- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
CFP to discuss rule barring teams from competing with professional players
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:52 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:52 am
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. This seems like the most important rule because I believe the CFP operates independently from the NCAA but I could be wrong. Could be the nail in the coffin for all of this.
10
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:57 am to CWILKS3
Whatever at this point.
If they do this and we have to back away from these players then so be it.
But if Texas or Missouri or any other teams get to keep their players on some stupid technicality.. then F that.
This whole thing feels very punitive towards LSU only when other schools are participating as well.
If they do this and we have to back away from these players then so be it.
But if Texas or Missouri or any other teams get to keep their players on some stupid technicality.. then F that.
This whole thing feels very punitive towards LSU only when other schools are participating as well.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:01 am to CWILKS3
I hope these 2022 4 for 4s sue the ever living frick out of the NCAA, SEC, BIG 10, ESPN, Paul Finebaum, etc
Every single NCAA athlete since 2018 has been granted 5 years except these men and women. Why is that? Why were they singled out?
They want chaos and to be able to beg congress to intervene.
But at a certain point, its not our fight and its gonna be up to the players and their attorneys to litigate and seek the appropriate relief.
Every single NCAA athlete since 2018 has been granted 5 years except these men and women. Why is that? Why were they singled out?
They want chaos and to be able to beg congress to intervene.
But at a certain point, its not our fight and its gonna be up to the players and their attorneys to litigate and seek the appropriate relief.
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 9:03 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:01 am to CWILKS3
We're in a world where a college QB can make more than half an NFL roster and not be enrolled in a single class and we're not going to call them a professional athlete because... word salad. 
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:03 am to CWILKS3
Then the CFP should bar teams competing with players whose eligibility the NCAA has denied as well. That is the issue at hand: the players are not eligible, but picking and choosing which court decisions to follow is pathetic and unethical, not to mention hypocritical.
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 9:09 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:04 am to Yaboylsu63
quote:
But if Texas or Missouri or any other teams get to keep their players on some stupid technicality.. then F that.
Texas, Mizzou(I guess, not up to speed on who Mizzou has), and LSU have commits from players who never signed a professional contract. Guys who went to minicamp tryouts but did not make a preseason roster. These are not the guys these rules are targeting.
quote:
This whole thing feels very punitive towards LSU only when other schools are participating as well.
LSU went big, and because of Lane, it also drew some eyes. But I think the rule is good in the long run.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:05 am to CWILKS3
I don't see any way they can enforce this. In fact doing this now just gives kids on contending teams the ability to add the CFP to the lawsuit
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:05 am to Honkus
It's going to be funny when some of these players end up playing for LSU and the SEC/NCAA end up paying their NIL for us.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:09 am to CWILKS3
This is interesting to consider because while the injunction could preclude formal punishment from anyone (SEC, NCAA, CFP, etc.) against LSU or other schools who utilize these players, let’s play out a scenario here…let’s say LSU is 10-2 and is among a handful of 9-3 & 10-2 teams in consideration for playoff berths. Could the CFP then leave LSU out of the playoffs as punishment for their roster but avoid any legal repercussions since the CFP is entirely subjective (strength of schedule, “eye test”, some other metric, etc) and claim it is not punitive? This is where it gets very messy.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:12 am to TigerConvert93
quote:
strength of schedule, “eye test”, some other metric, etc
Let's see em make that case when we go 12-0
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:14 am to CWILKS3
We all saw what happened to the NCAA when they tried to enforce illegal rules. They are now known to be powerless.
I guess the SEC and CFP are trying to go that direction as well?
I guess the SEC and CFP are trying to go that direction as well?
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:16 am to TigerConvert93
quote:
Could the CFP then leave LSU out of the playoffs as punishment for their roster but avoid any legal repercussions since the CFP is entirely subjective (strength of schedule, “eye test”, some other metric, etc) and claim it is not punitive? This is where it gets very messy.
They do meet weekly to discuss specifically which teams they're going to put in the playoffs or not and why or why not. I'm no lawyer, but I would assume that discovery would arrive to each member of the playoff committee as an unlubed 4x4 that would be inserted into their anus with a railgun.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:16 am to Honkus
TRUE. I like the way you think. I’d prefer that. But I do think the scenario I laid out is more in line where most people have predicted our team - in the 10-2 or 9-3 range. I like your option better though.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:19 am to CWILKS3
This is ridiculous.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:20 am to wadewilson
But why could the committee members simply not say “we felt 10-2 BYU was better than 10-2 LSU.” I’m obviously making up a scenario here. Even if it was obviously untrue that 10-2 BYU is better than 10-2 LSU, there’s no clear way to prove their decision would have been punitive. It’s potentially an easy way to sidestep a court order.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:23 am to mdomingue
quote:
Texas, Mizzou(I guess, not up to speed on who Mizzou has), and LSU have commits from players who never signed a professional contract.
quote:
Texas
Texas player did NOT sign a contact, but he DID enter the draft and not withdraw prior to it, which is absolutely one of the type of players the rule is targeting
quote:
Yes, Cole Hutson entered the 2026 NFL Draft after exhausting his college eligibility with the Texas Longhorns. He went undrafted in April 2026
ETA and yes I'm aware that he didn't know he could go back at the time, but just pointing out that by the letter of the law according to sec rules now, he still didn't remove his name.
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 9:29 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:27 am to TigerConvert93
You're missing my point.
To get to the decision, they talked about LSU every week and why they couldn't let LSU in, that the media hated LSU and Kiffin, etc etc.
Thus, collusion.
To get to the decision, they talked about LSU every week and why they couldn't let LSU in, that the media hated LSU and Kiffin, etc etc.
Thus, collusion.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:29 am to CWILKS3
Good. The rule changed. They got their four in. No need to screw the younger classes taking positions away from them. End this BS now.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:30 am to The Pirate King
The CFP will not be punishing players, but the institutions. So unless the schools sue the CFP I don’t see how they can fight this
Posted on 8/27/26 at 9:50 am to CWILKS3
What about Chambliss? NCAA deemed him ineligible
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News