Who said the offseason is dull in college football? The legal battles have replaced gridiron battles to keep the adrenaline rushing. Right now, Cincinnati football is suing former Bearcats quarterback Brendan Sorsby. As a result, Scott Satterfield’s program is now seeking $1 million in damages after Sorsby transferred to Texas Tech. With tensions boiling over, the quarterback’s agent dropped a statement. 

“Pursuing legal action against Brendan Sorsby is misguided. University of Cincinnati, through its revenue-share structure, paid him $875,800 for a season he fully completed, and in that time, he generated millions in value for the program,” Sorsby’s agent Ron Slavin of LIFT Sports Management shared. 

According to Justin Williams of The Athletic, the Bearcats are coming after Sorsby for a $1 million buyout. The allegations raised are that the quarterback violated a multi-year NIL revenue-sharing deal he signed with the program. However, Sorsby’s agent claims that the decision to transfer was not one-sided. Rather, both parties agreed to the move. 

“This is further disappointing given that Brendan parted ways with UC in what was a mutually agreeable manner. The money the university seeks to recover from him is nothing more than an unlawful penalty under Ohio law,” added Sorsby’s agent. 

The dispute escalated on February 25, when the University of Cincinnati took the formal step of filing a lawsuit in the Southern District of Ohio, officially bringing the NIL disagreement into a federal courtroom. The complaint alleges that back in July 2025, Sorsby, while represented by an agent, signed an 18-month, two-season NIL agreement with the Bearcats.

News served to you like never before!

Prefer us on Google, To get latest news on feed

Prefer Us on Google

According to the agreement, the program also agreed to pay the quarterback a hefty amount for the season, “with the express expectation that it would realize the majority of the benefits during the following season, 2026, after Sorsby’s play developed and his brand grew.”

However, there is a catch. The deal came with a major fine-print clause stating that if Sorsby transferred before completing his full 18 months at the University of Cincinnati, he would owe the school $1 million in damages. Also, it has to be paid within 30 days of the move, according to the lawsuit. 

According to the charges brought in the lawsuit, the quarterback has yet to pay the $1 million. It’s been two months since the quarterback decided to hit the portal in December 2025, before UC’s Liberty Bowl appearance. He did not have to wait long in the wings and signed with the Texas Tech Red Raiders in early January. The contract reportedly contained an exception that would have voided the buyout if Sorsby had declared for the NFL draft. 

Cincinnati is not breaking new ground here. College programs have already started taking the matter to court when NIL deals go sideways. Back in December, the Georgia Bulldogs sued former edge rusher Damon Wilson II for $390,000 in liquidated damages after he transferred to the Missouri Tigers. Now that Sorsby finds himself in a legal entanglement, how will it affect his new program?

Texas Tech’s role in the Brendan Sorsby case continues to draw attention

Joey McGuire made the biggest splash this transfer season by landing Sorsby. This move is considered one of the richest NIL deals ever. According to the reports, the deal is in the $5-6 million range. Unfortunately, it’s the same NIL that has now robbed Sorsby’s sleep. 

But will Texas Tech, too, be dragged into the legal battle? Going by the guidelines from the College Sports Commission, Sorsby’s buyout has to be counted by the Texas Tech Red Raiders under the school’s $20.5 million revenue-sharing cap for the 2025-26 fiscal year. That said, Texas Tech isn’t cutting a check to the Cincinnati Bearcats to cover the damages. The cost counts against the cap, not as a direct payout.

Sorsby’s case serves as a high-profile test for the new era of college football economics. How this $1 million buyout is resolved will not only determine his financial future but could also set a crucial precedent for how programs like Texas Tech navigate high-stakes transfers under the new revenue-sharing model.