Started By
Message

re: The SEC has called a Sept. 10th special meeting to vote on kicking LSU out of the SEC

Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:35 pm to
Posted by LivingOnTheBayou
Acadiana
Member since Oct 2024
39 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:35 pm to
we would not have any games except Tech to play with 9 conference games. We would not have a football season. Also, it takes years to get on someone's schedule.
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
90399 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:42 pm to
quote:

we would not have any games except Tech to play with 9 conference games. We would not have a football season.


They’d play out this season. The other schools have too much to lose financially.
Posted by Bert Macklin FBI
Quantico
Member since May 2013
12650 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:48 pm to
Look I am not here to argue its a good line in the sand but the line that the SEC/NCAA believes it can defend in court is actually putting ink to paper on an NFL contract. Our 2 guys did that. Chambliss did not. The situations are not apples to apples. I am not arguing one is more wrong than the other. But I am not gonna sit here and act like the distinction between our guys and Chambliss isn't clear as day.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
113177 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:51 pm to
quote:

Look I am not here to argue its a good line in the sand but the line that the SEC/NCAA believes it can defend in court is actually putting ink to paper on an NFL contract.
Google Charles Bediako.

How does the SEC explain having a pretend vote to kick LSU out of the SEC when not a single rule has been broken, but they did not give Alabama the same treatment when Alabama actually played the pro player, and in a situation MUCH different and wayyyy worse than this one, where the player did have eligibility and chose to forego it AND played professionally for 3 years before returning...

quote:

Chambliss did not. The situations are not apples to apples. I am not arguing one is more wrong than the other. But I am not gonna sit here and act like the distinction between our guys and Chambliss isn't clear as day.
What we think does not matter, i'm talking about applying the actual rule. I highly doubt the by-laws make distinctions of ineligible. By rule, ineligible is ineligible, so unless that is specifically called out and I can't see a world where it is, by rule the situations are the same. Not my opinion vs your opinion, just the actual rules itself.
Posted by DBG
vermont
Member since May 2004
81226 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:52 pm to
You’re right. Judging levels of ineligibleness can’t happen. It’s binary.
Posted by GetmorewithLes
UK Basketball Fan
Member since Jan 2011
23858 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:56 pm to
quote:

Just need a vote of two-thirds to make it happen


What worries me here is that you dont call a vote you dont know you will win. I suspect they are colluding to get LSU to agree to sanctions on the program
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
113177 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:57 pm to
quote:

You’re right. Judging levels of ineligibleness can’t happen. It’s binary.

That's the point I'm trying to make, you said it much more succinctly than I have.

The SEC is saying these 2 players are ineligible because they signed an NFL contract. There is no gray area by the SEC itself, so what that means, is...Patrick Mahomes himself is not any more ineligible than these 2 players...again, by rule. Patrick Mahomes is the same level of ineligible than those 2 players, not an opinion, just a fact based on the rule.

The same thing applies to Trinidad Chambliss, who is also ineligible per the NCAA.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
113177 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 1:59 pm to
quote:

What worries me here is that you dont call a vote you dont know you will win. I suspect they are colluding to get LSU to agree to sanctions on the program

Why would LSU agree to sanctions when they factually have broken zero rules?

You could certainly argue they're trying to strong arm LSU into not rostering these 2 guys, but there's no world where LSU is agreeing to sanctions for not breaking any rules.
Posted by GetmorewithLes
UK Basketball Fan
Member since Jan 2011
23858 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 2:03 pm to
quote:

Why would LSU agree to sanctions when they factually have broken zero rules? You could certainly argue they're trying to strong arm LSU into not rostering these 2 guys


Like you said, attempt to strong arm.
Posted by shel311
McKinney, Texas
Member since Aug 2004
113177 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 2:07 pm to
quote:

Like you said, attempt to strong arm.

You said to get LSU to agree to sanctions, why would LSU agree to sanctions?


first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

Facebook•X•Instagram