First Eagle!

So, Brendan Sorsby, Texas Tech transfer QB, was found guilty of sports betting by the NCAA. He admitted to it. He placed thousands of bets over multiple years while at Indiana and Cincinnati. This included betting on his own teams.  The NCAA rules ban athletes from betting on any sport (college or pro).  A retired visiting judge from Tarrant County, Texas has put an injunction on the NCAA ruling. He is a visiting judge because the first judge was a graduate and big fan of Texas Tech, and he recused himself. The judged ruled the following... "Under Curry's order, Sorsby is permitted to play for Texas Tech's 2026 season on the condition that he continues his treatment for a gambling and anxiety disorder and serves a two-game suspension (missing games against Abilene Christian and Oregon State)."  Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly care for the NCAA. That still doesn't mean that a college can choose when or where to say, "Yea we agree to these rules for all our sports, well except in this case." Here is a breakdown from S&W. The Hidden Weapon in Sorsby’s Injunction: How a Lubbock County Court Order Quietly Neutralized the NCAA’s Most Powerful Enforcement Tool - Law Offices of Snell & Wilmer By Ryan J. Regula On June 8, 2026, Lubbock County District Court Judge Ken Curry issued a temporary injunction in Brendan Sorsby v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Cause No. DC-2026-CV-0791 (99th Judicial District... The main judgement made sense. Sorsby, I am going to have all this harm done to me if I don't get to play. The Judge, I agree. The penalty for gambling is too harsh, so here are all these things you must do, and I will grant this injunction against the NCAA. Basically, an analogy would be when a person goes into court for a DUI and they agree to all these other things to not end up in jail.  What sucks for the NCAA is the NCAA has appealed to Texas’ Seventh Court of Appeals, based in Amarillo. All four justices that preside over the court are graduates of Texas Tech University School of Law. It would be hilarious if all four of them had to recuse themselves 🤣. For those who like to read legal rulings...  

The chatter in my brain is when the distance is between clubs since I am pretty weak at shortened backswings, etc. I try to simply decide if being long or short is the better outcome and choose my club based on that and simply not even try for the “real” distance.  For me a full normal swing is what I strive for.

I saw this comment made in a golf article... "Most golfers stand over a 4- or 5-iron still negotiating with themselves. They think about how hard to swing, whether they have the right club, if they have the aim correct and more. It’s a lot to deal with and long irons punish the “half-in” golf swing." I am not sure the "most golfers" is correct regarding the bolded part. I can understand if there is a bunker, water, and/or OB that a lot of golfers would be fixated on that. I am not sure that leads to ending up more times there. Pending your level in golf, the variance is so large in outcomes, it could be just with in the expected outcomes. I can understand if have a big lake on the right side of the hole being one of the most terrifying shots for right-handed amateur golfers.  I am not sure many golfers are standing over the ball talking to themselves, "Ok, maybe I should step back and pull the 4-iron. Am I lined up right? Oh, the wind came up, should I swing harder? What am I going to have for dinner tonight, maybe steak. (Joking, somewhat 😛)" A question is that how much chatter do you get while standing over the ball. Are you questioning the everything about your golf shot?   

Wordle 1,816 5/6 🟨🟨⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

Wordle 1,816 3/6 ⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨🟩⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩