NCAA an antitrust exemption.
These are distinct matters.
Anyway, good luck getting Republicans and Democrats to agree on anything.
I don’t get Tech becoming a villain because a judge made a bizarre ruling, which could still be overturned assuming the NCAA appeals.
I think the ruling standing would be an injustice based on rules & precedent, but don’t act like your program would sit an eligible $5M QB out.
@TomMarsLaw@clarencehilljr No, Leach would have punished him himself in some exotic and hilarious way. He would have covered him in honey and tied him to a tree in the Inn of the Mountain God's parking lot all night to attract bears or something.
This is a great example of how little people know about the Sorsby situation and courts.
Tx Tech can't be penalized for following a judge's court order. Their only real exposure is if they declare Sorsby ineligible to play for them against the court order, then he can sue the crap out of them.
Plus the NCAA has no jurisdiction over the CFP.
SEC fans are fundamentally misunderstanding that their own court challenges opened the door for this. I get that you have decided this one rule is the Rubicon, and it was fine to use the courts to get around every other eligibility rule. But the SEC has pushed us right up to this line, and a Texas Tech player has now pushed us past it. There is no line, there hasn't been for some time, and today the country is coming to that realization.
But Tech fans will also agree with you that there should be a line. There should be a rule making body with authority. That doesn't exist today, and the powers that be need to do what needs to be done to recreate that authority in a meaningful and lasting way.
College sports is broken, but not irreparably so. We didn't break it either, we just exposed it for what it is.
And sure, it benefits us. There's a homer aspect. But if it wasn't Tech, it would be someone else in a month or a year.
So either cry about us as if we're the problem, or get to work fixing the rot within the entire system.
Sorsby being eligible is dumb but SEC and Big Ten parties clutching their pearls about Texas Tech killing college football is very rich and ~totally~not a deliberate overreaction to take the spotlight away from them being the villains.