A judge’s ruling in Texas is sending shockwaves through college sports. Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby, who wagered $90,000 on sports games, was banned from the sport. But he and the school appealed, arguing he has a gambling addiction and anxiety issues. The judge agreed, and Sorsby will most likely play this year. William Brangham discussed more with Danny Funt.
Geoff Bennett:
A judge’s ruling in Texas is sending shock waves through college sports. The case involves Texas Tech star quarterback Brendan Sorsby, who wagered $90,000 worth of bets on sports games, including betting on teams he was playing for.
Our William Brangham has more — William.
William Brangham:
That’s right, Geoff.
Sorsby’s betting, all of which is prohibited by the NCAA, included 40 bets on Indiana while he was a freshman there. He was banned from the sport and would not have been able to play his last year at Texas Tech. But he and the school appealed, arguing he has a gambling addiction and anxiety issues.
And, yesterday, a judge agreed, writing that Sorsby — quote — “has demonstrated he will suffer a probable, imminent and irreparable injury if he does not play football for Texas Tech this fall.” The NCAA has appealed, but Sorsby will most likely play this year.
To unpack all of this, we are joined by journalist Danny Funt. He’s written about sports betting for “The New Yorker,” and his recent book is called “Everybody Loses: The Tumultuous Rise of American Sports Gambling.”
Danny, great to see you again.
The ironclad rule has always been, when you’re a pro athlete or a college athlete, you do not bet on games, certainly not on games regarding teams that you are playing for. So what do you make of this quite unprecedented ruling?
Danny Funt:
You’re right. This has been sports’ cardinal sin, from the Black Sox to Pete Rose to a handful of athletes who’ve been indicted for betting against their teams or even just on games they’re playing in over the past few years.
So this comes as a shock. I didn’t — I wasn’t surprised to hear people say they’re disgusted, they think this is ruining sports, people will never trust what they’re watching again.
The other side of that coin, though, is that we know we’re seeing a potential surge in gambling problems, especially among young men. Brendan Sorsby is kind of the target demo of the sort of American who’s being bombarded with appeals to gamble.
So it’s no surprise that someone like him might develop a gambling problem and be betting on all sorts of sports they’re watching and a lot of games they’re not watching. The issue is, how does the NCAA manage that, the desire to discourage players from gambling, but also acknowledging that this is a real health threat and people who suffer in that respect need help?
William Brangham:
The NCAA issued a statement, basically rejecting this ruling, saying it’s concerned about the — quote — “damaging, far-reaching and broadly destabilizing ramifications of this outcome, which undermines and corrupts the integrity of sports.”
Do you feel like a red line has been crossed here? I mean, is this not an indictment of this entire sports betting Pandora’s box that we have unleashed on society?
Danny Funt:
The real conclusion as I see it is that it’s an untenable situation.
If you make it so easy to bet on not just who’s going to win or lose, but how individual players are going to perform, if you spend billions in advertising and you have the leagues, the conferences, and the media companies that show these games all pushing gambling as aggressively as possible, players, just like everyone else, are going to get caught up in it.
And can you really ban for life every player who makes that mistake, especially if they develop a compulsive habit? And hopefully we’re coming around on recognizing that this is a legitimate addiction. And when you suffer in that way, it’s pretty brutal to your life and extremely hard to overcome that disorder.
I have seen some people kind of mocking him, Brendan Sorsby, that is, for seeking treatment and saying I couldn’t help myself. I think that’s a dated way of looking at it. But, again, all that said, it’s hard to imagine a world in which we’re allowing people to bet on their teams. That just is the ultimate betrayal of your teammates, fans, everyone who cares about these games.
Can we enjoy sports if we’re always wondering, are these athletes, to say nothing of their coaches and referees, wagering, as opposed to just trying their hardest to win?
William Brangham:
Right.
How have other teams across college football reacted to this?
Danny Funt:
You have seen some athletic directors, administrators, other people, particularly in the Big 12, where Texas Tech plays, say they’re disgusted, that college football has lost its soul. I have heard threats that teams will boycott playing Texas Tech or encourage the college football playoff from making them ineligible if they allow Brendan Sorsby to play.
A lot of this is wrapped up in the fact that Texas Tech is a really formidable team, in part because they have a lot of money to spend on players. And Sorsby reportedly was going to make about four or five million as a result of transferring to Texas Tech.
So there’s a lot of bad blood that might be fueling some of that rhetoric. But at the same time, I think all sorts of people have reasons to worry that, if we’re going to allow athletes to bet on games, it kind of destroys the whole thing.
The whole thing is premised on the assumption that people, their only priority is winning and helping their teammates do their best.
William Brangham:
That is journalist Danny Funt.
Danny, always great to hear from you. Thank you so much.
Danny Funt:
My pleasure. Thank you.
