Transfer quarterback Brendan Sorsby’s lawsuit against the NCAA, which seeks an emergency injunction restoring his eligibility for the 2026 season, will be heard June 1 at 9 a.m. in Lubbock County’s 99th District Court. Judge Ken Curry was appointed to the case after Texas Tech graduate Judge Phillip Hays recused himself. The NCAA deemed Sorsby permanetly ineligible on Tuesday. Texas Tech president Dr. Lawrence Schovanec sent out a letter stating the school's intent to appeal the recent NCAA decision to make him permanently ineligible. 

But are the Red Raiders better off if a local court allows Sorsby to play? 

The list of entities that is rooting against Sorsby includes the NCAA, the rest of the Big 12, and every college coach and administrator that fears the Pandora’s box that would be opened if a player who admittedly gambled on his own team’s outcome can somehow sue himself back onto the playing field. It should also include Texas Tech. 

The Red Raiders were loud and proud about their NIL and revenue sharing spending ahead of the 2025 season. In their pursuit of national contention and Big 12 dominance, Texas Tech wanted to advertise that it was open for business. 

Signing Sorsby to a $5 million contract out of the transfer portal was another shot across the bow to the blueblood programs who had grown used to dominating the recruiting markets for generations. 

Texas Tech spent aggressively ahead of the 2025 season, but school officials argue the program is only doing what traditional powers have done for decades. The difference, in their eyes, is that Tech isn’t supposed to operate at that level.

“All that Texas Tech has done over the last two or three years is put the resources into this place that blue-blood programs have been afforded for the last 50 or 100 years,” Texas Tech general manager James Blanchard told me this spring. “We’re a program that isn’t supposed to be doing it and they want us to stay where we’re at. But now that we’ve kicked that door in, you’ll never see Texas Tech go backwards.” 

Texas Tech wants to be taken seriously as a college football powerhouse. They don’t want money to be the story. They want the success to trump the spending, like it has done for Oregon or any other team in yearly contention. The Red Raiders needed to advertise the spending heading into last year. Now? The five-star commitments on the recruiting trail and the highly-rated transfer portal additions should speak for themselves. 

And that’s where the Sorsby saga becomes an anchor to that forward movement. If last season’s accomplishments were overshadowed by discussions about money, this season’s would be overshadowed by questions about Sorsby’s gambling and whether he should have been allowed to play at all.

By playing Sorsby if the injunction is granted, Texas Tech would become everything that its detractors falsely accuse it of now — a renegade program that doesn’t care about the sports norms and is only concerned with its rise, no matter the cost – financial or otherwise. 

There aren’t many universally agreed upon rules in sports but No. 1 with a bullet is that an athlete can’t bet on his own team. The only thing keeping athletics afloat is the notion that it is unscripted; that the outcome is up for grabs and that the combatants inside the ring are genuinely trying their best to win. College football becomes the WWE if the NCAA can’t even enforce that golden rule. 

College coaches preach against distractions at a nauseating clip. I can’t think of a bigger distraction than if Sorsby is allowed back onto a college football team. Every first question at every press conference from now until the end of the season would focus on Sorsby’s eligibility. No longer would the faces in those press conferences be relatively friendly local media. 

The safe assumption is that the Sorsby ruling will go against him and that he’ll find himself in the NFL Supplemental Draft later this summer. If the NCAA can’t win this one, it can’t win anything and the entire system must be blown up. Texas Tech doesn’t want, or need, that on its resumé. Not with a team that can win the Big 12 without Sorsby. 

Let’s say you disagree. Let’s say that Texas Tech would welcome Sorsby back with open arms if his injunction is granted. Then what? He’ll likely face at least some sort of suspension that would linger into the season, whether that is three games or six. Do you want that hanging over the team every week, only for the controversy to intensify when he returns? If Will Hammond balls out, do you turn to Sorsby midway through the season? Would the locker room split into Team Sorsby vs. Team Hammond? 

It all feels too risky, even if Tech’s ceiling is lower without Sorsby. The worst-case scenario for the Red Raiders if Sorsby never plays for them is that the 2026 season ends without a Big 12 title and return trip to the CFP, which would just result in Tech spending more money on the roster heading into 2027 to ensure that doesn’t happen again. 

The worst-case scenario for the Red Raiders if Sorsby comes back feels more damaging. It could cost them the locker room, maybe Hammond, and a scarlet letter that will be hard to shake. Tech is on the cusp of controlling the Big 12 and punching a yearly ticket to the CFP. It’s positioned itself to be included in any Super League that is formed over the next decade. 

The Red Raiders don’t need Sorsby. And they definitely don’t need this type of drama. They should wish Sorsby well and send him on his way, regardless of the outcome in court.

But some juice simply isn’t worth the squeeze.