College Football 2026, Texas Tech, Brendan Sorsby, and other troubles

[Keg Man]

I think the ruling is ridiculous. He bet on College Sports. He bet on his own team - but didn't have insider information? HE ADMITTED HE BET ON COLLEGE FOOTBALL AND HIS OWN TEAM!

But the Arbitrator rules, his interests weren't taken into account by the NCAA? And, enjoined the NCAA from preventing him from playing.

A retired Judge from Lubbock - the location of Texas Tech - made this decision as an arbitrator. Yup, that was impartial. Like Seargent Schultz, I Know Nuffing! But, it smells like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck. That arbitrator is on the take. I didn't say I think so. I said I know so. Most Arbitrator's split the baby. I don't know how his back is getting greased but he would swoosh down an unwetted metal slide during a bright sunny hot Texas afternoon.

Is it right to not schedule Texas Tech? It sounds harsh. But, if College Athletics are to keep any semblance of not being Red Light District Whores, it really is the right thing to do.

Nebraska and Georgia already supposedly committed to now scheduling Texas Tech in any sport in the future. I applaud them. Will it go well? Will others follow their lead? Probably not.

So it's known where I stand:

I believe College Athletes were paid through their scholarships, the benefits afforded D1 Athletes inclusive of but not exclusive of others, free education, free room and board, food service, workout facilities, tutoring, scheduling exceptions. I believe one of the biggest things was their ability to show off their skills to the pros. Observing the poor athletes that couldn't afford to eat or buy anything not emaciated in fantastic shape and growing in size and with designer clothes, jewelry, and expensive accoutrements, I don't believe their lives were any tougher than a regular college student living college life. Sorry just don't. Yes, some kids had more stuff. They always do.

I've accepted that College Athletes are getting paid. I don't like it. But, I've accepted it. I think it's ruining College Sports. For example, merely days after winning the College Woman's World Series TX star pitcher is leaving for greener pastures. Good for her to make more money - Bad for UT and College Sports.

I'm not even excited about WI's football class. I know many/most of them will not play for WI. Or, if they do, WI will be a stepping stone towards greener pastures. Good for them - Bad for WI and College Sports.

I don't like but accept the athletes being paid. But, I can't accept the athletes gambling on sports, their sport, and especially their team. Letting Sorsby play is wrong. We get what we sow and we are sowing a bad bunch.

 

[HowardK4]

I think the ruling is ridiculous. He bet on College Sports. He bet on his own team - but didn't have insider information? His interests weren't taken into account by the NCAA?

A retired Judge from Lubbock - the location of Texas Tech - made this decision as an arbitrator. Yup, that was impartial. Like Seargent Schultz, I Know Nuffing! But, it smells like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck. That arbitrator is on the take. I didn't say I think so. I said I know so. Most Arbitrator's split the baby. I don't know how his back is getting greased but he would swoosh down an unwetted metal slide slide during a bright sunny hot Texas afternoon.

Is it right to not schedule Texas Tech? It sounds harsh. But, if College Athletics are to keep any semblance of not being Red Light District Whores, it really is the right thing to do.

Nebraska and Georgia already supposedly committed to now scheduling Texas Tech in any sport in the future. I applaud them. Will it go well? Will others follow their lead? Probably not.

So it's known where I stand:

I believe College Athletes were paid through their scholarships, the benefits afforded D1 Athletes inclusive of but not exclusive of others, food service, workout facilities, tutoring, scheduling exceptions. I believe one of the biggest things was their ability to show off their skills to the pros. Observing the poor athletes that couldn't afford to eat or buy anything not emaciated in fantastic shape and growing in size and with designer clothes, jewelry, and expensive accourtrements, I don't believe their lives were any tougher than a regular college student living college life. Sorry just don't. Yes, some kids had more stuff. They always do.

I've accepted that College Athletes are getting paid. I don't like it. But, I've accepted it. I think it's ruining College Sports. For example, merely days after winning the College Woman's World Series TX star pitcher is leaving for greener pastures. Good for her to make more money - Bad for UT and College Sports.

I'm not even excited about WI's football class. I know many/most of them will not play for WI. Or, if they do, WI will be a stepping stone towards greener pastures. Good for them - Bad for WI and College Sports.

I don't like but accept the athletes being paid. But, I can't accept the athletes gambling on sports, their sport, and especially their team. Letting Sorsby play is wrong. We get what we sow and we are sowing a bad bunch.

well said. I don't know how a local judge can over-rule NCAA rules when the young man was admittingly guilty! He knowingly broke the rules (to HIS benefit) and that can't be punished?