He's eligible to play in 26. This is why Congress needs to act.
Texas Tech QB got the injunction from the state court judge
- Thread starter Duke Humphrey
- Start date
Shocking...
www.espn.com
"Monday's ruling by district judge Ken Curry in Lubbock County, Texas, restores Sorsby's eligibility"
Brendan Sorsby granted injunction vs. NCAA, eligible to play in 2026
Texas Tech star quarterback Brendan Sorsby has been granted a temporary injunction against the NCAA and will be eligible to play for the Red Raiders in 2026.
www.espn.com
"Monday's ruling by district judge Ken Curry in Lubbock County, Texas, restores Sorsby's eligibility"
College football has been my fall Saturdays for decades. It didn't matter if we were good or not, I watched it all, all day long. This stuff is changing that fast.
Nope, it wont be any better at all when a local
Judge can just throw the agreement out at will for his team. It's going to take actual laws from Congress to rein in the judges. An anti-trust waiver would be a start. THEN you can talk about collective bargaining.
So I guess you can do whatever the 17 you want, and then as long as you cry and say it's a mental health issue and not getting what you want will greatly affect your mental health, then you're good?
I don't want any part of the push away from amateurism. I don't think ya'll will like where collective bargaining and 'employment' ultimately take us. It's not going to be anywhere with actual rules, because the schools are still divided. And it's not going to look anything like it has in the past. At least now we can still halfway call it college.
What a joke.
Somewhere Joey Aguilar is sitting home pissed as all get out. He's the only one I can think off of the top of my head that was been denied.
If I have to watch TT vs Ole Miss in the championship game, I'm done.
Somewhere Joey Aguilar is sitting home pissed as all get out. He's the only one I can think off of the top of my head that was been denied.
If I have to watch TT vs Ole Miss in the championship game, I'm done.
We should start referring to every one of these injunctions by some local podunk judge as an "Ole Miss Injunction". They enjoy everyone talking about them & thinking everyone copies them so......
Seriously this cluster17 has to end somehow. There have to rules & consequences for those that do not follow the damned rules
Seriously this cluster17 has to end somehow. There have to rules & consequences for those that do not follow the damned rules
So it doesn't matter that he broke the law by placing over 2,900 bets while at Indiana, (40 involving his own team), he only had to say he would "suffer a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury if this Court does not issue this temporary injunction because he will be unable to participate as a member of Texas Tech University's 2026 Football season." SO FUC-KIN what, you broke the law, man up and live with the consequences MFer.
Has the NCAA won any court battles of any kind in recent years? They are useless, time to replace them
Has the NCAA won any court battles of any kind in recent years? They are useless, time to replace them
Well, that and have a crooked as 17 local judge that cares more about his school’s football team and/or bribe payment than actually upholding the integrity of our laws
The only ones I can remember the NCAA winning was Bediako (after he played five games) and the Tennessee quarterback Aguilar.
What is strange to me, is that a local judge is able to rule, on a player, that might play half of his games outside of that state.
It's really a Federal issue.
It's really a Federal issue.
Yep, and you know what pisses me off more than anything about this case? I’d bet that nearly every poster on this board has been impacted in some way by mental health during the last decade. Depression, anxiety, friend/family suicides, or at the very least… challenges at work/school or with raising kids due to the long list of side effects stemming from this growing, legitimate disease.
And here we are making a mockery of it so that some dipshit 20 year old can get his seat back on board the college football gravy train
17 all of this and those supporting it like this judge from Lubbock
Exactly, I understand to some degree why courts can use commerce laws to say you can't deny someone making money off of themselves during the time they play college football. But why and how does a court get to decide basic eligibility? Like, why does a court get to randomly decide that a guy gets a 6th year without any medical documentation that he warrants a medical redshirt? And why can a court decide that a gambling addict who is betting on college football get to retain eligibility when the player clearly knew the rule about gambling from the beginning? Next, I feel there will be a case where a player appeals to be eligible to play for a school where he is not even an enrolled student. I mean, why not, the NCAA apparently has no authority to make any rules or any decisions on who is eligible and who is not. Why should someone actually have to be a student at the college to play for that college? Its unfair!
So now if I am player X from Y university, I can gamble on games and cite this case? Just double bird the NCAA if they say anything?
Replace them with what?
How about an organization made up of the schools themselves, where administrators and coaches serve on various committees to enact and enforce rules and policies to try to serve the best interest of the schools, athletes, fans, and the sports themselves?
Oh, wait, thats what the NCAA is. Its not a top down authoritarian body...it only does what the member schools agree to.
The NCAA track record in court is pretty grim, because the college sports model doesn't make much sense from a business or legal perspective.
Why would a judge be able to throw out a collectively bargained agreement?
I mean, I'm not real clear on how we get to a valid collective bargaining agreement without unions and the like. But if they did reach the point of collectively bargaining, and the athletes agreed to harsh penalties for gambling, how could a court just throw that out?
My question on CBA is why would the players agree to any changes without some kind of federal framework? The players are the ones benefiting right now with no caps on salaries, no rules, etc. Why would they voluntarily give that up? And I agree, CBA is the most likely end game here, but without some kind of stick to get the players to the table, why would they agree to hurt themselves?
But why would the players collectively bargain when they already have everything they could possibly want?
The schools dont have much to bargsin with, but they could make things more desirable with guaranteed minimum salaries tied to revenue, health and education benefits extending beyond player eligibility, collective NIL deals for thin
gs like video games and merchandising, benefits for players who get cut...things that are attractive to all but the highest paid players.
But, I still think there would need to be a major shift of some sort for football and basketball players to be interested.
This happens and we still have posters on here rubbing their hands together about Ole Miss getting hammered by the NCAA.
Why can a judge throw out the rules of a voluntarily joined organization?
These judges are taking their time in making these decisions running the clock out, so the NCAA doesn't appeal to a higher court. Until the NCAA does, NCAA rules that every school agreed to abide by are moot. No state judge is going to rule in favor of the NCAA. Political suicide.
A couple of Big 12 AD’s are openly talking about not playing Texas Tech in football this season. That would be awesome if the whole conference refused to play them, but I’m sure it won’t happen. Georgia’s AD also said Georgia won’t schedule Texas Tech for anything until further notice.
There is not better way to force change than an empty stadium. If the Ole Miss opponents wanted to flex their muscles, they should do the same as long as Trinidad is eligible.
The easiest fix is the playoff committee to just not put them in the rankings no matter how good of a record they have
Years of litigation has paved the way.
But a collective bargaining agreement would require arbitration and a jurisdictional agreement keeping the issues out of local state courts.
Think that would hold now? The first time Ole Miss is denied they get Lafayette County Judge Earl Van Dorn V to throw the agreement out. The next step is signing cut NFL players. You can bet that's coming.
Im not sure what you're arguing, but, yes, I am confident a collective bargaining agreement would be honored by the courts. There may be loopholes, but the agreement would be enforced.
What we have in these state court cases (Chambliss, Bediako, and Sorsby) are claims that the players are third party beneficiaries of the agreements between the NCAA and the member schools, and/or that the NCAA is interfering with the players' NIL agreements.
If there was collective bargaining, the players would be parties to a contract and will have agreed to specific terms. The NCAA will still have a duty of fair dealing, but the players will be bound by rules to address their issues.
A state court judge might "throw the agreement out", but it would have no legal basis to do so.
the irony of course here is that previously, amateur student atheletes have no legal contracts of any sorts (other than schools like Bama that most likely have used a 3rd party private contracts between some entity not directly affiliated with Bama and some person not part of the athelete's immediate family)
So... with no contracts, no real structure for the business of college football, there are no rules and the NCAA can no longer afford the numerous expensive legal battles.
All that is left is the integrity and honor of the university. Hence, Ole Miss and Texas Tech.
So... with no contracts, no real structure for the business of college football, there are no rules and the NCAA can no longer afford the numerous expensive legal battles.
All that is left is the integrity and honor of the university. Hence, Ole Miss and Texas Tech.