That would be the ordinary timeline. The NCAA filed an appeal requesting expedited hearing. I can’t imagine this will be slow-walked given the publicity.
1 Like
Don’t sleep on ‘staying eligible’ as some kind of easy major. Plenty of players failed that while staying at one school.
OSU WR Reggie Germany and his 0.0 gpa always comes to mind.
It was indeed 0.0! But…He did graduate with a GPA above 3.0. The 0.0 was, I believe, for one quarter only (not attending classes).
2 Likes
For what it’s worth, the judge originally assigned to the case, who had two degrees from Texas Tech, recused himself. The court’s chief judge then brought in a retired judge from Fort Worth who had no ties to Texas Tech to serve as a temporary judge.
I always think of Katzenmoyer being the SI college football preview edition cover boy while needing to pass music, golf, and health over the summer.
Golf and health I could pass, music maybe not.
1 Like
Dudis-the irreparable harm is the loss of roster money. His deal is for 5 million dollars. The likelihood of success is his argument that gambling is a disease and mental health problem recognized by various health organizations, insurers, etc.
There is only one solution to what is going on, and I was on a thread with Andy Staples yesterday, who wrote an article on this along with fellow Missouri attorney who devotes a majority of his timet to sports law, Mit Winter.
It’s time to collectively bargain with the players.
Betting on your own team can’t be something that gets a mental health accommodation.
If it was just betting on pro sports, sure. Especially when the NCAA flip flopped 6 months ago on legalizing that. But there’s a line you can’t cross.
Additionally I’m still confused as to legal basis for the accommodation in this instance. He’s not an employee. Is it based in some sort of statutory anti-discrimination statute (Title 9 or something else)?
From Miami’s affiliated partner, whose name is on Miami’s Clinical Sciences Building, the Cleveland Clinic:
Might be a bit to “legalese” for some, but this does a very nice job of breaking down the 4 page Sorsby decision. I would have emphasized more how the way this was handed down, takes Federal law largely out of the question, i.e. this isn’t a antitrust claim, but rather breach of contract and as such, governed by state not Federal law. Also, and this is a significant point to make, this is a preliminary injunction and there are means to appeal the decision quickly.
And for those interested, a little primer by a Texas attorney on the injunctive process in Texas:
Texas Tech is not backing down.
The Snell & Wilmer piece looks like bull shit. You could apply that language to an Academically ineligible player too and justify poor grades to “mental health” and so on…
And alcohol use disorder is real, but it’s not a get out of jail free card for a DUI.
I feel like I’m about to face a firing squad! . As I have stated I never want to see him play in the NCAA again. There are differences though between a DUI charge and gambling as a college athlete.
1 Like
How would that help?
Blues, we love ya bud. No firing squads for you! Just keep helping explain the finer points of the law to all the legally challenged MHTers like myself. About the only legal point of law idea I remember from my Principal of Law class I took as a Marketing major way back in 1976 (maybe '77) is the concept of “consideration.” So your explanations much appreciated. Keep it coming.
2 Likes
This guy bet the UNDERS on his own team. The best thing he could do is show some self-respect and resign… I have never heard of this guy before the scandal, and the more it gets convoluted, the worse it gets for his reputation.
Sorsby has a gambling problem, that first and foremost needs to be addressed through counseling, rehab, etc. Texas Tech is doing Sorsby no favors here. They are simply enabling a guy with a problem, because “winning at all costs” is all that matters for Tech.
5 Likes