- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If Sorsby came to LSU and all this went down
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:03 am to LSBoosie
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:03 am to LSBoosie
quote:
He was betting against his own team? I haven't seen that. Can you link the article?
Yep. He bet the under on his own team and the under on his teammates passing yards a few times.
Yahoo Sports
quote:
The NCAA expressed disappointment with the ruling via a statement, and writ large, college football fans across the country were just as unhappy with the ruling. Some took exception to the fact that, per an ESPN report, Sorsby took the under for one of his teammates’ passing yards in an October 2022 game, as well as the under for the first half of a Hoosiers football game in September 2023.
“Don’t ever believe the lie from Sorsby that he bet on Indiana because he wanted the game to mean more since he wasn’t playing. He bet the under on a teammate in his own position group,” one person posted on X.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 9:05 am
0
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:07 am to dallastiger55
Many may not remember the Tulane basketball betting issues in the 1980s. Players may not have actively been betting, but they were shaving points for others. It cost the school its basketball team, and it cost the innocent coach a job, and followed him for life. NIL and the portal have changed the game, but if betting by players on their own team is allowed, we can kiss college athletics goodbye.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:09 am to GeauxLSUBengalTigers
quote:
The question you should be asking is would LSU have the audacity to go that length to get him eligible vs what TT did.
Valid question. I think the answer would possibly be no, but I could also see it being yes if LSU boosters were required to pay him $5 million even if he was ineligible.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:11 am to Nitrogen
quote:Of course, but guess I'm talking about in the TT situation, would LSU do that?
I think we would’ve just went with Longstreet honestly. The Tech situation is a bit different considering their usual backup (Will Hammond) is coming off an ACL injury
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:23 am to Sofaking2
quote:
Then everyone can gamble on the games and at anytime. They can bet at halftime on their own games if they want to. If there are no rules it’s basically pro wrestling.
Yep
Well PTO wrestling more organized then NCAA at momment
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:23 am to dallastiger55
I know I wouldn’t defend him… and I know this because in the past when players were booted from LSU for trivial shite, like weed, I was adamant that, “you knew the rules. you broke the rules. pay the consequences.”
If you are too dumb to stay within the very loose rules that are in place nowadays, you don’t deserve to play.
If you are too dumb to stay within the very loose rules that are in place nowadays, you don’t deserve to play.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:25 am to dallastiger55
You underestimate blind faith
More than 25% of this board would be defending the situation.. and I might be underestimating that %
More than 25% of this board would be defending the situation.. and I might be underestimating that %
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:31 am to dallastiger55
quote:
Don’t you think most of this board would be like Tech fans and defending everything?
Some would, because we have a lot of retards here. But most would not. His defense of him needing to play for the sake of his mental health goes against the baw mentality here.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:34 am to dallastiger55
quote:
Don’t you think most of this board would be like Tech fans and defending everything?
Sure we would. We would advocate for whatever benefitted us. That still doesn't make it right.
Secondly, you're assuming that we would follow Tech's path. Maybe the administration would show some courage, conviction and integrity and accept the NCAA's ruling. Who knows, maybe we take the high road. (Doubtful)
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:34 am to dallastiger55
Gambling on your own team should be permanent ban from the league in which you played. I don't care who the person plays for.
I'd say the same thing if he were at LSU.
That is a sacred rule.
I'd say the same thing if he were at LSU.
That is a sacred rule.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:38 am to dallastiger55
I would defend him and LSU and I would defend him at Tech.
Should he be suspended? Yeah probably. And I would be much more against him playing if the NCAA hadn’t done this to themselves. They have created all of these issues that they are in and I have no sympathy for their plight. In my playing days they would hand down extreme punishments for the little guys - small schools, non-revenue generating teams, people who spoke out against them, etc. while they would give near free passes to blue bloods, big names, and money makers.
In gambling cases, NCAA should be taking a much tougher stance against schools, they should be fining schools for not monitoring and educating their Student Athletes close enough. They should be making deals with the sports books to report on all accounts created my Student Athletes. And they should have engaged a student athlete association on a Collective Bargaining Agreement a long time ago. Instead they rather complain about the federal
Government not doing their job and states making it hard for the NCAA to operate.
Infact a CBA would end almost all of these lawfare TRO almost immediately.
Should he be suspended? Yeah probably. And I would be much more against him playing if the NCAA hadn’t done this to themselves. They have created all of these issues that they are in and I have no sympathy for their plight. In my playing days they would hand down extreme punishments for the little guys - small schools, non-revenue generating teams, people who spoke out against them, etc. while they would give near free passes to blue bloods, big names, and money makers.
In gambling cases, NCAA should be taking a much tougher stance against schools, they should be fining schools for not monitoring and educating their Student Athletes close enough. They should be making deals with the sports books to report on all accounts created my Student Athletes. And they should have engaged a student athlete association on a Collective Bargaining Agreement a long time ago. Instead they rather complain about the federal
Government not doing their job and states making it hard for the NCAA to operate.
Infact a CBA would end almost all of these lawfare TRO almost immediately.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:39 am to dallastiger55
The other issue is that I think we all know the outcry from national media had this been LSU. They went crazy when we hired Lane. They went crazy when we hired Wade. They went crazy when he got the players he got. (And still fighting eligibility issues)
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:40 am to dallastiger55
quote:Not really, no.
Don’t you think most of this board would be like Tech fans and defending everything?
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:40 am to Yaboylsu63
quote:
integrity of the sport.
College football lost integrity a long time ago. Recruiting has never, ever been about integrity.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:43 am to dallastiger55
idk man, i like to think that i'm ride or die lsu but come on, gambling on your team. that's the ultimate no-go.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:44 am to GeauxLSUBengalTigers
quote:
The question you should be asking is would LSU have the audacity to go that length to get him eligible vs what TT did.
We are currently adding players to our basketball roster who were drafted and have played in NBA preseason games.
We also tried very very hard to get Sorby here. If we got him and this went down we wouldn’t have any other QB capable of starting.
The answer is yes.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 9:53 am to dallastiger55
quote:
Don’t you think most of this board would be like Tech fans and defending everything?
I'm sure there would be some that would but i would hope most realize that the integrity of the game being questioned is just about the worst thing possible that could happen to the sport. Any active player betting on games they are participating in should receive a lifetime ban in that sport. I don't care which team they play for, or what level they play in, that is a rule that should remain black and white and have severe consequences when broken.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:00 am to dallastiger55
quote:
99.9% of Tech fans are supporting him and saying he did nothing wrong
Where are you seeing this? The vast majority of the people on Reddit with TTU flairs think it's a joke they reinstated him.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:03 am to dallastiger55
quote:
Don’t you think most of this board would be like Tech fans and defending everything?
We also got Longstreet so I hope most reasonable people would want to move on from a cancer at worst and massive distraction at best.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 10:04 am
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:06 am to dallastiger55
quote:
Don’t you think most of this board would be like Tech fans and defending everything?
Absolutely.
That's because LSU fans are like any other fans. Despite the moral high ground they may like to portray on a message board or in pleasant conversation, the reality is the ONLY thing that truly matters in W's/L's and the ends justify the means. Again, that's not limited to LSU fans. It's every fanbase. Ask this question with respect to Oklahoma, Florida, Ohio St, Georgia, etc...and it would be the exact same answer
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News