- 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
0
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:21 pm to b rod lsu
quote:
Which is a clear demonstration of a choice to "move on from college athletics" (Sankey's words, not mine).
I mean, you can go back even a little further. All of the Class of 2022 made themselves draft eligible and did not withdraw so they "made the decision to move on from college athletics."
Of course, when the NCAA and its members (including the SEC schools) did not give them the choice to return to college at the time, why would they withdraw from the draft and not seek employment?
Basically, Sankey using "move on from college athletics," if he did do so, was a very poor choice of words.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:21 pm to SaneTiger
The rules that are different depending on what team it is.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:22 pm to Shanks A Lot
quote:
fuk you’re a dumbass!
Melt vitch...just melt.
I live in your thoughts....enjoy be controlled
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:22 pm to mikesliveisacheater
quote:
They are treading into deep water on this one just to save face for their hastily passed rules last week. I don't know how they are going to put the toothpaste back in the tube after this. Seems like either LSU goes to another conference or Sankey gets thrown under the bus by the other Presidents.
It really is baffling, and it is literally a one-year issue. They're creating quite the legal trail of collusion and coersion to defend in the future.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:23 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
Bottom line SEC argument fwiw: Louisiana may be able to declare these guys eligible to play college football, but Louisiana cannot force the Southeastern Conference to accept LSU playing them under our banner while preventing us from enforcing our own rules.
They better make the same argument in Texas and Mississippi then.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:24 pm to RB10
Dont forget Kentucky and Missouri
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:25 pm to RB10
quote:
They better make the same argument in Texas and Mississippi then.
I don't know why people keep saying this. Its a really stupid point, whenever the SEC has already said ad nauseum where its (arbitrary) red line is, and that's inking a pro contract.
It doesn't matter that the position is silly and contextually moronic. But its an incredibly easy distinction that makes our situation different from the others.
Again--it doesn't matter if you think the difference is stupid or trivial--but it IS the answer to "why us?"
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:25 pm to RB10
Mars confirming that the lawsuit was just to halt the process
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:25 pm to Jwho77
quote:
Basically, Sankey using "move on from college athletics," if he did do so
The word "choice" is also important in this context. If there is no meaningful alternative available, it's not a "choice."
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:25 pm to RB10
quote:
They better make the same argument in Texas and Mississippi then.
Chambliss's eligibility does not violate SEC rules. He never signed a professional contract, unlike Wright and Harris, among others.
I am not sure about the Texas situation you reference.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:25 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
Bottom line SEC argument fwiw: Louisiana may be able to declare these guys eligible to play college football, but Louisiana cannot force the Southeastern Conference to accept LSU playing them under our banner while preventing us from enforcing our own rules.
At a minimum, even if this theory is correct, the Louisiana courts can certainly allow them to play in games held in Louisiana.
In a way I kind of agree with the SEC. But the courts do not and that isn’t likely to change.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:25 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
and that's inking a pro contract.
..or in Sankey's own words: Move on from collegiate athletics.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:26 pm to tigerskin
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:26 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I don't know why people keep saying this. Its a really stupid point, whenever the SEC has already said ad nauseum where its (arbitrary) red line is, and that's inking a pro contract.
That is not what Sankey said. He specified that they "left college" therefore they cannot "comeback." But keep putting your head in the sand.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:26 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
the SEC has already said ad nauseum where its (arbitrary) red line is, and that's inking a pro contract.
I don't think signing a pro contract is an arbitrary decision point. It literally makes a player a professional rather than an amateur.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:26 pm to Tornado Alley
Yes it does. He was deemed ineligible by the ncaa 3 times. He was granted a 6th year by the injunction. The sec complied despite 5 for “wait for it” 5.
This post was edited on 9/3/26 at 1:28 pm
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:26 pm to Tornado Alley
quote:
I am not sure about the Texas situation you reference.
Cole Hutson.
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:27 pm to Tornado Alley
Does anyone know who these female athletes are in the courtroom? Did they also sign pro contracts and are trying to come back? There 5 female athletes in here
Posted on 9/3/26 at 1:27 pm to IM_4_LSU
quote:
That is not what Sankey said. He specified that they "left college" therefore they cannot "comeback." But keep putting your head in the sand.
No, you are quoting what Sankey allegedly said in court today. I am reiterating the conference's actual, stated, legal position on the distinction.
Page 23 of 42
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News