- 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
The SEC has been consistent on this, even speaking out against the Bama basketball player
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:42 am
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:42 am
LINK
I think that case was a no-brainer...the kid had been out of college for three years AND signed a pro contract...I think these class of 2022 kids have a much better case, but you can't say that Sankey has been inconsistent on this issue.
quote:
Thu, Feb 5, 2026
A conference commissioner is urging a state judge to uphold NCAA eligibility rules and deny extended eligibility to a player in his own league.
In an affidavit filed Thursday in the Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey argues against granting Alabama basketball player Charles Bediako collegiate eligibility — a somewhat groundbreaking and stunning filing a day ahead of a hearing Friday over whether the Crimson Tide can continue playing Bediako.
"I respectfully ask the Court to uphold the NCAA eligibility rules challenged in this case, which are essential to the integrity of college sports, to the educational mission they serve, and to the opportunities they provide for current and future student-athletes," Sankey wrote in the four-page affidavit.
Bediako, a 7-foot center, returned to the Alabama basketball team last month despite leaving school three years ago and after signing multiple professional contracts — a violation of NCAA eligibility rules. He is playing under a temporary restraining order granted on Jan. 21 by an Alabama judge and alum who, in light of conflicts, recused himself from the case last month.
I think that case was a no-brainer...the kid had been out of college for three years AND signed a pro contract...I think these class of 2022 kids have a much better case, but you can't say that Sankey has been inconsistent on this issue.
This post was edited on 8/26/26 at 9:14 am
15
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:43 am to Chicken
apples & oranges
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:44 am to Schmelly
quote:
apples & oranges
not at all
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:49 am to Chicken
What about Cole Hutson at Texas?
No outrage with him & seems like he is being treated differently than the other 5 for 5 guys
No outrage with him & seems like he is being treated differently than the other 5 for 5 guys
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:50 am to Chicken
I think the basketball player who declared early on his own is a different thing entirely.
The football guys have a case and should get to play since they weren't aware of the 5 for 5 ruling when they made their decisions.
The football guys have a case and should get to play since they weren't aware of the 5 for 5 ruling when they made their decisions.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:51 am to Schmelly
quote:
apples & oranges
apples to apples if they both got a paycheck from the NFL.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:52 am to Chicken
Agreed. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills by being in the minority on not wanting guys who participated with pro teams coming back to school. I can see why Kiffin did what he did, and if he didn’t do it, others would. In the big scope, allowing it is awful for the product. We are a little over a week out, and these rosters are still fluid.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:53 am to Chicken
Did Sankey quickly create a new SEC policy banning professional athletes from competing in the SEC when Bama decided to play a former NBA player last season?
The answer is no.
The answer is no.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:56 am to Chicken
quote:
But you can't say that Sankey has been inconsistent on this issue.
He's drawing an arbitrary line when he allows certain judicial rulings that technically override NCAA rules while acting against others.
One example is Ole Miss having a 6th year QB that was ineligible by rule, ruled ineligible on appeal, but allowed via a TRO.
Attempting to draw a distinction because you think THIS is different is illogical and emotional.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 8:59 am to TexasTiger08
quote:
Agreed. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills by being in the minority on not wanting guys who participated with pro teams coming back to school. I can see why Kiffin did what he did, and if he didn’t do it, others would. In the big scope, allowing it is awful for the product. We are a little over a week out, and these rosters are still fluid.
We are witnessing the most blatant example of collective rationalizing I have seen.
If this were Ole Miss people on this board would be applauding Sankey. It's because we don't get a good player that people are upset about it.
This post was edited on 8/26/26 at 8:59 am
Posted on 8/26/26 at 9:09 am to Chicken
I still think it’s hilarious Ole Miss’ starting quarterback is 24 and was granted a sixth year of eligibility over tonsillitis.
Even though it isn’t a return from the pros, Trinidad should have been forced to enter the draft in the first place.
Even though it isn’t a return from the pros, Trinidad should have been forced to enter the draft in the first place.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 9:31 am to Chicken
Yup, particularly true in the Luis case.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 9:47 am to Schmelly
quote:I agree. Like others have said, it's not a hill worth dying on, but I do feel like the 2022 guys that had no other option than to go pro are getting shafted here. I get the other side of it where allowing these guys to come back could create a slippery slope, but this is an edge case. People viewing this whole situation a little too black & white in my opinion.
apples & oranges
Posted on 8/26/26 at 9:52 am to moneyg
quote:
One example is Ole Miss having a 6th year QB that was ineligible by rule, ruled ineligible on appeal, but allowed via a TRO.
But now with the 5 for 5 rule, he’s actually ineligible, he’s played five season, why isn’t the SEC bringing this back up?
Like Lane said they are picking and choosing their TROs…
This post was edited on 8/26/26 at 9:53 am
Posted on 8/26/26 at 9:56 am to LSURulzSEC
I don't understand what Poultry Boy said-but I am-as always-100% with him.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 10:07 am to Chicken
My feeling on this whole thing is this:
1) I dont want guys coming back to college after spending any time in the pros.
2) If its possible for that to happen, I want LSU to be competitive in getting those guys that can help us win
3) If there is an oppurtunity to keep that from happening, i want LSU to be apart of that push
4) I dont think these guys are necessarily worth the trouble. Nice to have? sure. Worth continuing to fight the issue? definitely not.
So far, everything we have done aligns with all of those so im good. Narratives are whatever.
If LSU wins a chip with those 2, im pretty confident in saying they probably would have done so without them. So why not just do it without them and eliminate that narrative.
1) I dont want guys coming back to college after spending any time in the pros.
2) If its possible for that to happen, I want LSU to be competitive in getting those guys that can help us win
3) If there is an oppurtunity to keep that from happening, i want LSU to be apart of that push
4) I dont think these guys are necessarily worth the trouble. Nice to have? sure. Worth continuing to fight the issue? definitely not.
So far, everything we have done aligns with all of those so im good. Narratives are whatever.
If LSU wins a chip with those 2, im pretty confident in saying they probably would have done so without them. So why not just do it without them and eliminate that narrative.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 10:31 am to GeauxPanthers2
quote:
I think the basketball player who declared early on his own is a different thing entirely.
The football guys have a case and should get to play since they weren't aware of the 5 for 5 ruling when they made their decisions
I don’t care if any of them are allowed to play or not, but this is kind of where I fall as well.
Players like Luis shouldn’t be able to come back if they declare early and sign pro contract. He had chance to come back after going undrafted and still signed the pro contract.
My issue with the Luis situation is that the NCAA is inconsistent with the foreign players.
A pro league is a pro league a pro contract is a pro contract. If the foreign players are allowed to be eligible after playing in pro leagues, the same should hold true for the Americans, like Luis.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 10:58 am to TexasTiger08
quote:
Agreed. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills by being in the minority on not wanting guys who participated with pro teams coming back to school. I can see why Kiffin did what he did, and if he didn’t do it, others would
I think most everyone feels this exact way deep down.
The issue now is that its become an us vs them thing and we know how that goes. And I think that's fair also due to the inconsistencies in it all. 5 for 5 is the new rule, which the NCAA didn't make retroactive in a mistake(and purposely I believe), yet the SEC, among other conferences, have kids in their 6th, even 7th years of eligibility. So a 5th year guy with no options before the rule was added late cant play but a kid in his 6th or 7th year can. It makes no sense. When the 5 for 5 rule was enacted it should have universally made every 22 kid eligible and every kid prior to 22 ineligible. But that's not what happened so now we've got this mess. The mess seems to be exactly what everyone wanted to make getting a congress backed bill passed. I think the lawyers are on to something with the term "collusion". They just aren't applying it to the correct situation. The NCAA and conferences colluded to cause chaos in order to end the chaos.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 11:16 am to JimTiger72
quote:
What about Cole Hutson at Texas?
No outrage with him & seems like he is being treated differently than the other 5 for 5 guys
Look at the wording of the SEC rule: Hudson never signed a contract or joined a roster as a free agent.
Posted on 8/26/26 at 11:18 am to JimTiger72
quote:
What about Cole Hutson at Texas? No outrage with him & seems like he is being treated differently than the other 5 for 5 guys
He never signed a contract nor appeared on an NFL.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News