Everything you need to know about the Sorsby saga
Dan Wetzel breaks down everything to do with the Brendan Sorsby story at Texas Tech.
Video Transcript
Dan Wetzel, ESPN senior writer.
Always great to have him on, and seems like the NCAA always gives us gifts like this, Dan, where we can be reunited.
The Brendan Souersby story.
What is the rule that he broke?
he was The NCAA banished him, took away all of his remaining eligibility for, sports wagering, particularly betting, about 40 or so bets on a team that he was playing for, the Indiana Hoosiers.
Now, he didn't actually get in the games, but, he had access to all sorts of information, and that's just a, you cannot bet specifically on your own team.
and you shouldn't sports wager at all.
he bet over 9,000 times over four years while he was at Indiana, then later Cincinnati, and then since January at Texas Tech.
some of those bets were on accounts that he had access through to that weren't under his name, so he knew it was wrong.
There's extensive education, and he, he clearly violated the NCAA's, rules and precedents, concerning sports wagering.
But I'm just trying to understand this.
If I go back to 2023, Iowa State had a quarterback.
he had a $15 bet on Iowa State to beat Oklahoma State.
He was ruled ineligible.
Yeah.
Iowa had a defensive lineman, Noah Shannon.
He lost a year of eligibility due to gambling.
he bet between 10 and, $20 on the women's basketball team.
Yeah.
How did Souersby survive this?
Well, so to the NCAA, he did not.
Yeah, they, there was, it was clear-cut that he should be banished.
And, you know, I, I, we spent a lot of time researching this.
There isn't a sports organization in, in the, in the world that doesn't have the same policy.
You cannot bet on your own team.
You can't.
You, you, you should have the right to banish somebody for sports wagering.
I don't care if it's NBA, NFL, FIFA, ch- the Chinese Table Tennis League, cricket, what, you name it, everybody on earth has this policy because it's just the third rail of sports.
If once you lose the public's trust in your games and you have integrity issues, the entire operation can collapse.
So, Brendan Souersby was, was, you know, he, his eligibility was up.
He was done.
NCAA basically kicked him out.
He had one year left.
What he was able to do was file an, a, a temporary, file for a temporary injunction in Lubbock County, Texas, where Texas Tech is located.
And what the argument is, is they have enough of a case that they should be heard that he should be allowed to not be banished, or the NCAA shouldn't be allowed to banish him, based on, his addiction to gambling, he went into a rehab treatment, and, mental health concerns, and a- among other arguments.
And the, the judge in Lubbock, who they brought in from, from the Fort Worth area, a retired judge to hear this case 'cause they couldn't find anybody, in Lubbock that didn't have, you know, Texas Tech ties, ruled that he deserves an injunction because he would suffer irreparable harm having to sit out, during the season while waiting for the argument.
So he has a injunction against that banishment.
It doesn't mean that a judge ruled that the NCAA was wrong.
And this is a way that a lot of these plaintiff attorneys, whether it's getting a fifth year of eligibility or a 27-year-old basketball player from, like, the Albanian Pro League.
they, they, they, they get an injunction saying, "Well, we're gonna make an argument, and maybe we win."
And that lowers the burden of the plaintiff.
'Cause all you have to do is say, "Hey, I ki- kind of have a compelling argument here."
So then they'll give him an injunction, but by the time the case would ever get through the slow-moving courts and through all of the process, the, the Texas Tech season will almost assuredly be over.
And then you just drop the case, Souersby moves on.
so, he's got a temporary injunction, but it is a, it is a shocking and, quite frankly, ridiculous, decision.
Yeah, I had a source tell me this morning that the appeal wouldn't be heard until February of 2027. how accountable is Texas Tech?
How accountable is the Big 12 in what they could do, in this situation?
Well, I mean, look, Texas Tech doesn't have to play him, right?
So Texas Tech could sit there and say, "Hey, look, we take these rules seriously.
We think you violated them.
Even if you get an injunction, you know, you can, you can be on..." I, I, I don't know what, if he has to be on the team, I'm not sure how that would all work out.
they support this fully, and there's certainly a tremendous amount of backlash against Texas Tech for doing that because, again, this is You, you can hate every NCAA rule ever written, but not this one.
I mean, this is the same rule that everybody has.
You can hope the NCAA goes away.
They would have to create a new organization to do basic rules like, "Hey, you're not allowed to bet on your own team."
there's, there's really not anybody arguing that that's a great idea.
So Texas Tech could do that.
But in, in, in fairness to Texas Tech, that, that level of personal accountability, personal responsibility, self-punishment, that has gone out of the culture probably at large, but certainly in college athletics for decades now.
Everybody sues for everything to try to get any little advantage, and it's basically, well, the other guys do it, too.
So while there's a lot of, backlash against Texas Tech, and maybe you could say, "Hey, look, be great if they did this," and said, "We're just not gonna be a part of it," it's not particularly realistic in the, in the landscape of college athletics right now.
What about the I still think we're gonna get conferences who will govern themselves, and that's where the Big 12 could play a role in this.
Um-Y- what do you think about that?
Yeah.
Yeah.
absolutely.
So if you look back, to, say, the Michigan sign-stealing scandal, the Big 10 stepped in and said, "Okay, we need to This is gonna take too long.
We wanna punish, in real time, Michigan."
And they came in and w- laid a three-game suspension down on Jim Harbaugh.
So the head coach has gotta sit three games, and if you remember, it was the Penn State game, a Maryland game, and then at Ohio State.
So it was this huge, Or h- home against Ohio State, but, at Penn State, whatever.
So it was a big penalty.
You lost your head coach.
Michigan was going to file for a temporary injunction on that.
They ended up not, and so Harbaugh ended up sitting.
But that would kind of be your, you know, your, your, your, your, your idea there, your game plan if they wanted to do that.
But I don't know that this injunction would even allow that, and I don't know whether the Big 12 wants to get involved in selective, punishment like that.
It was a very dicey move by the Big 10 also, because every school, or, or almost every school, has some incident coming, where you, once you open Pandora's box of, "Well, we're gonna step in and do the right thing here," that becomes a selective enforcement, and you open up your conference office to its own thing.
So could the Big 10 d- or Big 12 do it?
Potentially, if they have the will and the want.
They still would be, I'm sure, under legal, a bid, and they could go back to the exact same judge and say, "Well, the NCAA can't do it.
Why can the Big 12?"
So I don't I- I- I s- I expect Brendan Sorsby to play.
Talking to Dan Wetzel, ESPN senior writer.
But the precedent is being set where I can just say this, "If I don't get to play, it does irreparable harm to me."
No matter what I'm guilty of, isn't that going to be an out for athletes moving forward?
Absolutely.
And part, really, the, the bulk of this argument was that, Sorsby had a, an, an addiction as a, as a medical condition, right?
Which, we know gambling addictions are real, and they're prevalent, and the way these sports apps and stuff like that are, are more and more problematic every day.
And certainly someone who risks a $5 million payday to bet small amounts on baseball games and, and European pro leagues and stuff i- is almost the definition of a problem.
So we're, we're cognizant and respectful of that.
At the same time, just because you have an addiction doesn't mean you should be, you know, cleared of all of the wrongdoing you did under that addiction.
And, and that's what they're arguing as well.
This is a medical condition.
And then, further, the NCAA has a stated policy where one of their goals is to aid in the mental health of the, of the athletes, which is, you know, a pretty broad statement.
Well, they're saying, "Look, if you don't allow me to play, it'll impact negatively my mental health and potentially impact negatively my recovery."
and that's a real stretch of an argument, in my opinion.
I'm not a judge in, in Lubbock County, Texas, but I I sit there and say, yeah, all punishments are des- everyone who gets in trouble, generally their mental health is negatively affected.
Whether you're in prison or you're a, or you're a teenager who blew curfew, and you have to miss the party the next week, and you're not too happy about it.
That's the point here.
So their argument, that they're gonna take is really, you know, really out there.
But if this becomes a precedent Now, no other court.
This is one case in one county of Texas.
No other This is not the Supreme Court saying, "This is, this is the, this is how everyone should rule."
But we do know judges look at other cases and say, "Well, maybe there's something there."
but if, if, I mean, you could be I g- I got, you know, I've been, I keep targeting people and getting thrown out of games.
I now have to serve a two-game suspension.
Well, my mental health is impacted by this, and my potential future earnings are, are, are impacted by, like, this, and I have a, a medical 'cause I grew up, you know, whatever trauma in my life.
I mean, are we gonna get to that point?
So this ruling absolutely shocked and stunned college athletics, and they are on a court losing streak.
But even on this one, I think everyone thought the NCAA would win because this is just Eight billion people think, and every sports league around the world think this is wrong, and there's one judge in, in, Lubbock County, Texas, saying, "Yeah, let's, let's hear the argument."
There was one other, item here that stood out, that schools are saying they won't schedule Texas Tech for any sport.
I mean, I, I, I'm sure there'll be some that, that don't.
probably doesn't matter.
I, I, usually there's a lot of, there's a lot of, hot takes, after all of these things from athletic directors and presidents.
You can get people to say a lot of stuff.
potentially they won't.
But, you know, i- in fairness to Texas Tech, they're, cast the first stone, man.
Like, every one of these schools- ...sort of.
Everybody's got something.
Somebody, you know, "We played this guy even though he was, he was facing charges," or, "We, we, we, we overlooked this guy's test grades," or, "We..." Like, there, there are no white hats and there are very few white hats- ...and black hats.
It's all gray, Dan.
You know that.
And so, listening to these guys moralize against Texas Tech is, is a, is a bridge too far for me.
I just think this is the culture of the sport and really potentially the country of just, "Yeah, I'm in trouble, but you guys did worse," or, "I'm gonna, I'm gonna pout," or whatever.
"I'm gonna sue," or everything is just this way.
And, I don't really have a lot of fault with Texas Tech on this.
They, they ran this game and found a judge to go with it.
that's how, that's how this, this is played now.
This is cutthroat business.
Just when you thought you'd seen it all, Dan.
I, I real- I never thought that you could gamble on your own sport, own team.
And they go, "Eh, you can just keep playing."
Yeah.
Yeah.
This one, I don't get shocked easy, Dan.
I've been on this show how many times?
Many.
Many.
You imagine the- Murder trials.
Every single thing you can imagine.
And I'm like, wow, that, I cannot believe that just happened.
Can you imagine what- So this was a big one ...Pete Rose is thinking?
Pete, Pete Rose.
Well, he, it's funny, you know, Sorsby comes from University of Cincinnati, and they, they play, Texas Tech plays at Cincinnati, this season, and he will be eligible.
I want, like, everybody should just wear a Pete Rose jersey or something.
I, it's, I mean, Charlie Hustle, he's, he needed a judge in, in Lubbock County.
He did.
He did.
He didn't know how to fight this.
Yes.
He didn't know how to fight it.
Irreparable harm that he needs to manage.
Yeah.
thank you, Dan.
I'm sure we'll- Thank you, Dan ...talk again.
Yep.
Take care.
That's, Dan Wetzel of the mothership.
