- 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: Sankey named as a defendant in Texas
Posted on 8/27/26 at 4:59 pm to dallastigers
Posted on 8/27/26 at 4:59 pm to dallastigers
quote:None of the courts or lawmakers involved in any of this the last several years understand the landscape of college athletics or the consequences of their decisions, opinions, or judgements.
Regardless these elected local yokels are making federal law decisions on a topic they probably have rarely dealt with since law school.
I hope they’re all happy with the shite show they’ve created.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:01 pm to LSBoosie
The NCAA is not exempt from the laws of the land.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:02 pm to 1999
But I was assured by all the media members that LSU was a rogue school.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:09 pm to 1999
Same story in Louisiana suit.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:12 pm to 1999
Now this is big and NOT in Louisiana! Buckle up boys
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:13 pm to 1999
Sankey is such a short sighted moron
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:14 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
Could also be nothing if they followed the original rule from the NCAA that said the class of 2022 was excluded from 5 for 5. It’s not the NCAA’s fault that anytime they put a rule place, a player can take it to a local judge and have it overturned. We have random judges making up rules for college football on the fly.
Judges making rules because the NCAA lacks foresight
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:19 pm to dallastigers
quote:
I haven’t seen the exact wording, but is the judge declaring the decision cannot be appealed to higher court?
It will be appealed, and a stay will be granted.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:19 pm to DBG
quote:
Why would a class of 2022 player accept that?
Because it’s the rule that was put in place? Why would anyone accept any new rule that they don’t agree with?
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:20 pm to saintsfan22
quote:
Judges making rules because the NCAA lacks foresight
Not sure what you mean by this.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:21 pm to LSBoosie
Did you just agree with your own disagreement?
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:23 pm to dallastigers
So the sec and teams will be on the hook for damages when the players aren’t allowed to play
This is a total fiasco by the ncaa and conferences
Sankey should be fired
This is a total fiasco by the ncaa and conferences
Sankey should be fired
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 5:28 pm
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:25 pm to 1999
Sankey getting the sec entangled in lawsuits left and right.
All because he can’t lead the conference for shite and has a double standard by deciding to defy court orders while in every other case the conference abided by them, notably Trinidad
All because he can’t lead the conference for shite and has a double standard by deciding to defy court orders while in every other case the conference abided by them, notably Trinidad
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:25 pm to Veritas
quote:
Did you just agree with your own disagreement?
No, I’m pointing out the problem that I don’t like the fact that any player that doesn’t like a rule can just take it to court and a random judge could possibly overturn it. It’s a broken system.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:32 pm to Veritas
I’m not sure what you are getting at but ok
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:35 pm to LSBoosie
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. "Sorry, Greg Sankey. A Dallas court just granted a TRO against you, the NCAA, and the SEC. Any proposed SEC penalty against the athletes, the schools that roster them, or the schools that compete against them and any other ineligibility theory requires leave of court.
“To be clear, it is the Court’s intention to place Plaintiffs in the position they were in at the end of their last college sports season. As long as they would have been eligible to continue playing college sports in the following semester if they had a fifth year of eligibility, they are eligible today.”
Portal / SEC transfer-rule noncompliance is not a basis to sit players and post-2025-26 pro contracts, agent contracts, or pro appearances are not a basis to sit them if they terminate and repay before a college game."
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:40 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
Because it’s the rule that was put in place? Why would anyone accept any new rule that they don’t agree with?
A nonsensical rule should be challenged.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:50 pm to DBG
What exactly makes it nonsensical?
Posted on 8/27/26 at 5:54 pm to LSBoosie
It's nonsensical because the rule is trying to say that you're not harming the players. You're only harming the schools and the institution. You and everybody on here know that that's BS. What institution is going to play a player that might very well get the institution in trouble. Forfeiting games coach being suspended for half a year. All the BS you LS Boosie you're very smart. You know, good and well. That in essence is punishing the players and these players have every right just as Trinidad chamblers who has a sore throat. The NCAA is who made the rule the five for five and these players were not made that available till after the fact and none of them as far as I know have been paid by the nfl. They may have signed with the NFL but it doesn't matter and Sankey and the SEC and the Big 12 is going to get in a lot of antitrust problems just like one of the lawyers I believe posted in another thread. You're smart LS Boosie. I've seen you a lot of your posts. You're a sharp person so you know good and well that this room by Greg Sankey and the SEC is nonsensical because it is in turn affecting the players
Popular
Back to top



0



