Started By
Message

re: Do you really believe the SEC would kick LSU out? MSB edition

Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:37 pm to
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
74262 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:37 pm to
quote:

Can they be rostered in the future?

The only way to eliminate that is to kick them out of school. Any student enrolled can technically be added to a football roster later
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
482343 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:39 pm to
quote:

what do you mean “claiming?”That’s exactly what happened.

After their NFL dreams didn't come true, which was convenient timing.

quote:

They were wrong for excluding that class of players.

The rule never applied to them. They were never excluded.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
482343 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:39 pm to
quote:

LSU just filled its roster so no “pro players”


Cutting ties
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
74262 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:41 pm to
quote:

Lane and LSU are a very easy villain target because they can potentially be a very good team.

I think it’s more Kiffin’s infamous career exits from various places and his trolling nature making him a very easy target.
Posted by icecreamsnowball
Member since Mar 2025
1739 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:42 pm to
quote:

SoDakHawk
I assume that isn’t a response to my post.
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
113114 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:43 pm to
SFP is going to look like Forrest Gump when the SEC still keeps pressing forward with its lawsuit and vote eventhough lsu has a full roster now
Posted by icecreamsnowball
Member since Mar 2025
1739 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:44 pm to
quote:

After their NFL dreams didn't come true, which was convenient timing.
Oh wow you clearly have no clue what you’re talking about.
Posted by TheChosenOne
Member since Dec 2005
18906 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:44 pm to
The SEC isn’t kicking out LSU, especially after they just filled the roster. That said, what happens if the outcome of the hearing tomorrow is that the SEC doesn’t have the authority to expel a school based on the current set of facts?
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
74262 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:45 pm to
quote:

I don't think the SEC was a party or involved in the suit at all.

They weren’t involved in this suit either until they created a retroactive rule in direct response to a state court ruling. The plaintiffs then added the SEC and Sankey as parties to the suit to enjoin the SEC as well
This post was edited on 9/8/26 at 8:49 pm
Posted by zzemme
Member since Nov 2008
10551 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:46 pm to
So adding two players to fill the roster
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
53703 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:50 pm to
quote:

The SEC isn’t kicking out LSU, especially after they just filled the roster. That said, what happens if the outcome of the hearing tomorrow is that the SEC doesn’t have the authority to expel a school based on the current set of facts?


Countersuits start flying at the SEC from everywhere.

They will already be sued by these players. LSU, the AG, BOS etc. will all probably file as well.
Posted by RB10
Member since Nov 2010
53703 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:52 pm to
quote:

The only way to eliminate that is to kick them out of school. Any student enrolled can technically be added to a football roster later


Exactly.

If this lawsuit gets tossed or the SEac gets overruled, these two will be added to the roster the next day, if there’s room.
Posted by Rainier Fog
Member since Jul 2025
1892 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:52 pm to
Temu Keffe D
Posted by lsufball19
Franklin, TN
Member since Sep 2008
74262 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:55 pm to
You know, I started reading this thread about 30 minutes ago and thought, wow an actual rational conversation about this from fans of all different teams unlike the SEC Rant, then SFP had to come in to douche it up like he always does. Never change bud.
Posted by OWLFAN86
Erotic Novelist
Member since Jun 2004
198411 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 8:58 pm to
being signed to an NFL contract is different than not being signed to a NL contract
Posted by bbap
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2006
97339 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 9:00 pm to
what about an nba contract? is that different too?
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
482343 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 9:00 pm to
quote:

SFP is going to look like Forrest Gump when the SEC still keeps pressing forward with its lawsuit and vote eventhough lsu has a full roster now

No. They want the authority to enforce their rules. I have said early and often this isn't about LSU alone.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
482343 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 9:01 pm to
quote:

They weren’t involved in this suit either until they created a retroactive rule in direct response to a state court ruling. The plaintiffs then added the SEC and Sankey as parties to the suit to enjoin the SEC as well

That post was in response to the Chambliss suit, not this current one
Posted by Scruffy
Kansas City
Member since Jul 2011
78387 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 9:01 pm to
quote:

being signed to an NFL contract is different than not being signed to a NL contract

Entering the draft is the same qualifier for everyone.

It always has been.

Hutson should have withdrawn his name to maintain eligibility.

Much like the other players, simply failing to make a roster is not enough…yet.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
482343 posts
Posted on 9/8/26 at 9:02 pm to
quote:

, then SFP had to come in to douche it up like he always does.


what
the
frick
Jump to page
Page First 16 17 18 19 20 ... 23
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 18 of 23Next pagelast page

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.

FacebookXInstagram