Brendan Sorsby may have left Texas Tech, but the Big 12’s federal lawsuit over his eligibility has not been dismissed. Filed Monday, June 15, it comes as the conference weighs liability, legal fees across member schools, and what happens if the NFL limits Sors
Brendan Sorsby is gone from Texas Tech now. But the fight that began after he secured a court order—allowing him to play while a separate case ran its course—has not ended for the Big 12.
The conference has not dismissed its lawsuit against Texas Tech, with the federal complaint filed on Monday, June 15. That filing set off immediate consequences in Lubbock: Texas Tech pulled the plug on the “Sorsby experiment. ” and later that same day the school gave Sorsby more than a nudge to enter the NFL supplemental draft.
The case continues even as concern lingers inside the Big 12 about potential conference liability. There is also a belief in some Big 12 circles that Texas Tech should cover the legal fees produced by Tech’s insistence on moving forward with a player the conference viewed as permanently having lost his NCAA eligibility—despite Sorsby having obtained 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 said. “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.”.
That’s the dispute in plain terms: the Big 12 argues it pressed back against Texas Tech on the idea that Sorsby should not play while his lawsuit against the NCAA proceeded, while Texas Tech acted as if a court order meant the program had to follow the ruling.
The conference’s stated position was to reject the ruling that Sorsby would be eligible to play during the pendency of his NCAA case. The Big 12 also applied pressure for Texas Tech to not let him play.
Those facts collide with a counterpoint that’s already circulating in Big 12 football circles: if a court order restored eligibility, why wouldn’t any school honor it? The core argument is simple—if the same situation landed elsewhere, the reaction likely would not have been different.
The practical question hanging over the legal feud is whether the Big 12 ultimately gets the outcome it wants on liability and money. It already appears to have moved the pieces quickly: the federal complaint went in on June 15. Texas Tech halted the planned usage. and the same day Sorsby was directed toward the NFL supplemental draft.
But the stakes grow depending on what the NFL does next. The Big 12’s concern about liability becomes more pointed if—at the end of the process—the NFL does not allow Sorsby into the supplemental draft or suspends him for all or part of the 2026 season.
If Sorsby ends up facing an NFL-imposed punishment, the door opens for him to pursue claims. The possibilities raised here include a potential tortious interference claim against the Big 12. an antitrust-based collusion claim among members of the Big 12. or—most starkly—an allegation of collusion between the Big 12 and the NFL to ensure Sorsby endures 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 succeed would depend heavily on evidence available through discovery—emails. text messages. and other communications exchanged by key individuals after Sorsby won in court. The argument being raised is that the sudden escalation inside the conference likely produced comments that could end up mattering if the case turns to proof of intent.
There is also a procedural path the Big 12 could take while the matter remains in federal court. With an active case pending in that forum, the conference could file an amended complaint that joins Sorsby and seeks a declaratory judgment that it did not violate his rights, if it expects him to sue.
If it does not, the risk shifts. The conference could face the possibility that Sorsby files a fresh lawsuit in Lubbock County, arguing the Big 12 violated his rights by forcing Texas Tech to engineer Sorsby’s exit for the NFL.
For now, the only certainty is that the legal skirmish is not simply a matter of paper and procedure. The Big 12 still may want something from Texas Tech. And Sorsby may still want something from those who. as the dispute frames it. tried to subvert the injunction that allowed him to play college football in 2026.
In sports, departures are often final. In this one, the paperwork refuses to be.
Big 12 Texas Tech Brendan Sorsby lawsuit NCAA eligibility federal complaint June 15 NFL supplemental draft 2026 season injunction legal fees