College Football Thread

[Brass Cannon]

Correct me if I’m wrong but the problem stems from the fact they aren’t employees correct?

[jermhoosierfan]

10 minutes ago, rayl456 said:

There’s just no end to the stupidity of this story and our “legal” system.  JMHO. 

The Protect College Sports  Act may not be perfect, but the stuff happening like with Sorsby is the reason something has to be done.  The NCAA needs to have some teeth in their bite.

[Pagoda]

This is (was) a cut and dry rule.

CFB has an issue if player gambling (including on their OWN team) is legal or a slap on the wrist.  Fans are gonna wonder, which is a real and serious problem.  It’s why every sports league severely penalizes players that gamble on their sport.

Also… if this stands what rule can the NCAA enforce?  Are we gonna see bad calls being taken to court?  Oh, this call was wrong and caused a loss resulting in “irreparable harm.”  The court rules this loss is now a win.

Hopefully the NCAA wins on appeal.

[Hovadipo]

Seems like this is the line every time one of these idiotic rulings happens, but this really does feel like the one that’ll change things. I’m just not sure how or in what way. Unbelievable, truly. 

[Demo]

46 minutes ago, jermhoosierfan said:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/49000177/brendan-sorsby-granted-injunction-vs-ncaa-eligible-play-2026

If the NCAA can't say a player can't play because he was betting on his team which about every athletic organization from the NFL to MLB to the NBA says they can't do, what are they good for?  

"The ruling also said that Sorsby "demonstrated that he will 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."  What in the world does this mean?  This judge had to be paid off or is an alumni of Texas Tech.

 

Surely this nonsense is overturned. The 1 good thing might be that the NCAA can go back to Congress and say, “C’mon we can’t even regulate this? We have got to have an antitrust exemption.” And maybe a few folks with some juice have the good sense to push that forward because it just has to happen. 

[American HoosierX]

Absolutely incredible, what a joke. He is going the be the villain of all villains in college sports this year.

I agree this will really light the fire to do something at the legislative level. It has to right?

[Demo]

Don’t bother trying to find the dumbest single imaginable take on this thing because Cowlishaw just hit a tape measure shot of blinding stupidity. Ain’t no one touchin’ this one. 

[Hovadipo]

1 minute ago, Demo said:

Don’t bother trying to find the dumbest single imaginable take on this thing because Cowlishaw just hit a tape measure shot of blinding stupidity. Ain’t no one touchin’ this one. 

The most unapologetically Texas Guy ever bringing the heat. 

[Stuhoo]

The thing is, it can be legislated against; it just hasn't been. The NCAA is an internal industry regulatory group; because of that they routinely lose in court. It will take legislation to truly produce fixes.

As Hova stated, this may be the case that spurs the creation of legislation, though the legislative proposals that I've seen about college sports don't mention gambling prohibitions.

Anyway - this is an injuction - a stay for Sorsby - not a judicial ruling that he can play. I agree with this judge that the injunction was warranted because there's a pending appeal that needs to be decided by August - he remains eligible until that appeal is heard. However, I also strongly suspect that the appeal will now be heard really quickly and that this injunction will be a moot point by the time the season starts.

[Demo]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7340104/2026/06/08/demond-williams-washington-contract-transfer-dispute/?unlocked_article_code=1.olA.Kooy.wxdE_P6eFXLP&source=athletic_user_shared_gift_article_copylink&smid=url-share-ta
 

Pretty interesting read on the Demond Williams/ Washington portal saga. 

[Stuhoo]

23 minutes ago, Demo said:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7340104/2026/06/08/demond-williams-washington-contract-transfer-dispute/?unlocked_article_code=1.olA.Kooy.wxdE_P6eFXLP&source=athletic_user_shared_gift_article_copylink&smid=url-share-ta
 

Pretty interesting read on the Demond Williams/ Washington portal saga. 

One word summary of the article? "Kiffen-ed."

[jermhoosierfan]

1 hour ago, Demo said:

Don’t bother trying to find the dumbest single imaginable take on this thing because Cowlishaw just hit a tape measure shot of blinding stupidity. Ain’t no one touchin’ this one. 

In his reasoning, Pete Rose should have never been suspended because he only bet on the team he was managing to win and never to lose.  If the NCAA can't suspend players from betting, they can't do anything.

[Lebowski]

1 hour ago, Stuhoo said:

The thing is, it can be legislated against; it just hasn't been. The NCAA is an internal industry regulatory group; because of that they routinely lose in court. It will take legislation to truly produce fixes.

As Hova stated, this may be the case that spurs the creation of legislation, though the legislative proposals that I've seen about college sports don't mention gambling prohibitions.

Anyway - this is an injuction - a stay for Sorsby - not a judicial ruling that he can play. I agree with this judge that the injunction was warranted because there's a pending appeal that needs to be decided by August - he remains eligible until that appeal is heard. However, I also strongly suspect that the appeal will now be heard really quickly and that this injunction will be a moot point by the time the season starts.

Man, I hope you're right here. If Sorsby is playing this season than the sport and our judicial system is truly broken. He admitted to the ULTIMATE NO NO regarding athletes betting while playing in competitive sport. It's the most sacrilegious thing to do and even some of his peers will have a hard time trusting him. Every move he makes on the field will be questioned. This is bad. Really bad. 

[Brass Cannon]

1 hour ago, Demo said:

Don’t bother trying to find the dumbest single imaginable take on this thing because Cowlishaw just hit a tape measure shot of blinding stupidity. Ain’t no one touchin’ this one. 

I know he’s an idiot but has he never heard of point shaving?

[Lebowski]

Let me repeat. Some of Sorsby's own teammates will have a hard time trusting him. 

I don't understand how Joey McGuire is even allowing him to play. It says more about Coach McGuire than it does anything. That locker room will have multiple players questioning the coach's own integrity. 

Any loss, 'potential point shaving' play whether that be a throw away, fumble, etc. etc. will be questioned by some of the players in the locker room. 

This is bad. Really bad.

[Pagoda]

16 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

I know he’s an idiot but has he never heard of point shaving?

Yep.  And even when betting on your own team, varying the amount bet on each game and the type of bet (e.g., money line or a spread to cover) all creates conflicts and sporting integrity issues.

Did Brendan try that pass to cover a spread?  He bet $100K on this game and $5K on that game… is he playing differently?  What’s more important to him, the bet outcome or the team outcome?

One of the more annoying things is when someone pretends to not understand something really basic in an argument.  Cowlishaw a case in point example here.

[AKHoosier]

The #1 rule in sports is that you can't bet on your own team. Sorsby broke that rule thousands and thousands of times.

All the adults in the room should be united in efforts to permanently ban him from competition, but here we are. 

[Brass Cannon]

4 minutes ago, AKHoosier said:

The #1 rule in sports is that you can't bet on your own team. Sorsby broke that rule thousands and thousands of times.

All the adults in the room should be united in efforts to permanently ban him from competition, but here we are. 

Yeah at this point the conference has a duty to force the schools hand.  

[Lebowski]

2 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Yeah at this point the conference has a duty to force the schools hand.  

What can the conference do? Won't they be going directly against the courts?

[Stuhoo]

13 minutes ago, AKHoosier said:

The #1 rule in sports is that you can't bet on your own team. Sorsby broke that rule thousands and thousands of times.

All the adults in the room should be united in efforts to permanently ban him from competition, but here we are. 

Currently toothless to make that happen. That's the current situation.

8 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Yeah at this point the conference has a duty to force the schools hand.  

Toothless. That's the current standard.

5 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

What can the conference do? Won't they be going directly against the courts?

Yes. That's why there needs to be legislation that courts can cite as the justification for prohibiting certain acts. Courts rely on precedence, statutes, laws, and ordinances. Once there are legislated rules in place and players lose in court, the confeences will have the ability to enforce because they can have confidence they will win on appeal.