Cincinnati Faces NCAA Inquiry Tied to Brendan Sorsby Betting Case

CINCINNATI: The NCAA has sent the University of Cincinnati a letter of inquiry tied to former quarterback Brendan Sorsby’s gambling case.

The inquiry adds pressure on the school as college sports continues to confront athlete betting, eligibility disputes and sports integrity concerns.

The letter reportedly concerns Sorsby’s two seasons with the Bearcats and what Cincinnati knew about his gambling activity. A letter of inquiry does not establish wrongdoing, but it can mark the start of a formal NCAA review into possible rules violations.

Cincinnati Denies Staff Knowledge

Cincinnati has said it has been in contact with the NCAA since the first reports involving impermissible sports wagering. The school has also denied that athletics officials or staff members knew of any impermissible betting by Sorsby while he was with the program.

“We have had continuous conversations with the NCAA since the initial reports related to impermissible sports wagering began,” a Cincinnati spokesperson said. “As we have stated before, we do not believe any athletics official or staff member was aware of any impermissible sports wagering.”

Cincinnati coach Scott Satterfield, who coached Sorsby during his two seasons with the Bearcats, declined to comment on the reported inquiry at Big 12 Media Days in Frisco, Texas. The NCAA also declined to comment, citing its policy of not discussing ongoing investigations.

The inquiry could focus on whether Cincinnati knew, or should have known, about betting activity that affected Sorsby’s eligibility. Sorsby’s agent, Ron Slavin, has publicly suggested Cincinnati knew about the quarterback’s gambling activity during his time with the program, a claim the university has disputed.

Sorsby Betting Case Raises Eligibility Questions

Sorsby played two seasons at Indiana before transferring to Cincinnati, where his performance made him one of the top quarterbacks in the transfer portal. He later transferred to Texas Tech for what was expected to be his final college season.

The NCAA declared Sorsby permanently ineligible in April after he acknowledged impermissible betting activity during his college career. Reports said he placed bets totaling at least $90,000 across four years of college football.

Sorsby acknowledged placing at least 40 bets on Indiana while he was a freshman there in 2022, though none were on games in which he played. He also acknowledged placing at least 165 impermissible bets on college and professional sports in 2024, including wagers on Cincinnati men’s basketball through a shared FanDuel account.

After the NCAA declared him ineligible, Sorsby sued and received a court order that would have allowed him to play for Texas Tech. The ruling drew criticism and raised concern across the Big 12 because any later eligibility reversal could have affected conference competition or postseason access.

Texas Tech Split Followed Court Fight

Texas Tech eventually cut ties with Sorsby. Head coach Joey McGuire said the program could not risk a situation where eligibility issues affected its ability to play in the Big 12 championship game or the College Football Playoff.

The Texas Tech split followed months of eligibility uncertainty after Sorsby was ruled out of playing for Texas Tech. The decision came after his NCAA gambling case moved through court and raised questions about whether a school could rely on an athlete whose eligibility remained under legal challenge.

Sorsby later dropped his lawsuit against the NCAA and sought to enter the 2026 NFL Supplemental Draft. The NFL is not holding a supplemental draft this year, and Sorsby is now expected to prepare for the 2027 NFL Draft.

Sorsby also posted publicly that he accepts full responsibility for his actions. He said he did not have control of his gambling problem and that getting caught forced him to recognize it.

The Cincinnati inquiry extends a case that already involved Indiana, Cincinnati, Texas Tech, the NCAA, the Big 12 and the courts. It also shows how sports wagering violations can move beyond individual athletes and raise questions for schools, conferences and regulators.

The case fits into wider concern around athlete betting and sports integrity, especially as college athletes operate in an environment shaped by legal sports betting, NIL deals and transfer movement. The issue has become broader than one quarterback, with athlete betting cases forcing sport to rewrite its rulebook.

For Cincinnati, the key issue is whether the NCAA finds any basis to question the school’s handling of Sorsby during his time with the Bearcats. For the NCAA, the case is another test of whether its sports wagering rules can be enforced consistently when athletes also turn to courts to challenge eligibility decisions.

The inquiry remains unresolved, and no finding against Cincinnati has been announced. However, the letter shows that the Sorsby gambling case is still expanding beyond the quarterback’s personal eligibility and into broader questions about institutional oversight.

RELATED TOPICS: Regulation