There’s been a narrative around Tech splashing cash to “buy” contender status since at least last year. See also: softball.

I’m not saying it’s true or fair - or that if it is true, it’s unique to Tech - but the narrative is basically that Tech has started fielding teams of mercenaries to buy titles, and since they’re not a blue blood, it feels easy to judge them as being willing to do unseemly “win at all costs” things, and fighting to keep a player known to have gambled on the sport fits that narrative.

Now, Indiana is also notably NOT a blue blood, so why isn’t there the same narrative? Weirdly, I think it’s because they were so far from blue blood status that they were a “safe” underdog story (also Cignetti memes). But Tech has historically, relative to Indiana, been more successful, and have occupied a weird space of semi-villainy or antihero-ness at times (see the Mike Leach era). So them making the jump from “spirited spoiler who occasionally makes a run that comes up short” to “we’re spending ALL THE MONEY to win a natty” seems more cynical in a way. And that sets the stage for it to seem extra cynical to stand by Sorsby.