1
Started By
Message
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:31 pm to tigerskin
So now it's time to kick Sanky out the SEC, not LSU
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:35 pm to Buster83
You LSU haters are hypocrits,the only thing LK or WW did was follow JUDGES ORDERS.Complain bitch moan groan all you want if LSU had done wrong they would have been strung up,but look what’s happened ,NOTHING.The players they were after or rostered are eligible ,so F you hypocrites and we will beat your asses in the future when our coaches have their programs really running.
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:35 pm to 3down10
LSU did not file a lawsuit. The players did.
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:39 pm to 3down10
quote:
The only reason that is true is because the SEC filed the lawsuit.
Wrong. LSU had already stated that they would abide by whatever the league said prior to the suit being filed.
quote:
If the SEC hadn't filed and threatened to kick LSU out of the conference, LSU would have rostered the players
No need to repeat an embellishment twice in one post
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:40 pm to Desert Storm 1991
quote:
LSU did not file a lawsuit. The players did.
The lawsuits do not force LSU or any other school to take the player.
And the lawsuits can't exist in the first place without a school such as LSU showing interest in them to start with.
This post was edited on 10/20/26 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:51 pm to UtahCajun
quote:
Wrong. LSU had already stated that they would abide by whatever the league said prior to the suit being filed.
While putting the same players in practice, leaving roster spots open for them until the last minute and so on.
I believe it's called talking out of your arse.
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:54 pm to 3down10
At that time the SEC was going along with court injunctions, like they did with Chambliss.
Then that quickly changed......
So yes it is rational that LSU expected the SEC to continue with following court orders (like they had been doing).
Whatever, it's moot now
Then that quickly changed......
So yes it is rational that LSU expected the SEC to continue with following court orders (like they had been doing).
Whatever, it's moot now
This post was edited on 10/20/26 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 10/20/26 at 4:57 pm to tigerskin
quote:
At that time the SEC was going along with court injunctions, like they did with Chambliss.
Then that quickly changed......
I don't agree with any of them. I hope the SEC wins and all of them can be turned down from the start the way it use to be.
Posted on 10/20/26 at 5:02 pm to PGJ
You have to actually prove “lack of institutional control”
Sankey can’t just claim it because his liberal feelings are hurt and how embarrassed he got in court.
Sankey can’t just claim it because his liberal feelings are hurt and how embarrassed he got in court.
Posted on 10/20/26 at 5:15 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
the conference picks and chooses which eligibility rules it wants to enforce.
Good way of showing how stupid the SEC is being.
SEC is trying in court to that some athletes are MORE ineligible than other ineligible athletes. Their argument falls apart in court because the several dozen ineligible athletes are playing ball right now, or are going too.
The SEC has no good argument why this ineligible athlete is less ineligible that that athlete.
Posted on 10/20/26 at 5:27 pm to 3down10
quote:
While putting the same players in practice, leaving roster spots open for them until the last minute and so on.
They never practiced and there is no rule that all roster spots have to be full
quote:
I believe it's called talking out of your arse.
Yes, that is indeed what you did there. Good call.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News