
- 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

SEC cant punish retroactively players eligible at the time w TRO banning it, Bama Bediako
Posted on 8/31/26 at 1:43 am
Posted on 8/31/26 at 1:43 am
I see a lot of misinformation here. There’s absolutely 0 way SEC or NCAA can retroactively punish a team for playing players who were deemed eligible bc an injunction. See 2025 Bama and Bediako. They got a generous #4 seed in MM with a 23-9 record. The same would be for Pavia and Chambliss who played or playing on injunction. If Chambliss loses the case after the season ends, the SEC can’t retroactively punish Ole Miss and vacate wins, or god forbid a Nati. That’s not how it works. You can’t issue punishment retroactive for players deemed eligible while playing, and a TRO that explicitly in clause 6 prohibits this.
Judge Jorden who granted the TRO and supports players is one who is deciding on injunction. He will obviously agree with himself which means LSU will get players.
Any appeal will go to Louisiana state Supreme Court, just like in Chambliss case in which NCAA appealed to MS Supreme Court and were denied. And Bediako case in which he appealed local Bama court ruling by going to Alabama Supreme Court. I think it’s unlikely this ever sees federal court. I don’t know how long it’d take if NCAA gets rejected in Louisiana Supreme Court to get into federal court and a ruling there, but I’d guess it might not be until season is over.
Judge Jorden who granted the TRO and supports players is one who is deciding on injunction. He will obviously agree with himself which means LSU will get players.
Any appeal will go to Louisiana state Supreme Court, just like in Chambliss case in which NCAA appealed to MS Supreme Court and were denied. And Bediako case in which he appealed local Bama court ruling by going to Alabama Supreme Court. I think it’s unlikely this ever sees federal court. I don’t know how long it’d take if NCAA gets rejected in Louisiana Supreme Court to get into federal court and a ruling there, but I’d guess it might not be until season is over.
This post was edited on 8/31/26 at 1:53 am
Posted on 8/31/26 at 5:06 am to JSmat931
The SEC would likely file in federal court if it isn't successful in La. They won't let the issue die... even if it means pro playerrs play this year.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 5:08 am to LVag1997
5 for 5. SEC established it and now wants to fight their own eligibility decision?
Posted on 8/31/26 at 5:53 am to JSmat931
They can’t punish, but they can still ban if they eventually win. Hopefully this doesn’t get settled til after this season but I understand the SEC not wanting a precedent of pro players coming back to college.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:09 am to LVag1997
How? Diversity?
Federal questions will surface
Anti-trust
RICO
Collusion
Treble damages
Attorney Fees
Putative Damages
Federal questions will surface
Anti-trust
RICO
Collusion
Treble damages
Attorney Fees
Putative Damages
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:30 am to ClintonTigerMS
quote:There is no precedent in a one-off case which, by-definition, is isolated to the 2022 entry class. That is the problem the SEC and NCAA face in the injunction battle. Their damage is limited. The players' damage could affect them for years.
the SEC not wanting a precedent of pro players coming back to college.
E.g., Suppose Pyburn returns to LSU, has a kickass season, and gets compensated well for it. Then he gets drafted next year, which would equate to millions more.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:38 am to ClintonTigerMS
Isn't a ban equivalent to punishment?
If the court forbids retroactive punishment, they can't do a blanking thing about it. Unless they want to get dirty behind the scenes with officiating, etc...
Even that would be a very risky move by the SEC.
If the court forbids retroactive punishment, they can't do a blanking thing about it. Unless they want to get dirty behind the scenes with officiating, etc...
Even that would be a very risky move by the SEC.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:40 am to ClintonTigerMS
It’s a one year issue caused by the ncaa being dumb.
The kids trying to come back have a much better case than chambliss, chambliss is a bigger disgrace to the rules than kids that had a rule changed on them.
It’s pretty simple that either no one should be playing or all of them should.
The kids trying to come back have a much better case than chambliss, chambliss is a bigger disgrace to the rules than kids that had a rule changed on them.
It’s pretty simple that either no one should be playing or all of them should.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:42 am to tigahlovah
quote:
Even that would be a very risky move by the SEC
Let's be real. They already did this during the Saban era.
The SEC and College football see LSU spending money they didn't know they had and it terrifies them.
They've been criticizing LSU since the moment they began doing it.
This post was edited on 8/31/26 at 6:43 am
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:45 am to JSmat931
They can’t or LSU will own the SEC financially. Who cares if they ban the players half way through the season. Their depth will help keep guys fresh until then and everyone will lose their depth on the same day. Push it to the limits.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:45 am to PUB
quote:
How? Diversity?
They have already mentioned the right to free association, but I don't think that would fly in a federal court in this case, other than acknowledging their right to set penalties and fines.
I think it's a pretty high bar for a federal court to overturn a state injunction. I think there has to be some defect in law where the state is explicitly overriding a federal statute or mandate. But I'm no lawyer and did not sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 6:47 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
E.g., Suppose Pyburn returns to LSU, has a kickass season, and gets compensated well for it. Then he gets drafted next year, which would equate to millions more.
That can't happen exactly like that. If a player had a contract, like Pyburn, he would not be eligible for the draft and would function as an undrafted free agent. But it could be a windfall for Pyburn or players like him.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 7:01 am to LVag1997
And that’s where we need to get to. No more filing state injunctions with pro decision because the judge went there. If this fast tracks everything getting a set of rules across the board great!
Posted on 8/31/26 at 7:03 am to mdomingue
And there are no federal legislation or federal constitutional law issues.
SEC - send Sarkey to testify. The coward will be probably be a ghost this Thursday.
SEC - send Sarkey to testify. The coward will be probably be a ghost this Thursday.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 7:03 am to JSmat931
The risk that hasn't been completely addressed in court yet involves what they may be able to do if the case is ultimately dropped, as in the case of Louis Moore with Indiana. After the season was over, Moore's team voluntarily vacated the suit (rightly so, IMO; why waste the court's time) because they didn't need to continue.
https://www.idsnews.com/article/2026/02/ncaa-threatens-rule-of-restitution-against-indiana-louis-moore-case
https://www.idsnews.com/article/2026/02/ncaa-threatens-rule-of-restitution-against-indiana-louis-moore-case
quote:
The NCAA has threatened to invoke the “rule of restitution” against Indiana University and former Indiana safety Louis Moore in his ongoing eligibility lawsuit.
quote:
Bylaw 12.9.4.2 of the 2025-26 NCAA Division I Manual states if a player ruled ineligible by the NCAA is allowed to participate by a court order that is later “voluntarily vacated, stayed, or reversed,” the Board of Directors is permitted to take action against the institution “in the interest of restitution and fairness.” Possible actions include:
Vacating individual and team records and performances
Declaring the institution ineligible for NCAA Championships in the sport and season that the ineligible student-athlete played in
Posted on 8/31/26 at 7:05 am to PUB
quote:
And there are no federal legislation or federal constitutional law issues.
I agree. My opinion is so very important
Posted on 8/31/26 at 7:06 am to mdomingue
Correct. You can enter the NFL draft one time in your life.
Posted on 8/31/26 at 7:21 am to JSmat931
quote:
Judge Jorden who granted the TRO and supports players is one who is deciding on injunction. He will obviously agree with himself which means LSU will get players.
The main point.

Popular
Back to top
5











