BrohanDavey

quote:

---

genuine

---

Yes.

quote:

---

baw

---

No.

quote:

---

Leavitt missing some open guys didn't help

---

No doubt. Throws could have been better, although they appeared to be catchable.

I was scratching my head about that. We ran that play with the same personnel and formation. Found it to be rather predictable since the only other time we ran that play was for a TD.

I know dropping that game to Ole Miss yesterday stings, but take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Kiffin’s start here at LSU is eerily similar to Nick Saban’s first year at Alabama.

Think about the 2007 season. Saban takes over at Bama, plays LSU in his first year, and what happened? He lost 41-34. Saban was going up against a roster loaded with veteran guys he originally recruited to Baton Rouge.

Sounds familiar? Kiffin just walked into Oxford yesterday and took a loss against a veteran, win-now roster that he spent the last few years building while competing with a team he’s still building.

Silver lining: just like Saban's old recruits eventually cycled out of LSU, Kiffin's old recruits and portal players are about to leave Oxford en masse. Ole Miss is going to have to replace basically their entire offensive production next year. For what it’s worth, Ole Miss returned 61% of its roster from a year ago; LSU returned less than half of its roster.

1) Trinidad Chambliss is finally out of eligibility (his clock has completely run out and he will not be granted a 37th year of eligibility by a backwoods Mississippi judge).

2) Kewan Lacy is most likely declaring for the draft because he’s the best running back in the country.

3) Their starting tight end is a senior who could return under the NCAA five-for-five rule or go pro.

4) That Ole Miss defense is heavily anchored by at least five seniors who could very well be gone after this season.

The cycle is resetting right in front of us. The old team gets one last ride to win the first game using the elite talent the coach left behind. But once those players leave in the offseason, the new coach just starts beating the dog out of his old team. Saban did it to us, and Kiffin is about to do it to Ole Miss. Geaux Tigers.

quote:

---

These all have to be AI generated, right?

---

It is. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Being a woman in 2026 is a business model, driven by AI and affiliate links.

1. Women use AI to do the heavy lifting.

They don't even write this stuff anymore. Anyone can type "write a profound, 300-word post about the mental load of motherhood" or whatever the latest fad in the women’s hemisphere is and get a perfectly spaced, emotionally manipulative essay in four seconds. Then when you talk to a woman like that in public, you realize how vapid and self-absorbed she is.

2. The GRWM / LTK grift.

Why pair a heavy trauma dump with a makeup tutorial? The vanity video stops the scroll, the emotional story builds fake intimacy, and then the viewer clicks the LikeToKnowIt link to buy the $40 concealer they're using. They are monetizing vulnerability and feeding into the trauma craze that is “‘my truth” vs. others truth because “lived experiences” or something like that.

3. "My therapist said..."

Therapy-speak is the ultimate shield. You can't call out their narcissism or bad takes if it's framed as a fragile mental health breakthrough from a medical professional. Looney tunes, the lot of them.

4. The "Daddy's Girl" Humble-Brag.

The "my dad raised me to believe I could do anything" trope is just an algorithm-friendly excuse to post a hot vanity pic or vacation flex. It disguises self-promotion as "empowerment." These are the same women who, at the same time, harbor resentment toward men because they think men simply view them as a piece of arse. Well golly gee, Megan, maybe don’t post a workout video of you at the gym hitting planks with the phone looking straight down your cleavage.

5. Cosmetic procedures as “self-care.”

People used to hide their Botox and nose jobs. Now they vlog the entire procedure from the medspa chair. They frame it as "just being transparent with y'all!" or "empowerment," but it's really just a sponsored ad for their injector disguised as a brave act of self-love. The OT 6 thinks she’s suddenly a solid 9.

It feels fake because it is. It’s not a diary anymore; it’s a highly curated, highly engineered sales funnel in the world of “influencers.”

quote:

---

does the perception of pettiness and/or gamesmanship work against the plaintiff’s case?

---

Contract law is generally objective, i.e., you look to the terms of the contract. A breach is a breach, and the subjective motivation of the plaintiff—even if spiteful or petty—does not automatically invalidate a legally binding agreement. However, in the real-world arena of civil litigation, blatant gamesmanship can absolutely work against a plaintiff.

If Ole Miss behaves in a highly punitive, theatrical manner—like intentionally timing the service of process to maximize a player's emotional distress or distraction right before a major rivalry game, which the folks in Oxfart did—it plays directly into the defense's hands. Defense counsel can point to this behavior as evidence that the university's overarching intent, including the buyout clause itself, is purely punitive.

Contracts carry an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. While filing a lawsuit to enforce a contract is not inherently bad faith, utilizing aggressive, hyper-public tactics to execute the litigation can blur the lines. It allows the defense to frame the plaintiff as an untrustworthy, vindictive actor rather than an aggrieved business partner

Just looking at the mechanics of this lawsuit, it’s a standard civil breach of contract claim, but with a massive SEC revenue-sharing twist.

For Ole Miss to actually win this, they have to prove three basic things: (1) the January 3rd contract was valid, (2) Umanmielen broke the 90-day retention clause by jumping to Baton Rouge in late January, and (3) that OM actually suffered $550k in damages.

But here are the two giant legal hurdles they have to clese:

(1) Did they even pay him?

If OM didn't actually hand over any cash before he entered the portal, they are going to have a brutal time proving they suffered half a million in actual harm. You can't usually enforce a massive buyout if no money actually changed hands.

(2) Is it just a penalty?

Courts routinely strike down "liquidated damages" if they figure out it's just an arbitrary penalty designed to trap a player on the roster rather than replace actual financial loss.

The bottom line: This isn't really about squeezing $550k out of a college kid's pocket. We already told OM to kick rocks back in March when they asked us to pay the buyout. This litigation looks like a backdoor maneuver to force that $550k onto our own revenue-sharing cap.

quote:

---

Is that even a thing? A civil RICO complaint? The C in RICO stands for "criminal"

---

It is. The “C” in RICO stands for Corrupt: the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

quote:

---

**** these guys, this is clearly collusion and racketeering. If I'm LSU I tell them to pound sand.

---

You know, LSU bringing a civil RICO complaint isn’t as far fetched as one would think.

The SEC isn't operating like a voluntary sports association—it is functioning as a centralized cartel weaponizing economic extortion to crush member institutions. By threatening to strip half of LSU's athletic revenue, suspend its head coach, and orchestrate an emergency expulsion vote solely because the university complied with a valid state court order, Greg Sankey and Birmingham are engaging in classic Hobbs Act coercion: using severe financial ruin to force a state entity to surrender its legal rights. Hiding an extractive, multi-billion-dollar media monopoly behind the fraudulent pretext of "preserving amateurism" while abusing market power to bypass state jurisdiction isn't legitimate sports governance; it is a corporate protection racket using fear and administrative bullying to demand total compliance.

You’re correct regarding LSU being an arm of the state but perhaps misapplied how federal court venue and removal jurisdiction technically work in a pre-emptive federal suit.

Being an arm of the state gives LSU 11th Amendment sovereign immunity defense arguments, but it doesn't automatically force a federal case into a Louisiana federal court. Venue in federal court is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1391, which looks at where the defendants reside or where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred. Because SEC HQ is in Birmingham, the SEC filed there claiming the alleged injury to the conference happens in Alabama. Additionally, a federal court in Alabama could establish jurisdiction over LSU: the SEC relies on LSU’s "continuous and systematic governance activities" within the conference; the SEC argues that because LSU voluntarily participates in conference administration (e.g., attending SEC meetings, voting on bylaws, and competing in conference events hosted or governed out of Birmingham), the university has sufficient "minimum contacts" with Alabama federal court related directly to the dispute over its "Professionalism Rules." LSU can (and will) file a Motion to Transfer Venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), but that is a discretionary balancing test by the judge based on convenience and justice—it isn't an automatic right simply because LSU is a state institution; that motion should be granted, though, because the litigation in state court is further along than federal courts and the majority of whatever evidence would be found in Louisiana.

The SEC didn't go to federal court to appeal a state district judge's ruling. Instead, they filed a direct, original federal action in Alabama alleging federal constitutional issues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (specifically using Ex parte Young to sue LSU officials in their official capacities). Because the SEC is asserting a direct federal question, it's an independent original lawsuit, not an impermissible appeal of a state decision (which would otherwise trigger the Rooker-Feldman doctrine).

While federal courts generally defer to state law on state contract/bylaw matters, federal courts have a constitutional mandate to hear federal constitutional claims brought before them. If there are parallel state court proceedings, of which there are, federal courts generally continue unless very narrow abstention doctrines apply.

LSU certainly has strong venue transfer arguments under § 1404(a) and sovereign immunity defenses under Pennhurst, but the SEC filing in Birmingham was a calculated preemptive strike precisely to establish federal jurisdiction on their home turf first.

I explained this in a post on the SEC Rant. Sankey’s Desperate Hail Mary: Why the SEC’s Federal Lawsuit Against LSU is Total Nonsense

I agree with you about the ultimate outcome and the SEC’s nonsensical approach to penalize LSU for having not broken any rules. LSU didn’t roster any players who participated in any NFL minicamps or what have you unlike Texas. The procedural aspects of cases moving through state and federal courts are more nuanced.

quote:

---

That is a blue print of how a MID MAJOR HAS DONE IT. Surely a major like LSU can do it better? Dumbass

---

My brother in Christ, you are staring right at the problem and still missing it.

A mid-major has to rely on a “blueprint” because they have zero margin for error—they catch a weak conference schedule, squeeze every ounce of senior-heavy luck out of a composite 3-star roster, and hope the stars align. That isn't a replicable formula for a program like LSU that operates in the SEC meat grinder.

LSU doesn't need Tulane's “blueprint” because our floor is their ceiling. We don't build our program by copying a G5 school that gets physically dismantled the second they play a team with a pulse. You’re acting like Tulane discovered fire when they just caught a soft wave in a kiddie pool.