Texas Tech's Brendan Sorsby is headed for a Lubbock courtroom to try and earn his way back on the field. Can Ole Miss' Trindad Chambliss case help him out?
In the latest development to the saga that has captivated not only folks in Lubbock but across the national college football landscape, Texas Tech quarterback was officially ruled ineligible by the university following a gambling scandal.
Despite their decision to rule out Sorsby, the Red Raiders stated that they are immediately beginning the reinstatement process with the NCAA. Sorsby is also taking matters into his own hands for a chance to suit up for Texas Tech.
ESPN's Pete Thamel broke news that Sorsby alongside a lengthy list of lawyers filed a lawsuit against the NCAA in a Lubbock County court to attempt to earn a preliminary injunction that will restore his eligibility.
READ MORE: Brendan Sorsby Takes NCAA Fight to Court
Latest reports indicate that the potential judge in the case, a two-time graduate of Texas Tech, recused themselves from the case. The new judge presides in Tarrant County, meaning the courtroom battle will head to the DFW Metroplex. For those interested in the possible alumni connections, this new judge graduated from UT-Arlington and the University of Houston.
If this whole legal fiasco is beginning to seem familiar, it might be for a good reason. Earlier this offseason, Ole Miss had its starting quarterback, Trinidad Chambliss, ruled ineligible after he appealed to play one more season in Oxford.
Similarly to Sorsby, Chambliss then sought legal council and sued the NCAA in hopes of reversing their decision. He argued that the governing body of collegiate athletics failed to uphold their end of the deal with Chambliss after he was sidelined with an injury at Division II Ferris State and not granted a medical redshirt.
In a momentous change of fortunes for both Chambliss and the Rebels, the Mississippi court ruled in favor of him and granted Chambliss the preliminary injunction that has him set to play for Ole Miss this upcoming season. Notably, the NCAA attempted to appeal this reversal with the Mississippi Supreme Court, however, it determined that it had no right to prevent Chambliss from playing.
While the circumstances underlying Sorsby's situation are very different than a simple appeal for an extra season of play, there is an argument to made that he could benefit from the learning and building upon the foundation Chambliss set.
That idea seems to also be in the minds of his legal team, as Sorsby's claim against the NCAA is strikingly similar to the argument made by Chambliss. Recall the idea that the NCAA failed Chambliss by refusing the medical redshirt? Well, Sorsby is positing that it let him down by punishing him for a "mental illness" that it simultaneously profits from.
It is an interesting position to take but one that holds water. Sports betting has become almost as common in college athletics as marching bands and mascots. Although Sorsby is admittedly guilty of violating the gambling rules set by the NCAA, it is understandable why he feels there is a double-standard.
Sorsby has the benefit of hindsight from watching Chambliss take on the NCAA head-on just months ago. But the biggest question that remains is will his case be strong enough to sway the opinion in his favor against the supposed all-powerful entity.
The decision in Chambliss' case was already impactful and now the potential ruling in Sorsby's could completely blow up the environment of college athletics as it stands today.
