- 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
Is this about LK getting back at Ole Miss?
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:43 am
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:43 am
Because if they deny LSU players due to running out of eligibility, then Ole Miss quarterback should be illegal to play right? 5 for 5 is in effect right?
Last laugh?
Last laugh?
6
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:44 am to Raging Tiger
quote:
then Ole Miss quarterback should be illegal to play right?
no, legally speaking the 2 are completely unrelated
This post was edited on 8/25/26 at 10:46 am
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:46 am to Honkus
How? If they implement that then it’s 5 for 5 without medical exception.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:47 am to Raging Tiger
No I think this is about lane kiffin trying to win football games.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:47 am to Raging Tiger
That would be some 4d chess, but I dont think it would happen.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:48 am to Raging Tiger
quote:
Because if they deny LSU players due to running out of eligibility, then Ole Miss quarterback should be illegal to play right? 5 for 5 is in effect right?
Last laugh?
Tell me you have no idea what's going on without telling me you have no idea what's going on.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:49 am to mdomingue
Tell me how the rule is not applicable there?
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:52 am to SmoothBox
quote:
No I think this is about lane kiffin trying to win football games.
Lane left Ole Miss - I don't think he has any sort of vendetta against them or animosity.
He wants to win a title - that is it.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:54 am to mdomingue
I get the no NFL players stuff but they technically had a 5th year added after they went to the NFL. Chambliss technically already used his 5th year and both had TROs to play. I get Chambliss retained his amateur claim so it's different but it's because he needed a TRO with a homecourt judge like the LSU players.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:55 am to Raging Tiger
quote:
Tell me how the rule is not applicable there?
Chambliss graduated from HS in 2021. The guy got a regular redshirt and a medical redshirt, albeit a dubious one, which has nothing to do with 5-for-5. He wouldn't even qualify under the 5-for-5 rule.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:56 am to Raging Tiger
quote:
Tell me how the rule is not applicable there?
the stupidity of this board sometimes.Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:57 am to mdomingue
That’s two redshirts… not allowed under 5 for 5 which the NCAA is operating under.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:58 am to USAFTiger42
quote:
I get the no NFL players stuff but they technically had a 5th year added after they went to the NFL. Chambliss technically already used his 5th year and both had TROs to play. I get Chambliss retained his amateur claim so it's different but it's because he needed a TRO with a homecourt judge like the LSU players.
Yes, but the OP was lumping Chambliss' case into the 5-for-5 case. I would also add that the Chambliss case was fully adjudicated; these have not been.
ETA: not fully adjudicated; my mistake, but the preliminary injunction bars the NCAA and, I believe, the SEC or any other party from penalizing the school for playing him.
This post was edited on 8/25/26 at 11:25 am
Posted on 8/25/26 at 10:59 am to mdomingue
5 for 5 don’t care
If you’re okay with Trinidad Chambless getting a 6th year to play then you should be okay with the LSU situation.
If you’re okay with Trinidad Chambless getting a 6th year to play then you should be okay with the LSU situation.
This post was edited on 8/25/26 at 11:02 am
Posted on 8/25/26 at 11:02 am to Raging Tiger
quote:
That’s two redshirts… not allowed under 5 for 5 which the NCAA is operating under.
Not for 2021 (and technically 2022) HS graduates. They are under the old rules.
Once again, you are mistaken.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 11:02 am to mdomingue
thanks for the clarification. damn....
Posted on 8/25/26 at 11:03 am to Raging Tiger
quote:
If you’re okay with Trinidad Chambless getting a 6th year to play then you should be okay with the LSU situation.
I, like most here, was not OK with that.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 11:04 am to mdomingue
So you’re telling me 2021 rules are still in effect for him and him only?
Posted on 8/25/26 at 11:12 am to mdomingue
quote:
Yes, but the OP was lumping Chambliss' case into the 5-for-5 case. I would also add that the Chambliss case was fully adjudicated; these have not been.
I think you’re missing the point. Ole Miss had to go to a rogue judge after the NCAA had twice denied Chambliss a 6th year. Kiffin is using the NCAA ‘s own rules.
This post was edited on 8/25/26 at 11:13 am
Posted on 8/25/26 at 11:20 am to da prophet
That’s my point. Additionally, how does his 6th year apply? If the SEC tries any funny business I think you have this in your back pocket.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News