As far as former Texas Tech QB Brendan Sorsby is concerned around the Big 12, it is “see no evil, hear no evil, but you also better double down on speaking no evil,” according to Bryan Fischer of SI. The story of the offseason in college football involved a Big 12 school -- Texas Tech -- and the gambling issue surrounding Sorsby. But does that mean the Big 12 “wants to actually talk about” Sorsby and the “entire saga surrounding the will he, won’t he, he won’t roller coaster to get him eligible to play in 2026?” Fischer: “No, not one bit it seems.” Over the past few years, the Big 12 has done “everything it can to attract attention to itself and the brand of competitive football it plays.” But this year’s media days are “clearly an attempt to turn the page on a story which captured rapt attention the past few months.” Not a single question about Sorsby or the “legal furor he brought about was asked at the main stage for TV cameras” in the nearly two hours between Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark and Texas Tech coach Joey McGuire stepping up to the microphone on Tuesday. And while there were a few ADs “milling about” doing interviews, Texas Tech AD Kirby Hocutt “was not among them.” In addition, Texas Tech board Chair and out-front booster Cody Campbell was not present after doing radio row at last year’s media days. That meant McGuire “took any slings and arrows thrown his school’s way” on Tuesday (SI, 7/7).
AVOIDING THE POINT: In Dallas, Kevin Sherrington wrote on one hand, you could see “why the commissioner might not be interested talking about how the league’s new marquee program became the consensus villain of college football” in “one of the most unsettling episodes in the Big 12’s contentious history.” On the other, a player placing thousands of bets, many on his own team, “was pretty big news,” and there was not “much in the way of transparency about the process leading to his exit.” Sherrington: “Why not address it in July instead of kicking the can down the road?” Yormark could have “moved it along Tuesday.” He had a “duty to respond” in public about a league issue that “remains the talk of college athletics.” The commissioner “needed to make clear why the league took the stance that it did on Tech while acknowledging the university remains a valued and trusted member.” It would have required the “kind of finesse and gravitas his predecessor, Bob Bowlsby, displayed in difficult times.” But those simply “aren’t Yormark’s strong points” (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 7/7).
HERE’S THE QUESTION: USA TODAY’s Matt Hayes writes a member of the media asked Yormark a “legitimate question” about why the Univ. of Cincinnati -- Sorsby’s former school -- is not part of any investigation into Sorsby’s gambling. Yormark responded, “We’re going forward as 16 strong and that’s my answer to your question.” Hayes writes it was as “punk a move as you’ll see” at any of these events. Hayes: “Here’s the answer we want, Brett: it’s time for the Big 12 and NCAA to come clean about Cincinnati’s alleged knowledge of Sorsby’s gambling. If Cincinnati knew and played Sorsby anyway, there should be NCAA sanctions.” If Cincinnati did not, “why let the university twist in the wind with the question everyone in the Big 12 wants answered?” (USA TODAY, 7/8).
