- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 1,153,000
- Reaction score
- 59
The latest strike in Texas Tech's unilateral legal fight with its resident conference, the Big 12, came Thursday, June 11 via a staunchly worded letter from the office of the Texas attorney general that further threatened legal action against the league should the Big 12 invoke its own rules against Tech.
By Thursday afternoon, on the heels of a preliminary meeting with the conference's executive board and ahead of a scheduled meeting of the Big 12's full board on Monday, June 15, the league issued its third statement this week from commissioner Brett Yormark.
"Shortly before the start of today's Big 12 Executive Board meeting, the Conference received a letter from the Texas Attorney General's office notifying the Conference of potential legal action from Texas Tech if the Conference pursues certain actions under its Bylaws," the statement, attributed to Yorkmark, read. "We are taking time with our legal counsel to understand the concerns of the state and will meet again with the full Board next week.
"We moved forward with our Executive Board today in preparation for our full Board meeting on Monday. We had a good and informative discussion. Sentiment among the Executive Board was no different from what we heard from the ADs earlier this week."
Then, Yormark delivered the most important line:
"Our discussion with the full Board will determine our course of action," he said in the statement, "and all options remain on the table."
The ongoing saga has erupted this week after Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby was granted temporary injunctive relief against the NCAA in Lubbock County, Texas, district court by retired judge Ken Curry. The move preempted the NCAA's decision to permanently ban Sorsby from NCAA competition per the organization's rules against gambling. Sorsby has admitted to placing dozens of wagers on his team at Indiana among the thousands of bets totaling at least $90,000 that the investigation has uncovered.
The office of Texas attorney general Ken Paxton cautioned the Big 12 against the conference's ability to sanction its member institutions if a "super-majority of disinterested (athletics) directors" voted to take action against Texas Tech, via the league's bylaws.
Specifically, Big 12 Bylaw 3.6 provides the league with the ability to sanction a member if that institution is deemed to be acting in a manner "materially adverse to the best interests of the Conference."
The attorney general's office, effectively, tried to issue a preemptive strike via threat of legal action againt the Big 12 on behalf of Texas Tech:
"Any sanction against Texas Tech for acting consistent with (Judge Curry's) order would be a per se violation of federal and state anti-trust laws -- a naked horizontal agreement among competitors to disadvantage Texas Tech by cutting off access to the resources it needs to compete," the letter, signed by Thomas D. York, head of the office's antitrust division, and Kimberly Gdula, chief of the office's general litigation division, read.
To recap: In January, Texas Tech signed prized quarterback Sorsby out of the NCAA's Transfer Portal, after Sorsby started his collegiate career at Indiana in the 2022-23 and then spent the 2024-25 seasons at Cincinnati.
Despite a seven-figure pact with Cincinnati, Sorsby entered the transfer portal. He visited LSU, under new coach Lane Kiffin, before he signed with Joey McGuire's Texas Tech program.
As the Red Raiders were going through spring football practice in March, Tech's athletics department was notified that Sorsby was being investigated for claims of rampant gambling.
On April 27, via release from Texas Tech, it was revealed that Sorsby was entering into an inpatient facility to treat a "gambling addiction" and "anxiety disorder," both of which Sorsby had received a clinical diagnosis.
The NCAA in late-May issued its ruling that cited the association's bylaws and noted via statement, obtained May 18 by USA TODAY Sports, that "When it comes to betting on one's own team, these rules must be enforced in every case for the simple reason that the integrity of the game is at risk. Every sports league has these protections in place, and the NCAA will continue to apply them equally because every student-athlete competing deserves to know they're playing a fair game."
In his ruling Monday in the West Texas courtroom, Curry leaned on contract law as he granted Sorsby's request for injunctive relief and also established a full-hearing court date of Feb. 8, 2027, for the case -- exactly two weeks after the conclusion of the 2026-27 College Football Playoffs.
The NCAA filed its appeal later Monday and also asked the court to expedite the process.
Ryan Regula, a partner at the Washington, D.C.,- and Phoenix-based law firm Snell and Wilmer, as well as former NCAA student-athlete at both Notre Dame and Pittsburgh, has done extensive contract litigation and written from a legal viewpoint on Curry's ruling in the Sorsby case.
"The NCAA’s strongest argument is structural, not doctrinal," Regula, a football player for a season at Pitt and track scholar-athlete of the year at Notre Dame, told USA TODAY Sports. "If every disciplinary determination can be relitigated in any sympathetic state court, then no uniform system of rules is possible, and without uniform rules, competitive athletics simply cannot function.
"That argument has deep roots. It mirrors the rule-of-reason analysis the U.S. Supreme Court applied in NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), where the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that certain coordinated rules are necessary for the product to exist at all. You cannot have athletic competition without agreed-upon eligibility standards any more than you can have a game without agreed-upon field dimensions. Sorsby’s breach-of-contract theory, taken to its logical conclusion, would subject every NCAA sanction to de novo judicial review in 50 states under 50 different contract-law standards. This destroys the very uniformity that makes competition meaningful.
While Regula noted the potential pathway for the NCAA's legal battle, a Big 12 general manager who spoke to USA TODAY Sports Thursday offered a much more candid view of his program's current mindset.
"I absolutely do," he said, granted anonymity to speak freely, when asked if he expected to see Sorsby playing in Big 12 competition this fall.
Added a defensive assistant coach whose program is scheduled to face the Red Raiders when asked the same question by USA TODAY Sports, "You get the feeling unless someone comes down on them (Texas Tech), they are going to let him play. Which is (bleeping) crazy."
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Big 12 reacts to Texas Attorney General's threat on Brendan Sorsby
Continue reading...
By Thursday afternoon, on the heels of a preliminary meeting with the conference's executive board and ahead of a scheduled meeting of the Big 12's full board on Monday, June 15, the league issued its third statement this week from commissioner Brett Yormark.
"Shortly before the start of today's Big 12 Executive Board meeting, the Conference received a letter from the Texas Attorney General's office notifying the Conference of potential legal action from Texas Tech if the Conference pursues certain actions under its Bylaws," the statement, attributed to Yorkmark, read. "We are taking time with our legal counsel to understand the concerns of the state and will meet again with the full Board next week.
"We moved forward with our Executive Board today in preparation for our full Board meeting on Monday. We had a good and informative discussion. Sentiment among the Executive Board was no different from what we heard from the ADs earlier this week."
Then, Yormark delivered the most important line:
"Our discussion with the full Board will determine our course of action," he said in the statement, "and all options remain on the table."
The ongoing saga has erupted this week after Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby was granted temporary injunctive relief against the NCAA in Lubbock County, Texas, district court by retired judge Ken Curry. The move preempted the NCAA's decision to permanently ban Sorsby from NCAA competition per the organization's rules against gambling. Sorsby has admitted to placing dozens of wagers on his team at Indiana among the thousands of bets totaling at least $90,000 that the investigation has uncovered.
The office of Texas attorney general Ken Paxton cautioned the Big 12 against the conference's ability to sanction its member institutions if a "super-majority of disinterested (athletics) directors" voted to take action against Texas Tech, via the league's bylaws.
Specifically, Big 12 Bylaw 3.6 provides the league with the ability to sanction a member if that institution is deemed to be acting in a manner "materially adverse to the best interests of the Conference."
The attorney general's office, effectively, tried to issue a preemptive strike via threat of legal action againt the Big 12 on behalf of Texas Tech:
"Any sanction against Texas Tech for acting consistent with (Judge Curry's) order would be a per se violation of federal and state anti-trust laws -- a naked horizontal agreement among competitors to disadvantage Texas Tech by cutting off access to the resources it needs to compete," the letter, signed by Thomas D. York, head of the office's antitrust division, and Kimberly Gdula, chief of the office's general litigation division, read.
To recap: In January, Texas Tech signed prized quarterback Sorsby out of the NCAA's Transfer Portal, after Sorsby started his collegiate career at Indiana in the 2022-23 and then spent the 2024-25 seasons at Cincinnati.
Despite a seven-figure pact with Cincinnati, Sorsby entered the transfer portal. He visited LSU, under new coach Lane Kiffin, before he signed with Joey McGuire's Texas Tech program.
As the Red Raiders were going through spring football practice in March, Tech's athletics department was notified that Sorsby was being investigated for claims of rampant gambling.
On April 27, via release from Texas Tech, it was revealed that Sorsby was entering into an inpatient facility to treat a "gambling addiction" and "anxiety disorder," both of which Sorsby had received a clinical diagnosis.
The NCAA in late-May issued its ruling that cited the association's bylaws and noted via statement, obtained May 18 by USA TODAY Sports, that "When it comes to betting on one's own team, these rules must be enforced in every case for the simple reason that the integrity of the game is at risk. Every sports league has these protections in place, and the NCAA will continue to apply them equally because every student-athlete competing deserves to know they're playing a fair game."
In his ruling Monday in the West Texas courtroom, Curry leaned on contract law as he granted Sorsby's request for injunctive relief and also established a full-hearing court date of Feb. 8, 2027, for the case -- exactly two weeks after the conclusion of the 2026-27 College Football Playoffs.
The NCAA filed its appeal later Monday and also asked the court to expedite the process.
Ryan Regula, a partner at the Washington, D.C.,- and Phoenix-based law firm Snell and Wilmer, as well as former NCAA student-athlete at both Notre Dame and Pittsburgh, has done extensive contract litigation and written from a legal viewpoint on Curry's ruling in the Sorsby case.
"The NCAA’s strongest argument is structural, not doctrinal," Regula, a football player for a season at Pitt and track scholar-athlete of the year at Notre Dame, told USA TODAY Sports. "If every disciplinary determination can be relitigated in any sympathetic state court, then no uniform system of rules is possible, and without uniform rules, competitive athletics simply cannot function.
"That argument has deep roots. It mirrors the rule-of-reason analysis the U.S. Supreme Court applied in NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), where the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that certain coordinated rules are necessary for the product to exist at all. You cannot have athletic competition without agreed-upon eligibility standards any more than you can have a game without agreed-upon field dimensions. Sorsby’s breach-of-contract theory, taken to its logical conclusion, would subject every NCAA sanction to de novo judicial review in 50 states under 50 different contract-law standards. This destroys the very uniformity that makes competition meaningful.
While Regula noted the potential pathway for the NCAA's legal battle, a Big 12 general manager who spoke to USA TODAY Sports Thursday offered a much more candid view of his program's current mindset.
"I absolutely do," he said, granted anonymity to speak freely, when asked if he expected to see Sorsby playing in Big 12 competition this fall.
Added a defensive assistant coach whose program is scheduled to face the Red Raiders when asked the same question by USA TODAY Sports, "You get the feeling unless someone comes down on them (Texas Tech), they are going to let him play. Which is (bleeping) crazy."
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Big 12 reacts to Texas Attorney General's threat on Brendan Sorsby
Continue reading...
