- 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: Poll: Are you in favor of LSU adding players with NFL experience to the roster?
Posted on 9/1/26 at 7:48 pm to Chicken
Posted on 9/1/26 at 7:48 pm to Chicken
I think the language is too vague and leaves the door open for abuse and exploitation.
If only for this season and only for athletes who were part of the 2022 recruiting class, then I would support LSU adding players.
Otherwise, without any safeguards to prevent abuse, it becomes a slippery slope...
quote:for only this season or in perpetuity?
Are you in favor of LSU adding players with NFL experience to the roster?
If only for this season and only for athletes who were part of the 2022 recruiting class, then I would support LSU adding players.
Otherwise, without any safeguards to prevent abuse, it becomes a slippery slope...
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:02 pm to Chicken
I’ve voted yes because all of these “college“ players are already professional anyway… All of them are getting paid. What’s the difference?
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:11 pm to Chicken
If eligibility can be dictated by a court of law for other situations, then it can also dictate it in a situation where you have players who were given eligibility after the fact and never played a down in the NFL.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:13 pm to Chicken
The clear answer would be no. No professional player should play college sports. HOWEVER.... That got messed up when players started getting money before setting foot on campus. If by definition of Professional is paid to play, college athletics are now professionals. Why the hell would I have a problem with someone who signed a league minimum undrafted free agent contract and got cut, but not have a problem with his $5 million starting QB. Getting paid more than some of the QBs in the league.
So the answer is Yes. And the NCAA and Courts all did this to themselves. Everyone saw that coming the moment they ruled players can be paid for their NIL, and then through profit sharing.
So the answer is Yes. And the NCAA and Courts all did this to themselves. Everyone saw that coming the moment they ruled players can be paid for their NIL, and then through profit sharing.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:34 pm to Chicken
My useless opinion: 2022 should be a blanket waiver. Moving forward, I would go as far as letting anyone who doesn't make a final NFL roster re-apply to school...any school.
I don't get the concern over players who didn't get drafted, didn't make a team, and who have eligibility. We have players on the team right now that will absolutely be playing on Sundays.
Not sure about a player who is officially offered a contract on a roster and chooses to come back. Not sure why they would choose to come back but someone could likely do it if college money gets high enough.
I don't get the concern over players who didn't get drafted, didn't make a team, and who have eligibility. We have players on the team right now that will absolutely be playing on Sundays.
Not sure about a player who is officially offered a contract on a roster and chooses to come back. Not sure why they would choose to come back but someone could likely do it if college money gets high enough.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:39 pm to LSU Neil
quote:
without a black cloud.
OOOHHH . . . the dreadful black cloud . . . gonna get you . . .
if you're scared, say you're scared
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:44 pm to Chicken
I'm against, but the NCAA screwed the pooch on the announcement. Do before the draft, or in a couple weeks.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 8:54 pm to YungBuck
quote:
shocked
Some of you are too online. Most people think this is pretty stupid.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:02 pm to Tiger Live2
The NCAA should have simply said, we are bringing in a new 5 for 5 eligibility rule beginning with the incoming class of 2028. Then this effects no current students in or just after college
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:05 pm to Chicken
The poll question asks if they have NFL experience which is an important distinction in your question.
I don’t consider a tryout having NFL experience.
But I understand the argument on both sides I think at the end of the day it’s going to come back to the NCAA being fair to all of their student athletes relative to the new eligibility rules they implemented in June
If a judge says they’re eligible then they’re going to play somewhere
I don’t consider a tryout having NFL experience.
But I understand the argument on both sides I think at the end of the day it’s going to come back to the NCAA being fair to all of their student athletes relative to the new eligibility rules they implemented in June
If a judge says they’re eligible then they’re going to play somewhere
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:09 pm to Chicken
Is attending camp as a rookie and getting cut really “NFL experience”?
It is not like any of these guys actually made an NFL team
It is not like any of these guys actually made an NFL team
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:11 pm to Chicken
Im blown away by this result. 50.1 of us voted yes, 49.9% no after 2k votes. Im no longer in shock of narrow elections. I expected 70/30 at the least. Are yall really thinking this is just a massive distraction and nobody can focus through this?
Ive been in a college fb program, I promise you this isnt affecting the team. They are showing up to scheduled practice, work outs, team meetings, etc, its a job that is focused by the coaching staff. These guys might talk about it here n there at campus lunch tables, its not some damn spastic out of control subject that the coaches just cant get the players to shut up about and refocus on their game. Yall are being so weird about this, its a damn afterthought, theyre focused on CLEMSON.
Ive been in a college fb program, I promise you this isnt affecting the team. They are showing up to scheduled practice, work outs, team meetings, etc, its a job that is focused by the coaching staff. These guys might talk about it here n there at campus lunch tables, its not some damn spastic out of control subject that the coaches just cant get the players to shut up about and refocus on their game. Yall are being so weird about this, its a damn afterthought, theyre focused on CLEMSON.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:22 pm to Chicken
It's maybe the stupidest hill to die on.
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:35 pm to Odysseus32
I am in favor of a dynasty and I believe Lane is the guy. 
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:38 pm to Chicken
NFL training camp experience*
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:46 pm to Chicken
I don't like the principle of it so I'm against that. However, I don't fault LSU for moving this way when everyone else has exploited the rules. If they feel confident and SEC can't touch them, then I'm 100% behind the team taking advantage of this. The SEC can go to hell with their grandstanding attitude moving goalposts after dipping their own hands in the cookie jar. It's hypocrisy at the highest level. frick off.
This post was edited on 9/1/26 at 9:47 pm
Posted on 9/1/26 at 9:55 pm to sportsaddit68
The NCAA created all this BS
Posted on 9/1/26 at 10:11 pm to Chicken
It’s not worth the risks. If they are allowed to play and do, if the SEC wins on appeal and they have played, the SEC could retroactively punish us.
Besides, if we need these 3 players at this point, we are in deep shite.
Besides, if we need these 3 players at this point, we are in deep shite.
Popular
Back to top



0






