1
- 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
re: Players file motion for contempt against Sankey, SEC, and LSU
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:05 pm to DeathByTossDive226
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:05 pm to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
A. You aren’t sure of your own argument?
I was going off what others posters said
quote:
So the meeting had not been scheduled, the itinerary not known, and expulsion from the conference was not mentioned prior to 9/4? Might want to check again.
From what I'm reading, it was done on September 8 and set for September 10.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:06 pm to SloaneRanger
quote:
Hell has he even entered a written order yet?
I read news articles saying he had, but could not find a linked copy
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:LSU filled the final two spots on its 2026 football roster on Tuesday, September 8, 2026.
Nope. That's the September 4
The two players were:
- Aidan Anding, cornerback
- Gabriel Reliford, defensive end
LSU added them to reach the SEC's 105-player roster limit.
This was significant because the two open spots had been deliberately left available after LSU initially submitted its roster with 103 players, potentially allowing former Ole Miss players Dae'Quan Wright and Zxavian Harris to be added.
So the sequence was:
- Sept. 3: SEC files federal lawsuit in Alabama. Louisiana judge grants preliminary injunction in Baton Rouge. Wright and Harris are legally eligible to play
- Sept. 4: LSU submits a 103-man roster for the Clemson opener, leaving two spots open.
- Sept. 5: LSU beats Clemson 51–10 without Wright or Harris.
- Sept. 8: SEC files Amended Complaint seeking authority to expel LSU. LSU fills the roster spots with Anding and Reliford closing the door on Wright and Harris for the season.
- Sept. 9: LSU President Wade Rousse tells SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey that the roster is now locked and LSU has complied with SEC rules.
- Sept 10: SEC presidents/chancellors hold scheduled videoconference. No expulsion vote; no sanctions but SEC says discussions will continue
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
From what I'm reading, it was done on September 8 and set for September 10.
Well for one… As of September 2nd conference officials were already publicly feeding the press info that they were considering using “all measures available” against LSU if football rostered Wright and Harris.
Secondly, remember Bediako? That dude was never even granted an injunction.
All it took to keep the SEC from attempting to punish Alabama was a TRO. Even after the NCAA ultimately won, the TRO was still the reason Bama faced no penalties.
Pretty sure new conference bylaws don’t change the law laws.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
LSU should have paid these guys a measly settlement when this all blew up to make this go away and avoid all of this and just focus on the SEC
And then allow the SEC to use that as leverage that LSU was indeed trying to convince the players to sue the NCAA and SEC?
Your approach opens massive wormholes for something LSU did not even do wrong.
If LSU had decided not to roster the players on September 4th, then why were Anding and Reliford not already on the roster on the 4th?
The letter was provided under duress of threats by the SEC. It's not some magical gotcha. Does it complicate things? Sure, but there is enough questions about timing and whether the plan was in place already or not.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:18 pm to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
Pretty sure new conference bylaws don’t change the law laws.
This x 1000000. It seems to me that the SEC’s position is that it can ignore TROs and rulings issued by state courts where it does business, in this case, Louisiana. That’s not a strong position.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:21 pm to Buryl
quote:
Anyone have access to the full pleading?
It is still not up on ClerkConnect. Just checked.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The NCAA always had a weird status because they were so far removed from players, but if conferences are no longer permitted to create rules for members (who voluntarily join the conference and benefit greatly from the association), I don't know where college football goes.
I am not wrapped up in this because I am an LSU fan. College sports are dead and likely need to be buried precisely because of the assholes at the conference levels, AD and coaching levels.
Stop trying to sell professional minor leagues as college athletics and wipe the whole thing out. Let the NFL pay for its minor leagues, and same for basketball and baseball, and all sports for that matter.
I don't believe a bunch of conferences should get exemptions to laws simply to abuse them. Cut all of the fake student athlete garbage out and pay the pros. Let club sports take over college athletics, and it's over.
That is the real solution.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I just don't know if it would be a good long-term strategy, as fans, to push for elimination of conference rules.
So you think it is fine to fight one TRO and make up rules after the fact of a lawsuit in one case of eligibility, and ignore it for another.
The SEC and other schools lost any standing in this argument when other ineligible players using even bigger kangaroo courts like Chambliss were not stopped from playing despite being ruled ineligible by the NCAA multiple times.
That is why most LSU fans are pissed. Somehow this is a line that cannot be crossed, but what players like Chambliss did was okay.
At least as bad as Pavia's situation was to be allowed to play, his case had 10 times the merit of Chambliss since he played under another umbrella (NJCAA), which the NCAA has no jurisdiction over.
Again, either apply the same argument across the board, or shut it. That is not an argument just because this helps LSU. It's the ridiculous double standard.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:30 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:
LSUnKaty
Thanks for the timeline.
You could add that Lane made the comment during the halftime interview about pro players that didn't sit well with Sankey. Recall that the line of argument the SEC was using was that we (LSU) had lost institutional control over our football program.
Also, in a post on ESPN dated 9/8/26 11:34 AM EDT, the forthcoming 9/10 mtg was scheduled. I assume Rousse has a mtg invite in his email with the agenda. That email must've been sent < 9/8/26 11:34 AM EDT.
ESPN
Finally, the lack of a statement from the SEC that LSU was free to roster the players (Wright/Harris) and no punitive action would taken against LSU implies the sword of Damocles was still hanging over LSU.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't think LSU is under any threat of expulsion due to votes by those schools
They were more than clear about this numerous times very publicly. That's what prompted Landry and Murrill to get involvedPosted on 10/7/26 at 1:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I just don't know if it would be a good long-term strategy, as fans, to push for elimination of conference rules.
If the conference can take a vote to impose severe penalties or exclusionary measures against an institution without evidence or arbitration… and that bylaw is used to facilitate suppression of free trade… then no “strategy” matters as the conference’s bylaws are now illegal and unusable in context of the current CFB landscape.
Very real potential for a permanent injunction on antitrust grounds if even just 1 of these 48 refuses to settle.
That kind of member/conference governance might have worked for amateur athletics. It doesn’t fly given the money tied up in athletics now, TV deals, etc.
If conference rules go away, it will be because of the hubris of the conference.
Not because LSU tried to sign a couple class of ‘22 depth guys who went to camps — but because the SEC showed how easily its bylaws can be abused to suppress free trade & threaten severe economic consequences to a member school.
Once potential for serious monetary damages are in play, lobbying for votes without evidence or arbitration just isn’t going to cut it.
And I’ll die on that hill. The SEC’s legal exposure caps out at potentially having to rewrite their bylaws and being completely defanged.
Again, if that happens it will be the fault of their own leadership for even trying to bark up the tree that their bylaws supersede US law / Sherman Act.
This post was edited on 10/7/26 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:The federal case was not filed by the SEC prior to the state ruling, if that's what you're trying to say.
how can the players allege contempt for an action undertaken prior to the final ruling
5 for 5 was already out there. in fact, multiple cases were ongoing prior to the LA case. THEN, the SEC told LSU they couldn't play Harris and Wright.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Which LSI did not do until Sept 8th, after the SEC amended their suit to gain authority to expel LSU. Expelling LSU was not in the original suit files on the 3rd.
Coming after Septemer 4, when LSU made the decision, makes anything AFTER that decision, relevant if they're used to formulate a contempt argument. The contempt was moot against the SEC once LSU made that decision on its own.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Under threat of death by the SEC which was in direct contravention of the state court order
Rousse's letter says the decision was made on September 4 by LSU not to roster them
quote:Exactly. Punitive, vindictive and in contempt
On September 8, the SEC amended the federal complaint and scheduled the meeting (potentially with expulsion on the table
quote:AFTER the SEC had made numerous very public threats. The REAL threat was the CFP. They're in the on deck circle in all of this
LSU had already the decision prior to this date
quote:Them filing now shows that you are wrong on this. They are losing revenue. They should sue.
the injunction was effectively moot as to those players
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Who is making the case LSU was obligated to add them?
the injunction said they HAD to roster them
quote:It is not an eternal pass. The SEC isn't immune from contempt forever. The new court order explicitly barred the SEC from coercing or penalizing LSU for interacting with court-cleared players.
I just read the judge ruled the actions prior to the 9/3 ruling weren't contempt, so the "SEC passed a rule on August 25" argument can't be contempt now
The contempt motion filed on October 6 isn't asking the judge to punish the August 25 vote again. It is targeting subsequent, ongoing coercion—specifically the backroom threats made in September regarding CFP access, the forced 105-man roster lockout, and the continued threats to strip revenue if LSU fielded Wright and Harris.
You can't say "I didn't get caught in August, so I can keep doing it in October."
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:55 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:September 3: Judge Jorden issues the Preliminary Injunction in Baton Rouge protecting LSU and the players.
LSU made the decision not to roster them the day after the injunction ruling, prior to the amended federal suit and the scheduling of the potential expulsion vote.
September 4 (Afternoon): LSU President Wade Rousse calls SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey to give advance notice that LSU will not place Wright and Harris on the 105-man roster. LSU formally submits its locked roster that evening.
September 8: LSU fills its final two open roster spots with other players and locks the roster completely.
September 8 (Later that day): LSU receives formal notice that the SEC scheduled a special Presidents & Chancellors meeting for September 10 to vote on expelling LSU from the conference.
September 8–9: The SEC files its amended federal lawsuit in Alabama, pushing to validate its authority despite LSU’s compliance.
The threats happened before September 4. LSU didn't wake up on September 4 and randomly decide to bench two court-cleared impact players. The expulsion meeting was the follow-through, not the origin.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:56 pm to Geauxgurt
quote:
And then allow the SEC to use that as leverage that LSU was indeed trying to convince the players to sue the NCAA and SEC?
As a settlement for litigation? Doubtful it could be spun that way
It would hurt the SEC, too
It would be the ultimate "we care about the players and don't want to violate a court order or be liable for future damages" move
Posted on 10/7/26 at 1:58 pm to Geauxgurt
quote:
So you think it is fine to fight one TRO and make up rules after the fact of a lawsuit in one case of eligibility, and ignore it for another.
The SEC and other schools lost any standing in this argument when other ineligible players using even bigger kangaroo courts like Chambliss were not stopped from playing despite being ruled ineligible by the NCAA multiple times.
The specific lines of professionalism with these specific NFL guys were always a more bright line rule
Why do you think basically EVERYONE else took the side opposing LSU this time, and we didn't see the same thing with Chambliss or the Bama bball player? It's not because LSU is some villain, no matter how much of a martyr complex many have developed the past 90 days
Posted on 10/7/26 at 2:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:The federal counter-lawsuit was filed September 3, 2026
Which ones occurred between the ruling and September 4?
SEC executive committee sanctions vote on August 25–26
Threat of conference disaffiliation and membership termination late August through September 8.
The official letter from LSU President Wade Rousse on September 9 confirmed that LSU yielded to these exact threats. Rousse put it in writing that he personally called Greg Sankey on the afternoon of September 4 to notify him that LSU would comply with SEC rules and omit Dae'Quan Wright and Zxavian Harris from the 105-man roster specifically to protect the university from those declared conference penalties
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News