Started By
Message
re: Dellenger: The SEC’s federal court hearing today will go on as scheduled
Posted on 9/9/26 at 10:49 am to Trout34
Posted on 9/9/26 at 10:49 am to Trout34
quote:Do tell.....
I am an LSU alum and SEC dominance has always made me proud. Unfortunately, the current state of affairs has made divorce imminent. LSU fans will miss the great matchups, but the time is right to exit. LSU will remain silent and offer zero push back tomorrow , as the monetary offers they have been presented are insane.
0
Posted on 9/9/26 at 10:50 am to Tuscaloosa
Why would it not have?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 10:55 am to RB10
quote:
LSU hasnt challenged anyone in court. LSU was enjoined as a defendant by the players in their lawsuit.
Isn’t it pretty widely reported that LSU coaches encouraged the players to challenge the NCAA eligibility rules? At best, that’s reckless on LSU’s part.
quote:
They already have been granted an exception to their rule. What do you think TRO stands for?
A TRO is not granted by the SEC. Have any of those guys played? I admittedly haven’t been following minute to minute.
quote:
I’ll go ahead and mark you down as another who believes LSU encouraged a lawsuit against itself.
If they encouraged NFL players to challenge the NCAA, they at least put themselves at risk to legal response.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 10:57 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Isn’t it pretty widely reported that LSU coaches encouraged the players to challenge the NCAA eligibility rules? At best, that’s reckless on LSU’s part.
Is it? Should be easy to link then, no?
quote:
A TRO is not granted by the SEC. Have any of those guys played? I admittedly haven’t been following minute to minute.
I’m aware of that. What’s your point?
quote:
If they encouraged NFL players to challenge the NCAA, they at least put themselves at risk to legal response.
I’ll ask again:
Do you believe LSU encouraged these players to sue LSU? Because that’s what ended up happeningZ
Posted on 9/9/26 at 10:58 am to Tuscaloosa
LSU made that decision last week….the projecting of what will happen before it happens is wild to me. Let’s enforce the rules that they haven’t broken lol
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:01 am to RB10
quote:LINK
Is it? Should be easy to link then, no?
Sure is.
quote:
What’s your point?
That a TRO is not an example of the SEC granting an exception to their rule.
quote:
Do you believe LSU encouraged these players to sue LSU? Because that’s what ended up happeningZ
If the above link is accurate, I believe they willingly put themselves in a risky legal position.
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 11:02 am
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:04 am to Trout34
quote:
LSU will remain silent and offer zero push back tomorrow , as the monetary offers they have been presented are insane.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:06 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Sure is.
Did you just link an article without any quotes, from anyone, backing up your claim? So because a journalist says it happened, that’s your proof?
These are interesting though:
quote:
To be clear, LSU wasn't the first school to pursue this path of signing former professional players. Texas added fifth-year offensive lineman Cole Hutson, who had participated in NFL minicamps but wasn't signed to a contract, following a lawsuit in Texas. A sweeping rule in Colorado also, for a time, allowed the class of 2022 players to return for a fifth year of eligibility. But that did not include former professional athletes.
quote:
LSU isn't the only SEC program doing it. But the Tigers led the initial movement, which tipped over dominoes for other teams in the league.
Remember what I keep telling you about selective enforcement?
quote:
That a TRO is not an example of the SEC granting an exception to their rule.
Except it is. The NCAA said those players were ineligible and the restraining order said they can play anyway. The SEC chose to accept that and allow them to be rostered, except for certain players. Their TRO doesn’t count.
Here we are, circling back around to selective enforcement.
quote:
If the above link is accurate, I believe they willingly put themselves in a risky legal position.
So many “ifs”
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 11:08 am
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:06 am to higgs_boson
quote:It was going to happen regardless.
If we take the current LSU situation out of it, this still needs to be done. If a conference cannot regulate its members, the last vestige of college football is gone.
LSU simply gave them the opportunity.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:11 am to RB10
quote:
So because a journalist says it happened, that’s your proof?
I am not privy to LSU coaches’ cell phone records, so I work with what’s available.
quote:
Remember what I keep telling you about selective enforcement?
I am in favor of any school that violates these rules being punished accordingly.
quote:
Except it is. The NCAA said those players were ineligible and the restraining order said they can play anyway. The SEC chose to accept that and allow them to be rostered, except for certain players. Their TRO doesn’t count.
Did they accept it, or are the just expecting the ruling on the LSU case already in progress to set precedent?
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 11:12 am
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:12 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
I am not privy to LSU coaches’ cell phone records, so I work with what’s available.
May want to check the board.
It just came out the SEC has no actual evidence that LSU had anything to do with the lawsuit.
That must sting a bit.
quote:
I am in favor with any school that violates these rules being punished accordingly.
Cool. Let me know when the rest of them are up for expulsion.
quote:
Did they accept it, or are the just expecting the ruling on the LSU case already in progress to set precedent?
Did you miss the part where Pavia played all of 2025 under a TRO?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:15 am to RB10
quote:
Nah, they’re looking to become judge, jury and executioner.
They are all three because the 16 members agreed to the bylaws which give the SEC that power. It is an associaton.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:17 am to Cell of Awareness
quote:
They are all three because the 16 members agreed to the bylaws which give the SEC that power. It is an associaton.
Wrong
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:23 am to RB10
quote:
Did you miss the part where Pavia played all of 2025 under a TRO?
Did he participate in any NFL activities before that happened?
Are you also familiar with the concept of “the straw that broke the camel’s back”?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:26 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Did he participate in any NFL activities before that happened?
Not the only thing that makes you ineligible.
quote:
Are you also familiar with the concept of “the straw that broke the camel’s back”?
That would be another instance of selective enforcement
You’re making my point for me.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:27 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
agree. Kiffin, and LSU fans in general, sure did thump their chests a lot just to very quietly back down in the waning moments. No please!!1! Please don’t expel us!!1!!
Nice troll. 7/10
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:30 am to RB10
quote:
Not the only thing that makes you ineligible.
It’s the only thing that the SEC has released conference-specific eligibility rules on, isn’t it?
quote:
That would be another instance of selective enforcement
So because they failed to act previously, they are supposed to just continue to fail to act forever?
ETA: let’s say the SEC let these would-be LSU players play, and then UGA rounded up a few boosters to pay Jalen Carter and Matt Stafford $50m apiece to play for UGA this season, at which point the SEC tried to stop UGA from doing so. Would you still be anti SEC due to “selective enforcement”?
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 11:35 am
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:32 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
It’s the only thing that the SEC has released conference-specific eligibility rules on, isn’t it?
Yes, after the players were granted a TRO.
quote:
So because they failed to act previously, they are supposed to just continue to fail to act forever?
They didn’t fail, they refused.
It just goes to show that “someone has to run it” isn’t a good argument when that someone has already proven that they can’t do it.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:33 am to Scruffy
quote:
It was going to happen regardless.
I agree. If not LSU, it would have been another school. But Lane made himself and easy target and hiring back the basketball coach probably also put LSU in the cross hairs.
I am just looking forward to this settling down and getting to enjoy the season. LSU looks talented and well coached, I am really curious to see how they do on the field this year.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 11:34 am to Tuscaloosa
Again, I ask. Why would the case not have been heard?
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News