The NCAA faces mounting legal pressure over its gambling enforcement policies as another starting quarterback fights for his eligibility in state court.
Former Indiana quarterback Brendan Sorsby placed at least 40 wagers on Indiana football games and individual players while enrolled at the university. Sorsby placed the bets between June 2022 and December 2023. The wagers on the Hoosiers totaled at least $850.
In total, Sorsby placed over 2,900 bets amounting to roughly $90,000 across a four-year period. He used sportsbook accounts registered to friends and family. The NCAA denied his request for reinstatement. Sorsby is scheduled for an injunction hearing on Monday in Lubbock County District Court to fight for his 2026 eligibility at Texas Tech.
The defense team filed court documents Friday detailing the $90,000 in total wagers, including his 40 bets on Indiana football and a recent 35-day stint in rehab for gambling addiction. Sorsby transferred from Cincinnati to Texas Tech ahead of the 2026 season. He recently took an indefinite leave of absence for his in-patient treatment in Arizona.
Sorsby maintains he never bet against his own team. He claims the bets were intended to make him feel more connected to his teammates while redshirting in 2022. He stated he did not wager on any games where he actively played.
Texas Tech head coach Joey McGuire and university president Lawrence Schovanec are publicly backing the quarterback. Schovanec wrote an open letter arguing the NCAA’s permanent ban should be reversed due to the clinical reality of gambling addiction. The university formally appealed to the NCAA. They recommended a two-game suspension instead of a permanent ban.
What Texas Tech’s Appeal Means for NCAA Gambling Bans
The Texas Tech administration’s decision to publicly back Sorsby challenges the NCAA’s absolute zero-tolerance policy on betting involving a player’s own program. By recommending a two-game suspension and citing his 35-day clinical rehab, the university wants to reclassify sports betting violations as a medical issue rather than a purely punitive integrity breach. Monday’s injunction hearing will test whether state judges agree with the NCAA’s permanent ban framework.