Big 12 lawsuit against Texas Tech over Brendan Sorsby has not yet been dismissed

Quarterback Brendan Sorsby is gone from Texas Tech but not forgotten by the Big 12.

Via Heather Dinich of ESPN, the conference has not yet dismissed its lawsuit against Texas Tech. The federal complaint, filed on Monday, June 15, prompted Texas Tech to pull the plug on the Sorsby experiment. Later that same day, the school gave Sorsby something more than a nudge to enter the NFL supplemental draft.

The case persists amid concerns regarding potential liability for the conference, and regarding a belief in some Big 12 circles that Texas Tech should foot the bill for the legal fees incurred as a result of Tech's insistence on proceeding with a player who had permanently lost his NCAA eligibility, but who had secured a court order restoring it.

"There may need to be consequences for Texas Tech, even if it works out this way," an unnamed Big 12 athletic director told Dinich. "It was pointed out there's been legal fees involved in this action. Is it right for all 16 schools to share in those legal fees when we didn't have anything to do with starting it? Those are some of the things that are going to have to be worked out and they will be."

It could reasonably be argued that the Big 12 did indeed start it. The conference decided to reject the ruling that Sorsby would be eligible to play while his lawsuit against the NCAA proceeded, and to pressure Texas Tech to not let Sorsby play.

Again, any of the other schools in the conference would have done the same damn thing Texas Tech did after landing the No. 1 player in the transfer portal and facing the prospect of not being able to put him on the field. The hue and cry against Texas Tech oozed with hypocrisy from the get-go.

Sorsby won a court order allowing him to play. Why would Texas Tech not honor the order? Why would any school in the same situation not behave the same way?

The practical question, as to the issue of legal fees, is whether the conference believes it has gotten its desired pound of flesh. It won. Frankly, it should take "uncle" for an answer and not insist on rubbing Tech's nose in it.

The other concern cited by Dinich — potential Big 12 liability — becomes interesting if, in the end, the NFL either doesn't allow Sorsby into the supplemental draft or suspends him for all or part of the 2026 season. Sorsby could, if he so chooses, explore a potential claim for tortious interference against the Big 12. Or collusion in violation of the antitrust laws among the members of the Big 12. Or, frankly, collusion between the Big 12 and the NFL to ensure that Sorsby ultimately endures a tangible punishment in the form of not being allowed to play football for part, most, or all of the 2026 season.

Whether any such claims would prevail depends largely on the emails, text messages, and other discoverable communications exchanged by key individuals in the aftermath of Sorsby winning in court. The sudden hysteria likely resulted in more than a few potential smoking-gun comments painting a vivid (and possibly profane) picture that the Big 12 was determined to keep Sorsby from playing, regardless of the court order permitting it.

By having an active case pending in the preferred forum of federal court, the Big 12 could file an amended complaint that joins Sorsby and seeks a declaratory judgment that it did not violate his rights, if it believes Sorsby will be suing. Otherwise, the conference risks the possibility that Sorsby will file a fresh lawsuit in Lubbock County against the Big 12 arguing that the conference violated his rights by forcing Texas Tech to engineer Sorsby's exit for the NFL.

Regardless, the legal skirmishes may not be over. The Big 12 still may want something from Texas Tech. And Sorsby still may want something from those who conspired to subvert the injunction that otherwise allowed Sorsby to play college football in 2026.