Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

But we didn’t break any rules?

Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:07 pm
Posted by tadelatt
Buga Nation
Member since Jan 2010
12431 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:07 pm
Commenting on the SEC, about something we didn’t do, makes no sense.


Like, don’t be shocked when a judge tosses this out if her courtroom and denies the TRO tomorrow. All this is over is the comments and nothing else given as we never signed or played any pro players…


So this is ONLY about comments?
Posted by Shiftyplus1
Marathon, FL
Member since Oct 2005
14811 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:08 pm to
This is about Sankey getting his fee fees hurt. That's literally all this now.
Posted by tadelatt
Buga Nation
Member since Jan 2010
12431 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:10 pm to
I’m seriously trying to understand…are they saying we can’t criticize the SEC?

How many times has any other coach done so? Should we start pulling receipts of times coaches commented about the SEC?
Posted by BOSCEAUX
Where the Down Boys go.
Member since Mar 2008
53400 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:11 pm to
quote:

I’m seriously trying to understand…are they saying we can’t criticize the SEC? How many times has any other coach done so? Should we start pulling receipts of times coaches commented about the SEC?


Spurrier would have been tarred and feathered.
Posted by jiffyjohnson
1226 miles from Death Valley
Member since Nov 2011
6037 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:14 pm to
quote:

How many times has any other coach done so? Should we start pulling receipts of times coaches commented about the SEC?


this should happen immediately since the amendment today was directed towards CLKs comments to Holly Rowe before halftime and LSUs administrations lack of addressing it constituting LOIC
Posted by VooDude
Member since Aug 2017
3872 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:14 pm to
Sankey is very self destructive.
Posted by Klark Kent
Houston via BR
Member since Jan 2008
76237 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:15 pm to
if Sankey loses (and i expect and pray he does). It should be the SEC Presidents meeting to fire the feckless butthurt count.
Posted by FMtTXtiger
Member since Oct 2018
5482 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:16 pm to
if this is about Lanes half time jab, why not just a fine?
Posted by TigerRoar95
Member since Dec 2025
75 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:32 pm to
The SEC said the reason for this is a “lack of institutional control at the university level— including complete lack of control over coach Lane Kiffin’s actions.”

Translation:

Greg Sankey: “Lack of institutional control at the university level”
Translation: I got embarrassed on the witness stand, the judge ruled against me, and LSU wanted to follow a legally binding court order.

Greg Sankey: “Complete lack of control over coach Lane Kiffin‘s actions.”
Translation: I am butt hurt that Lane said, “Imagine if we had pro players.”
Posted by philly444
stuck in contraflow
Member since Nov 2008
12563 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 7:33 pm to
The SEC is kinda resembling Nazi Germany right now.
Posted by tadelatt
Buga Nation
Member since Jan 2010
12431 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:15 pm to
I can’t get past how the players filed the lawsuit, not us. We just said we wanted to sign them legally. We didn’t until we won and we never did so we didn’t sign them.

That’s it.

Anything else is just us making comments and you can fine him for it.


Anything more is insane. Paul Finnebaum is an a-hole that supports the lobbyist that gives him the most money but outside of him, literally no one is on the SEC side here
Posted by icecreamsnowball
Member since Mar 2025
1764 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:17 pm to
quote:

Spurrier would have been tarred and feathered.
He wasn’t at LSU so he would’ve been fine.
Posted by dinner roll
buttery goodness
Member since Feb 2006
6645 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:18 pm to
I don’t get the point of the suit. The SEC bylaws allow for a vote to expel. Why does the SEC need to file a suit asking for authority to have a vote to expel?
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
483085 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:20 pm to
quote:

I don’t get the point of the suit. The SEC bylaws allow for a vote to expel. Why does the SEC need to file a suit asking for authority to have a vote to expel?


The state TRO case in LA prevents the SEC from using its enforcement authority. It's not clear what other parts of the SEC member agreements are or aren't enforceable, which may be dissolved with state court rulings in random states.
Posted by BillyBobfan24_7
R.I.P. SGT Nelson
Member since May 2004
18787 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:26 pm to
So you think a Federal court is going to tell the SEC they can disregard a state courts order?
Posted by White Tiger
Dallas
Member since Jul 2007
16097 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:44 pm to
Looking at the SEC's own bylaws, I would say no apart from the bad faith August 25 Zoom meeting rule about no one who signed a pro contract could return to college sports and made it retroactively effective. This is 100% bad faith.
Posted by dinner roll
buttery goodness
Member since Feb 2006
6645 posts
Posted on 9/9/26 at 12:53 pm to
quote:

So you think a Federal court is going to tell the SEC they can disregard a state courts order?


That pesky Rooker Feldman doctrine and the Anti Injunction Acts say otherwise. At least that would be my starting argument.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram