- 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: So how does a court order override NCAA and not the SEC
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:28 pm to LSBoosie
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:28 pm to LSBoosie
Meaning the players weren’t in violation of any rules when they declared and accepted an NFL contract.
I’d be shocked if any court grants the SEC some retroactive clause.
I’d be shocked if any court grants the SEC some retroactive clause.
1
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:29 pm to iPad
These attorneys are scum. SEC did the right thing.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:30 pm to wadewilson
quote:
I'm not interested in an exercise in intellectual dishonesty.
I’m telling you what the rules are and why they are that way. I don’t care what you consider intellectual dishonesty.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:32 pm to lurking
quote:
Meaning the players weren’t in violation of any rules when they declared and accepted an NFL contract.
I’d be shocked if any court grants the SEC some retroactive clause.
I don’t think it matters. The conferences aren’t superseding the judges RTO’s. They are simply saying that x school will have punishments if they choose to roster a player that has signed a pro contract. Those players are still eligible to play.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:33 pm to wadewilson
quote:
issues a new ruling making specifically that player ineligible for SEC ball with the transfer restrictions already in place, meaning the SEC is stealing that player's last year of eligibility
The players forfeited that last year of eligibility when they declared for the draft in my opinion
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:34 pm to LSBoosie
Again, I'm not interested in playing along with your intellectual dishonesty.
If you suspend the coach, that IS punishing the player, that's just punishing EVERY player on that team instead of just the 1 player that you've decided is going to destroy the sanctity and purity of college football.
If you suspend the coach, that IS punishing the player, that's just punishing EVERY player on that team instead of just the 1 player that you've decided is going to destroy the sanctity and purity of college football.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:36 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
The conferences aren’t superseding the judges RTO’s. They are simply saying that x school will have punishments if they choose to roster a player that has signed a pro contract. Those players are still eligible to play.
Actually, they have directly superseded the judge's RTO if that player has already sent in paperwork binding them to a specific school. They couldn't transfer out at that point.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:36 pm to TheRouxGuru
quote:
The players forfeited that last year of eligibility when they declared for the draft in my opinion
And then, after the draft, the NCAA gave them another year of eligibility.
Hence the court decision.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:39 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
Those players are still eligible to play.
We’re getting into wage discrimination laws now. Does the SEC or any other conference have the authority to deny a player of their earning potential?
My thoughts pretty much summed up below
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:39 pm to wadewilson
quote:
Again, I'm not interested in playing along with your intellectual dishonesty.
If you suspend the coach, that IS punishing the player, that's just punishing EVERY player on that team instead of just the 1 player that you've decided is going to destroy the sanctity and purity of college football.
That’s fine. I’m not asking you to “play along”. I’m sure players will challenge this in court. I don’t think they will win. If you think they will, that’s great. We’ll both find out very soon.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:41 pm to lurking
quote:
We’re getting into wage discrimination laws now. Does the SEC or any other conference have the authority to deny a player of their earning potential?
Let me be clear in saying that I have no clue about wage discrimination laws. But I don’t think that argument will hold up. All of these players can still go out and make money however they choose.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:43 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
All of these players can still go out and make money however they choose.
Except they can’t. The SEC has denied them that right. I’m not that well versed on the laws either, but these players are employees. If I artificially suppressed the earning potential of my employees I’d be sued into oblivion.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:43 pm to wadewilson
quote:
Actually, they have directly superseded the judge's RTO if that player has already sent in paperwork binding them to a specific school. They couldn't transfer out at that point.
Do you know this for a fact? LSU just started classes on Monday. I know for a fact there is a period after classes start in which students can unenroll/enroll.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:45 pm to lurking
quote:
Except they can’t. The SEC has denied them that right.
No they haven’t. These players can still go sign whatever NIL deal that they want. Hell the can still sign a rev-share deal if they want to do that as well.
quote:
If I artificially suppressed the earning potential of my employees I’d be sued into oblivion.
Btw, none of these players are employees of the SEC.
This post was edited on 8/25/26 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:45 pm to wadewilson
Cause the court order (injunction) is yet to be filed. Once it is filed, then people face imprisonment for willfully disobeying the court order so… It’ll just be like Trinidad and the NCAA there’s a court injunction saying that he can play parentheses our players just can play.) ignore it at your peril, if you do, you’re gonna go to jail the difference between us and the NCAA right now is that the injunction has not yet been filed
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:50 pm to LSBoosie
They’ve severely limited their opportunities and earning potential. You can’t argue they’d make the same in the SWAC.
Only because they continue to pretend these are student athletes. I imagine that will be challenged soon too.
quote:
Btw, none of these players are employees of the SEC.
Only because they continue to pretend these are student athletes. I imagine that will be challenged soon too.
This post was edited on 8/25/26 at 8:51 pm
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:50 pm to wadewilson
quote:
And then, after the draft, the NCAA gave them another year of eligibility.
Did they?
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:54 pm to notbilly
Yes
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:56 pm to wadewilson
quote:
If you suspend the coach, that IS punishing the player, that's just punishing EVERY player on that team instead of just the 1 player that you've decided is going to destroy the sanctity and purity of college football.
I just don’t understand the argument that penalizing institutions doesn’t cause irreparable harm to players. Of course it does. It’s cartel behavior and clearly excludes the schools where they can generate the most money and exposure.
Posted on 8/25/26 at 8:57 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
All of these players can still go out and make money however they choose.
And they can still make true NIL or even some NIL mixed with basically pay to play NIL elsewhere.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News