- 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
Do SEC schools have any defenses against rogue SEC leadership…
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:35 pm
that defy court orders to push its own agenda and seeks to push members with unsubstantiated claims?
6
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:42 pm to bass
If the school presidents vote for what SEC is proposing, then it is not just league. It is schools as well going along with it. So this is not just a rogue SEC league
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:45 pm to bass
Vote of no condidence of the SEC commisioner by the member institutions and move to replace him
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:47 pm to jp4lsu
They’ve determined LSU is rogue for maximizing its potential within the rules. Sorry, there should be serious repercussions for all that collude to punish a school for following rules.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:47 pm to bass
Seeing as though the other SEC schools are members of the conference, is the leadership rogue if the commissioner feels that he's whipped enough votes for expulsion?
A lot of these other schools are OK with this, because today it's LSU. None of them are calculating that tomorrow, it could be one of them.
A lot of these other schools are OK with this, because today it's LSU. None of them are calculating that tomorrow, it could be one of them.
This post was edited on 9/8/26 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:50 pm to bass
This isn’t Sankey. This is coming from the presidents.
The issue is there’s no protection from the tyranny of the majority.
The issue is there’s no protection from the tyranny of the majority.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:51 pm to bass
Are you saying that going forward UGA, TN, OM, BAMA, UF, Arky, KY and the others HAVE to associate with LSU if they don't want to? They should be forced to accept a member they want out of their club?
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:55 pm to KiwiHead
It shouldn’t be in the hands of biased votes.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 4:57 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
Are you saying that going forward UGA, TN, OM, BAMA, UF, Arky, KY and the others HAVE to associate with LSU if they don't want to? They should be forced to accept a member they want out of their club?
Yes. If they have a binding contract and LSU hasn't breached said contract.
If they are asking the court to let them do it then it seems likely that they don't have the right to do it within the framework of the current contract without fear of being sued by LSU for breach of contract.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:07 pm to bass
So a fraternity should not be allowed to blackball a pledge even after extending a bid?
A private country club should not be able to eject a member who violates club rules or engages in behavior that brings disrupted in the memberships opinion on the club as a whole?
You do realize that you are trampling on 1st Amendment protections? Voting by its very definition entails allowing biases to come into play
A private country club should not be able to eject a member who violates club rules or engages in behavior that brings disrupted in the memberships opinion on the club as a whole?
You do realize that you are trampling on 1st Amendment protections? Voting by its very definition entails allowing biases to come into play
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:14 pm to KiwiHead
The context is that it’s circumventing a court order that was made in response to circumventing a court order…
It’s not like they just randomly decided to vote LSU out for something unrelated
It’s not like they just randomly decided to vote LSU out for something unrelated
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:19 pm to mikesliveisacheater
That is the issue. What the SEC is saying though is that it should be allowed to make its own rules that determine acceptable membership going forward, the question is whether if one member sees those rules as onerous and arbitrary after the fact.
In particular, LSU could legally roster these players and contractually since the season has started the SEC would probably be forced to allow it for this year since the season has started, but it would not preclude the SEC from expelling LSU for next year.
Of course any actions would have to include some monetary settlements. Would LSU be eligible to demand monies generated under the TV contracts that would be in place going forward after the 2026/ 2027 year.
LSU though is not without some leverage in all of this but if the SEC doesn't want them, the SEC does not want them
In particular, LSU could legally roster these players and contractually since the season has started the SEC would probably be forced to allow it for this year since the season has started, but it would not preclude the SEC from expelling LSU for next year.
Of course any actions would have to include some monetary settlements. Would LSU be eligible to demand monies generated under the TV contracts that would be in place going forward after the 2026/ 2027 year.
LSU though is not without some leverage in all of this but if the SEC doesn't want them, the SEC does not want them
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:22 pm to KiwiHead
I would think at a minimum LSU would be able to get its payments through the end of the current tv contract. Could likely get significantly more especially if they can prove collusion or intentional bad faith on the part of other schools.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:25 pm to DeathByTossDive226
So are you saying that because this is in response to a court order that the SEC going forward has no control over its members via enacting bylaws in the future . Do you suggest that local judges can insert themselves at a university's chosing to intervene and seek relief whenever they are on the losing end of a vote they don't like?
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:28 pm to KiwiHead
I’m suggesting that rulemaking authority doesn’t empower you to make illegal rules or to retaliate where you are restrained from retaliating.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 5:36 pm to DeathByTossDive226
Id love to know the argument...LSau didnt roster the players...they didnt play...what rule was violated that deserves expulsion?
Posted on 9/8/26 at 6:02 pm to DeathByTossDive226
What rules are illegal? If the SEC says that because you did what you did and we could not prevent those players from playing this season, we don't want you in our club anymore. We'll let them play you get your win on this, but going forward you can do it in someone else's club.
That's not illegal, or,are you saying that rules are good....conceptually. Until it prevents you from doing what you want? Are you saying the rest of the league has to associate themselves with LSU when the rest of the membership says they don't want to?
That's not illegal, or,are you saying that rules are good....conceptually. Until it prevents you from doing what you want? Are you saying the rest of the league has to associate themselves with LSU when the rest of the membership says they don't want to?
Posted on 9/8/26 at 6:04 pm to bass
The best defense would be what amounts to jury nullification here and voting unanimously to do nothing to LSU and to demand Sankey’s resignation. If the SEC wins the schools we be reduced to abject vassals.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 6:11 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
What rules are illegal?
You serious? The SEC interjected itself trying to circumvent a ruling against the NCAA, they retroactively tried to create a rule (that we have yet to break), then they were enjoined in a TRO and asked to defend against contempt… then the TRO was elevated to an injunction.
The injunction explicitly protects LSU from retaliation.
Now they are voting to expel LSU.
Pretty obvious.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 6:40 pm to DeathByTossDive226
That ruling would not necessarily preclude expulsion for LSU beginning next season. Are you now saying that a court can force through a TRO whom an association wants to let on or stay in. What if the SEC says to LSU, " You got your win, you can play the players and you can finish out the season, but after the season, we are gonna turn our backs on you and cut you loose"
Are you saying the SEC can't do that if the membership decides it?
Are you saying the SEC can't do that if the membership decides it?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News