Started By
Message
re: Alabama fan, just allow me to remind you -
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:45 pm to billjamin
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:45 pm to billjamin
quote:
No clue. I haven't read it (maybe that makes me qualified to be SEC commissioner). I'm just reiterating what the SEC told the judge in court.
What did he tell the court?
1
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:49 pm to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
What did he tell the court?
That this was not a new rule and that it was enhanced guidance for an existing rule. The judge asked them this very directly.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:49 pm to dirtsandwich
quote:
Are you this ignorant or just being intentionally obtuse?
We've learned over the past few weeks that some of these guys are legitimately stupid.
They post this multiple times a day, then dare us to explain it to them.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:49 pm to Jauquismos
quote:
So this is a new rule that pro players can't play in college?
No. The penalties were new, not the prohibition. Bediako needed a court order precisely because professionals were already ineligible. You confused a new enforcement policy with a new eligibility rule, then strutted in with a “gotcha” that disproved itself.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:50 pm to CollegeFBRules
quote:
A lot of you guys have been reasonable in this conversation, but for those of you flaming, let me hand you a mirror.
Sankey said pros in the SEC would not be tolerated. It’s why he did absolutely nothing about it when Alabama recruited one and let him play.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:51 pm to graves1
quote:
Just curious, do you think the SEC might have some evidence? I’m not saying they do. But for Sankey and the rest of the SEC to be pushing so hard they might have some evidence of wrongdoing.
I don’t think they have a lick of evidence beyond what is obviously known publicly. I think he went harder into the paint than he should have, and now he has some walking back to do.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:52 pm to CollegeFBRules
And the courts rejected it
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:52 pm to billjamin
quote:
That this was not a new rule and that it was enhanced guidance for an existing rule. The judge asked them this very directly.
Then what exactly are you arguing? I said the penalties and enforcement were new, not the underlying prohibition. You responded with a smug “so this is a new rule?” and then immediately confirmed that Sankey told the judge it was guidance for an existing rule. You just circled the block to arrive at my point, all while admitting you never read the rule.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:53 pm to TideSaint
quote:
Let's get Chicken's take on the situation
quote:
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.
Did you just try to use Chicken saying this as being in YOUR favor?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 2:55 pm to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
I said the penalties and enforcement were new, not the underlying prohibition.
False, you said
quote:
Alabama was not sued because Bediako played months before this specific SEC policy existed
The policy always existed. Alabama and the SEC were not sued because they didn't interfere with the litigation.
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 2:56 pm
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News