- 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: Judge grants TTU QB Sorsby's injunction against the NCAA, eligible to play 10 gms in 2026
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:06 am to Diseasefreeforall
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:06 am to Diseasefreeforall
Can someone explain to me the two-game ban part of this thing?
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:08 am to castorinho
quote:
Can someone explain to me the two-game ban part of this thing?
This was the self-imposed penalty that Sorsby/his lawyers/TTU proposed to the NCAA that was denied. The judge just went along with it.
The two games are Abilene Christian and Oregon State. Games they'd win with any QB.
This post was edited on 6/8/26 at 11:09 am
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:09 am to The Pirate King
Hopefully the next time Saban is in Washington he lobbies to have people like Sorsby put in jail. That's one way to help stop this.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:09 am to castorinho
quote:
Can someone explain to me the two-game ban part of this thing?
A good call... so the NCAA can't regulate their "employees" activities, but a judge can issue a punishment within the organization.
This is batshit crazy. I thought the Chambliss ruling was insane, but this makes it look like kiddy hour.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:09 am to The Pirate King
quote:ahh, that makes sense. I was thinking that's random as frick.
This was the self-imposed penalty that Sorsby/his lawyers/TTU proposed to the NCAA that was denied. The judge just went along with it.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:10 am to whatiknowsofar
This Temporary Injunction Order is facially deficient. Texas rule of civil procedure 683 requires that an order granting a temporary injunction must set forth the specific reasons supporting each element. This order merely states that the Court found a probable right to relief without any factual basis supporting that finding.
There is not a single reason given as to why Sorsby has a probable right to relief on any of the causes of action he alleged.
Aside from the merits, this is a particularly surprising order because Judge Ken Curry is a very experienced judge. He knows that the law requires that an injunction order must set forth the specific reasons for his findings. The fact that he didn't is very curious.
In fairness to the judge, he did state the factual basis for his determination that Sorsby would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction did not issue. But that's only one of the elements Sorsby had to prove, and I would say it was the easiest for him to prove. But he had to also prove that he has a probable right to releif on at least one of the causes of action he alleged. In other words, he had to prove that he was likely to win the case at trial. That's the hardest element to satisfy. And the judge simply disregarded that element like an Aranda defense disregards a running QB.
There is not a single reason given as to why Sorsby has a probable right to relief on any of the causes of action he alleged.
Aside from the merits, this is a particularly surprising order because Judge Ken Curry is a very experienced judge. He knows that the law requires that an injunction order must set forth the specific reasons for his findings. The fact that he didn't is very curious.
In fairness to the judge, he did state the factual basis for his determination that Sorsby would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction did not issue. But that's only one of the elements Sorsby had to prove, and I would say it was the easiest for him to prove. But he had to also prove that he has a probable right to releif on at least one of the causes of action he alleged. In other words, he had to prove that he was likely to win the case at trial. That's the hardest element to satisfy. And the judge simply disregarded that element like an Aranda defense disregards a running QB.
This post was edited on 6/8/26 at 11:13 am
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:12 am to CPA Yung Boi
quote:
I’m very pro NIL and think the players should be compensated for being a part of a billion dollar industry
There is no NIL. It's pay for play and I'm against that also. This sport died in 2020 and it's only much worse now.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:16 am to Bayview
Will the NFL even risk taking this bum after this year, knowing about his gambling and all? Is he worth that risk?
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:20 am to dukesilver72
So the guy that's trying to help fix it is also trying to exploit it
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:21 am to Bayview
This is all the NCAA's fault. Going all the way back to well before the Ed O'Bannon stuff, they had ample opportunity to work with its athletes to come to a fair agreement in helping them monetarily beyond a scholarship, or just not being total dicks in certain cases, like the football player who had a t-shirt business on the side that had nothing to do with football, but the NCAA tried to collect because they said he's making the money because he's an NCAA player.
Instead, they kept kicking the can down the road, basically daring the players to take legal action. Once that first supreme court ruling hit in favor of a player, it was all downhill from there. The NCAA has zero power now based on precedent and it sucks because it has totally ruined college athletics from an entertainment standpoint.
I can't fault the players for trying to make money though. That's what we are as a society. The NCAA could've helped with that, instead they didn't and we are where we are now, and there is no going back.
Instead, they kept kicking the can down the road, basically daring the players to take legal action. Once that first supreme court ruling hit in favor of a player, it was all downhill from there. The NCAA has zero power now based on precedent and it sucks because it has totally ruined college athletics from an entertainment standpoint.
I can't fault the players for trying to make money though. That's what we are as a society. The NCAA could've helped with that, instead they didn't and we are where we are now, and there is no going back.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:22 am to The Pirate King
Don't worry....the NCAA will make this right and give Texas St a 7 year bowl ban.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:27 am to The Pirate King
Just abolish the NCAA already.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:29 am to Vandergriff
quote:
Some local yahoo judge wants to see his team win a bunch of football games. That's more important than integrity these days. Much less the rule of law. Of course this is where we are now.
One of the most asinine court rulings I've ever seen.
Bingo.
quote:
Canon 3B(2) — Faithful to law, not pressure or preference
“A judge should be faithful to the law and shall maintain professional competence in it, including by meeting all judicial-education requirements set forth in governing statutes or rules. A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.”
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:31 am to The Pirate King
This doesn’t make sense
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:33 am to beauchristopher
Cody Campbell playing the innocent bystander here is freaking hilarious.
quote:
Texas Tech booster + board chair Cody Campbell's statement to @On3 on injunction: "This unfortunate situation is the outcome of a broken system. I’m doing everything I can to fix it, but until there is a permanent solution, Texas Tech and its student athletes have to do the best they can to navigate and compete amid the chaos that exists in the reality of the world we live in."
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.This post was edited on 6/8/26 at 11:34 am
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:35 am to The Pirate King
It feels like a mockery statement just to get ahead of the immense backlash
F*ck Cody Campbell
F*ck Cody Campbell
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:35 am to The Pirate King
quote:
Cody Campbell playing the innocent bystander here is freaking hilarious.
Yep. But LSU is the bad guy for hiring some coaches.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:40 am to gringeaux
quote:
Per the injunction it stated that the NCAA cannot bar him from practicing, playin, or otherwise participating on TT football team for the 2026 season.
But does it bar the NCAA from levying penalties, fines, or otherwise forcing Texas Tech to forfeit all games he played in AFTER 2026?
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:44 am to SHPMustang
This could then get appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, right?
I figure the NCAA will try to fight this to the very top.
I figure the NCAA will try to fight this to the very top.
Posted on 6/8/26 at 11:45 am to The Pirate King
quote:
Texas Tech booster + board chair Cody Campbell's statement to @On3 on injunction: "This unfortunate situation is the outcome of a broken system. I’m doing everything I can to fix it, but until there is a permanent solution, Texas Tech and its student athletes have to do the best they can to navigate and compete amid the chaos that exists in the reality of the world we live in."
I would like to assure Cody Campbell that Texas Tech does not have to do this to compete. His hypocrisy would embarrass even the most morally repugnant politician.
Popular
Back to top


2







