The Sorsby decision was never about only one student-athlete. We are already seeing downhill effects in other eligibility cases in which state courts are allowing student-athletes to circumvent longstanding eligibility rules, citing Sorsby outcome as part of the court’s precedent. Another example of why we need Congress to pass the Protect College Sports Act, authorizing the association to apply common sense eligibility rules consistently for all student-athletes and schools, regardless of the state or local court system.

In a memo to DI conference commissioners sent today, the NCAA confirms that the Protect College Sports Act would not only prevent the Brendan Sorsby situation but, if the Act becomes law before the case resolves, it stands to "override Sorsby’s legal challenge."

JA'KOBE THARP ARE YOU KIDDING ME 🤯 12.75 ✅ NCAA RECORD ✅ WORLD RECORD #NCAATF x 🎥 ESPN / @AuburnTFXC

There is no better example of why targeted intervention from Congress is necessary. When you have schools and deep-pocketed supporters willing to look the other way on the glaring integrity threat of betting on your own team - and judges whose rulings effectively strip away our ability to stop them - only Congress can equip the @NCAA to apply this common sense rule to everyone fairly and consistently. The Protect College Sports Act would empower the NCAA to enforce rules including the gambling restrictions - it's needed now more than ever.

This is completely false - the NCAA has no commercial partnership with any sportsbook and the NCAA prohibits betting ads during all broadcasts.

The bipartisan SCORE Act ensures college sports are for college athletes, not a safety net for professional players - so while student-athlete leaders across all three divisions support the bill, it is no surprise a handful of pros are opposed.

Want to get fired up? Listen to Pedro:

espn.com/espn/feature/story/… 🏀🏀 The first thing you notice about a 76-team bracket is how much it looks like a 64- or 68-team bracket. Sure, a few seed lines are a little crowded, but the guts of the thing -- and the essence of the NCAA tournament itself -- are unchanged. We'll have the same symmetry as always by the first Thursday of the tournament, and a lot more good than bad will have transpired by then. In particular, four more single-bid conferences will have won a tournament game (and generated essential revenue for their members). Even better, six of the weakest 12 at-large teams -- formerly the "Last Four In," "First Four Out" and "Next Four Out" -- will have earned their way into the main bracket on the court instead of in the committee room. There will be unintended consequences, of course: namely, too many middling major conference entries. But the same thing was said in 1975 when at-large bids were first introduced. The world didn't end then, and it won't end now. It might even be better.

How it works:

Coming next year: more opportunities for student-athletes, better match ups for fans

March is about to get even better. 🏀 #MarchMadness | 🔗 on.ncaa.com/MMExpansion

there's a strict prohibition on advertising and sponsorship restrictions associated with betting during NCAA Championships

The @NCAA has the most aggressive posture toward sports betting among any league in the U.S. and journos who actually know something about betting understand that:

ICYMI: "...@CharlieBakerMA  is now firmly advocating for what portends to be the biggest foundational change to how the NCAA operates since freshmen were fully allowed to participate in college athletics back in 1972." si.com/college-football/ncaa…

Eyes on the prize 👀 #NCAAGYM

No caption needed. 😍 #NCAAGYM

ICYMI: @espn launches new “Home of @NCAA Championships” espnpressroom.com/us/press-r…

“NCAA membership is not waiting for others to act,”