Ultimately, leagues can do whatever they want, but I think FAAB and waivers are the cleanest and fairest solution. Here's why.
Managers Have Known This Was a Possibility
This isn't a situation that appeared out of nowhere. Back in early May, reports surfaced that if Sorsby couldn't regain NCAA eligibility, entering the NFL Supplemental Draft was a realistic possibility. That means dynasty managers have already had months to prepare.
The Supplemental Draft will likely take place in late July, which still gives managers additional time to make moves before anything becomes official. If you believe Sorsby is worth targeting, you can start preparing right now. This isn't much different than other situations we've seen before. When the Steelers signed Hakeem Butler out of the UFL, managers immediately started checking waivers to see if he was available. Nobody argued he should wait until the next rookie draft. The difference here is that Brendan Sorsby is a significantly better prospect. The concept is still the same. A player enters the NFL player pool and becomes available to fantasy managers.
FAAB Is Part of Dynasty Strategy
One of the biggest arguments I hear about this is that waivers create too much luck. I don't really buy that argument. In my leagues, managers receive $100 of offseason FAAB and then reset to $100 once the regular season begins. If Sorsby hits waivers, the manager who values him the most can position themselves to acquire him:
• Trade for FAAB.
• Save FAAB.
• Include FAAB in deals.
Plan ahead.
In many ways, it functions similarly to an auction. The highest bidder wins. And managers still have plenty of time to acquire more FAAB if they want to make a serious push for Sorsby.
Moving Him to the 2027 Draft Punishes Managers Who Planned Ahead
• There are managers who intentionally saved FAAB.
• There are managers who traded late-round rookie picks for extra FAAB.
• There are managers who included FAAB as throw-ins during trades.
• There are managers who completely ignored post-rookie draft waivers because they wanted flexibility later in the offseason.
Why should those managers lose the benefit of their planning? Pushing Sorsby into the 2027 rookie draft effectively wipes out every strategic decision those managers have already made. It also rewards managers who did absolutely nothing.
Some dynasty managers have been preserving resources all offseason waiting for opportunities like this. Others spent aggressively after rookie drafts. Both are valid approaches, but those decisions should have consequences.
That's a part of dynasty football.
“If I would’ve known, I wouldn’t have blown all of my FAAB.”
Another reason I struggle with the 2027 rookie draft argument is people are arguing that they wouldn't have spent FAAB on their recent waiver additions if they knew Sorsby was going to be available. We are in the same boat, as I wouldn't have spent FAAB on Jack Endries ($15), John Michael Gyllenborg ($8), or Garrett Nussmeier ($25) in one of my leagues either if I knew Sorsby was an option, but instead of dwelling on it, I adapted.
I targeted FAAB as throw-ins in my recent trades, and now I hold the most FAAB in the league. Saying you spent money elsewhere isn't a valid excuse when you can actively make moves right now to put yourself in a position to go get him.
He Can Play During the 2026 Season
Whether he contributes immediately is beside the point. If an NFL team selects Sorsby in the Supplemental Draft, he immediately becomes an NFL player. He signs a rookie contract. He joins an NFL roster. He becomes eligible to play during the 2026 season.
Could he face a suspension related to his gambling history? Possibly.
Could he spend most of the season developing on the bench? Absolutely.
But dynasty managers roster developmental quarterbacks all the time. The fact that he may not produce immediately doesn't mean he should be unavailable until 2027. If he's eligible to be on an NFL roster in 2026, I believe he should be eligible to be on a fantasy roster in 2026.
The Bigger Issue Is League Process
The biggest concern for commissioners shouldn't be Brendan Sorsby specifically. It's the process. If your bylaws already contain a Supplemental Draft rule, follow it. That's easy. But if your bylaws don't address the situation, I don't think commissioners should be creating entirely new acquisition methods in the middle of the offseason.
In my leagues, we vote on league changes during our annual offseason meeting using majority voting. Any rule change or addition requires unanimous approval if it will be added during the season. Otherwise needs to be voted on next offseason. Managers need confidence that the rules won't change after they've already made strategic decisions.
If your league wants a Supplemental Draft process in the future, discuss it this offseason and put it in the bylaws. But for this year, I believe leagues should follow the rules that already exist.
Every league can make its own decision. But in my opinion, FAAB and waivers remain the best solution.