The University of Cincinnati is taking legal action against former quarterback Brendan Sorsby. They claim he breached a contract related to his Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) agreement. Cincinnati wants $1 million from Sorsby due to his recent transfer to Texas Tech, despite still being under contract.
Sorsby played for Cincinnati for two seasons before deciding to transfer last month. This transfer goes against a pact he signed that included a $1 million buyout clause if he left before the contract’s end, which was scheduled for December 2026.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court. Cincinnati states that Sorsby had signed an 18-month agreement in July 2025, while represented by a professional agent, which they believed would benefit both parties as he developed. The agreement included payment for the 2025 season, with an expectation that Sorsby’s growing brand would enhance the program’s visibility and revenue in the following year.
When Sorsby decided to transfer, the university reached out to his representation, but they reportedly refused to pay. Sorsby’s agent, Ron Slavin, argues that this legal action is unnecessary. He claims that Cincinnati benefited significantly from Sorsby’s contribution, noting he generated millions for the program and received $875,800 for the season he completed.
Analyzing this situation sheds light on the evolving landscape of college athletics. According to a recent survey by the National College Players Association, over 70% of college athletes believe NIL deals enhance their college experience. However, complicated legal frameworks are emerging around these agreements, leading to disputes like this one.
Adding to the complexity, Texas Tech was aware of the buyout clause when recruiting Sorsby. The university factored this into their budget and revenue-sharing plans for the upcoming season.
This case highlights a new era in college sports where financial agreements can lead to serious legal battles. It’s becoming increasingly common for programs to include buyout provisions in contracts to safeguard their interests. For example, the recent settlement involving Duke University and quarterback Darian Mensah shows that navigating these contracts can be tricky.
Over the past year, as schools adapt to new regulations following the House v. NCAA settlement, we’ve seen a surge in similar issues. While some schools are keen to enforce their contracts, others may focus on maintaining a positive relationship with student-athletes for the sake of future recruitment.
As Sorsby prepares to play at Texas Tech, the legal outcomes of such disputes could have lasting effects on how contracts in college sports are structured and enforced. Both student-athletes and universities are learning to navigate this new landscape with care.
Source link
Cincinnati Bearcats, Texas Tech Red Raiders, College Football, Sports Business
