Started By
Message
re: State courts have no jurisdiction to issue TROs in conflict with SEC rules
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:31 pm to RB10
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:31 pm to RB10
quote:
The reason they are withholding being a threat from the SEC removes the onus from LSU.
Nike can pay NIL whether a player is on LSUs roster or not.
That is the entire argument for players to have NIL. It is a right granted to them before college and after college, and therefore should be permitted in college.
2
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:35 pm to meansonny
Bottom line is the rules weren't broken. The argument that commenting at halftime, "Imagine if we had pro players." is the weakest argument ever. This is gonna get ugly but nit for LSU if Sankey doesn't back down
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:36 pm to meansonny
quote:
Nike can pay NIL whether a player is on LSUs roster or not.
That is the entire argument for players to have NIL. It is a right granted to them before college and after college, and therefore should be permitted in college.
Barring these players from playing NCAA football limits their NIL opportunities. This has already been alleged in a lawsuit, and that lawsuit was won.
This will be a short turnaround to get their payments once the bring the lawsuit.
Like I said, go ahead and bookmark this for later.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:36 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
Boy that's a massive stretch. By that measure Albert Pujols should sue every MLB team for not signing him to a $30M contract tomorrow.
I didn't say it'd work, but I didn't think we'd ever pay players either and here we are.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:37 pm to geauxcoco
The tro was to allow them to return to college football. It doesn’t have to be the sec.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:46 pm to RB10
quote:
Barring these players from playing NCAA football limits their NIL opportunities.
According to ncaa rules, that cannot be the case. NIL cannot be conditioned on roster spots, playing time, and stats.
And by definition, the players "own" their NIL. As much or as little value is in that name, image, and license cannot be based on the university. It cannot be suited to a school.
Your argument would be tested "by what limiting factor is there for NIL based on play?"
Does a game ejection for targeting limit one's valuation for NIL?
Does academic dishonesty limit one's value for valuation for NIL?
Does rostering a competing position player limit value for a player's NIL?
Do wide receiver drops limit a QBs NIL value?
Who is responsible for NIL based on play and performance and who can be sued for limiting that earnings potential?
If you read the NIL rules, they specifically state that they can't be tied to playing college football. They are only a permissive extension of the player's NIL ownership before and after college.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:58 pm to meansonny
This is far too advanced for an LSU fan.
It’s pretty common sense for the rest of us but good luck.
It’s pretty common sense for the rest of us but good luck.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 10:59 pm to RB10
quote:
This has already been alleged in a lawsuit, and that lawsuit was won.
Except the winning was not a tangible amount of money. LSU forfeited any missed NIL opportunities by leaving them off of the roster spot and then filling it with someone else.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:00 pm to meansonny
quote:
According to ncaa rules, that cannot be the case. NIL cannot be conditioned on roster spots, playing time, and stats.
And by definition, the players "own" their NIL. As much or as little value is in that name, image, and license cannot be based on the university. It cannot be suited to a school.
Your argument would be tested "by what limiting factor is there for NIL based on play?"
Does a game ejection for targeting limit one's valuation for NIL?
Does academic dishonesty limit one's value for valuation for NIL?
Does rostering a competing position player limit value for a player's NIL?
Do wide receiver drops limit a QBs NIL value?
Who is responsible for NIL based on play and performance and who can be sued for limiting that earnings potential?
If you read the NIL rules, they specifically state that they can't be tied to playing college football. They are only a permissive extension of the player's NIL ownership before and after college.
Tell that to Diego Pavia
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:01 pm to pankReb
quote:
This is far too advanced for an LSU fan.
It’s pretty common sense for the rest of us but good luck.
Diego Pavia won his lawsuit. Meansonny of SECr.com doesn’t have more insight than the judge that ruled in his favor.
It really is common sense.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:04 pm to SidewalkTiger
Pavia did not receive money from winning the lawsuit.
This is a comparison based upon desperation. LSU could have still given them a roster spot and paid them. As a matter of fact, the Louisiana courts told them to do so.
Harris and Wright’s lost NIL opportunities came at the hands of LSU and no one else. LSU is the one who took the chance. It didn’t work out for them. So it’s up to them to pay up.
And for a fan base who constantly brags about money not being an issue…..your arguments constantly keep money as being an issue. Just man up and pay them. It would give LSU a chance of being the good guy in a situation.
“Lane is players first!” arguments and shite LSU fans have made over the last few weeks. Time to prove that right.
This is a comparison based upon desperation. LSU could have still given them a roster spot and paid them. As a matter of fact, the Louisiana courts told them to do so.
Harris and Wright’s lost NIL opportunities came at the hands of LSU and no one else. LSU is the one who took the chance. It didn’t work out for them. So it’s up to them to pay up.
And for a fan base who constantly brags about money not being an issue…..your arguments constantly keep money as being an issue. Just man up and pay them. It would give LSU a chance of being the good guy in a situation.
“Lane is players first!” arguments and shite LSU fans have made over the last few weeks. Time to prove that right.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:05 pm to RB10
quote:
Diego Pavia won his lawsuit.
You keep repeating this but continue to ignore the rebuttals.
How much money did the NCAA/SEC have to pay him?
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:08 pm to pankReb
quote:
You keep repeating this but continue to ignore the rebuttals.
I’ve responded to every one. They’re just wrong.
quote:
How much money did the NCAA/SEC have to pay him?
$0 dollars because the extension of eligibility wasn’t fought. He was allowed to return. Can’t sure for damages if you aren’t barred from earnings, can you?
The money would have come in the form of damages had that extra year been denied, which is exactly what you’re about to see play out with these players.
Hold tight, it won’t take long.
This post was edited on 9/8/26 at 11:10 pm
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:09 pm to pankReb
The NCAA does... its called 5 for 5
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:14 pm to RB10
quote:
$0 dollars
Interesting
quote:
He was allowed to return.
Which would have been the same outcome of these lawsuits had LSU/Kiffin not fricked it up by both voting that they should not be eligible as well as giving those roster spots to someone else.
I’ll repeat that. LSU voted to keep these players ineligible. That admits fault. They agreed to a financial obligation with the players. They then voted with their governing body that those players should remain ineligible. LSU is solely responsible for any financial damages.
And once again…why are you even bothering to argue that the SEC should play. Money is of no concern at LSU and Lane is a players first guy. Show the world that you’re willing to uphold your agreement. Lane had no problem with LSU paying his Ole Miss bonus. It almost sounds like Lane is really Lane first.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:14 pm to Itmovedalittle
Research timelines.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:17 pm to pankReb
quote:
Which would have been the same outcome of these lawsuits had LSU/Kiffin not fricked it up by both voting that they should not be eligible as well as giving those roster spots to someone else.
I’ll repeat that. LSU voted to keep these players ineligible. That admits fault. They agreed to a financial obligation with the players. They then voted with their governing body that those players should remain ineligible. LSU is solely responsible for any financial damages.
I haven’t once said LSU wouldn’t be sued as well. You don’t seem to understand how onus works is damages litigation.
quote:
And once again…why are you even bothering to argue that the SEC should play. Money is of no concern at LSU and Lane is a players first guy. Show the world that you’re willing to uphold your agreement. Lane had no problem with LSU paying his Ole Miss bonus. It almost sounds like Lane is really Lane first.
These guys don’t have a contract for LSU to uphold, but we will see what sort of compensation LSU offers them. It won’t be nothing.
Posted on 9/8/26 at 11:20 pm to DMagic
No Medical Records: The NCAA stated that Ferris State had no documentation of medical treatment, injury reports, or conditions for Chambliss during that time frame.
Competitive Reasons: According to the NCAA, the school cited "developmental needs and our team's competitive circumstances" as the reason Chambliss did not play during the 2022–23 season.
Waiver Denial: Because of the lack of contemporaneous medical records from the school, the NCAA denied Chambliss a medical hardship waiver. [1]
LINK [2] (https://www.wjtv.com/sports/sec-football/ncaa-denies-waiver-for-ole-miss-qb-trinidad-chambliss/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer">LINK
Chambliss and his legal team later provided private physician notes, family testimony, and medical history regarding chronic tonsillitis and respiratory issues to a state court, which ultimately granted an injunction allowing him eligibility. [1] - Per WBLT and CNN
You are full of shite
Competitive Reasons: According to the NCAA, the school cited "developmental needs and our team's competitive circumstances" as the reason Chambliss did not play during the 2022–23 season.
Waiver Denial: Because of the lack of contemporaneous medical records from the school, the NCAA denied Chambliss a medical hardship waiver. [1]
LINK [2] (https://www.wjtv.com/sports/sec-football/ncaa-denies-waiver-for-ole-miss-qb-trinidad-chambliss/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer">LINK
Chambliss and his legal team later provided private physician notes, family testimony, and medical history regarding chronic tonsillitis and respiratory issues to a state court, which ultimately granted an injunction allowing him eligibility. [1] - Per WBLT and CNN
You are full of shite
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News