1
Started By
Message
re: The SEC Should Seriously Consider Kicking LSU Out
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:18 pm to theballguy
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:18 pm to theballguy
quote:
How many times does this need to be explained? The SEC is asserting its First Amendment right of association, alleging LSU lacks institutional control and challenging LSU's continued defiance of conference eligibility rules.
It's also seeking to protect its authority to terminate membership without interference. Those are the legal grounds. Whether the court agrees is another matter.
You can disagree with the SEC's position, but continuing to ask what grounds it has when they've been spelled out repeatedly is getting ridiculous.
I mean that's kind of the point you keep glossing over. LSU hasn't defied any conference rules, they aren't continuing to do so, and the allegation of LOIC is based upon no violation of conference rules.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:19 pm to stitchop
quote:
I guess he likes balls?
Pretty obvious no?
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:19 pm to theballguy
quote:Let me help you out.
A defendant would be beyond stupid if they didn't advocate for themselves in a case like this. I'm not a lawyer, but I wouldn't advise this.
In a U.S. civil action, the burden of proof generally falls on the plaintiff—the person or organization bringing the lawsuit. The plaintiff must prove the essential elements of the claim, usually by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning they are more likely true than not.
What that means
• The defendant ordinarily does not have to disprove the claim; if the plaintiff fails to meet the required burden, the defendant wins on that claim.
• If the evidence is evenly balanced, the plaintiff has not met the preponderance standard and loses on that claim.
• If the defendant brings a counterclaim or asserts an affirmative defense, the defendant generally bears the burden of proving that counterclaim or defense.
You are welcome.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:19 pm to theballguy
Lmao. Yeah man. You won.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:20 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
The burden of proof is on the accuser.
In a civil court you only have to prove the intent and the actions towards that goal beyond a 50% probability. So the burden is much much less. Everyone knows what LSU was doing, LSU fans bragged about it until the lawsuits hit. Then it was "didn't do nothing" and "what rule, where is the proof".
It basically boils down to this - LSU thinks it can use state laws to prevent the SEC from enforces it's own rules and the SEC thinks they should be able to kick LSU out of the conference for it.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:20 pm to 3down10
quote:
the very real threat... that Defendants will interfere with any effort to terminate LSU’s membership in the Conference.
The fact that there is an expectation that a member institution would not interfere with being terminated is pretty funny IMHO.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:20 pm to theballguy
quote:
And if LSU is as indispensable as you suggest, why did the SEC even consider expelling it?
I do not think anyone has said LSU is indespensable, but having LSU in the conference is better for the SEC that out. But, this is all a charade because no one likes Kiffin or Wade so they are throwing a tantrum.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:21 pm to lewis and herschel
quote:
all other 15 member institutions and the head office are wrong in their mind....
No one at LSU thinks the new rule is wrong or bad.
A bunch of players (not LSU) filed against the NCAA in a Louisiana court. The SEC then changed the rule and the penalties. After the lawsuit was filed. The players then added the SEC to the suit. (Again, not LSU.) LSU, as a Louisiana state institution, must abide by court rulings given by its own judiciary.
The rule changes put LSU in a bind: if the court ruled in favor of the players, LSU would face serious financial fines by the SEC. If LSU abided by the new rules to avoid said penalty, they would face contempt charges (which is what is happening now). This is what AG Murrill’s amicus brief stated would happen.
The 15 other institutions do not seem to understand this dilemma or (most likely) don’t care. (Even though, if this were happening in their own states, they would be in the exact same predicament.)
The court ruled that the players would likely prevail and that the SEC, with its new rule, would be violating the constitutional rights of the players to play a 5th year.
This post was edited on 10/14/26 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:21 pm to Madking
quote:
quote: theballguy
I guess he likes balls?
Pretty obvious no?
judging by his bitch acting on Rant, he likes them balls on his bitch lips
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:21 pm to 3down10
That is an accusation. It is not a fact.
Prove it.
Prove it.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:22 pm to theballguy
The SEC should drop the case before they get embarrassed worse.
OP just showed the entire internet how retarded he/she is.
OP- go back and read the hypocritical shite you just spewed. Jesus Christ some of ya'lls mommas need to take your keyboards away.
OP just showed the entire internet how retarded he/she is.
OP- go back and read the hypocritical shite you just spewed. Jesus Christ some of ya'lls mommas need to take your keyboards away.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:23 pm to Madking
quote:
How does Stanley’s taint taste?
I don't know, Alabama isn't the one facing being kicked out of the conference and being sent to a G5 conference.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:23 pm to stitchop
He’s a clown, look at his posts. He and that other one are like 7th grade public school kids trying to explain the law and legal procedures. It’s comical.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:23 pm to 3down10
quote:
I don't know, Alabama isn't the one facing being kicked out of the conference and being sent to a G5 conference.
Your entire life is a delusion
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:24 pm to SidewalkTiger
I think you're overlooking the distinction between eventually complying and respecting the authority of the conference. I used a simple analogy a few weeks ago. When your parents tell you to do something, the expectation is that you do it when you're told, not after arguing about it and facing consequences. LSU ultimately complied, and that's fair to acknowledge. But the SEC's concern goes beyond the final outcome. It's also about how LSU responded to the rules and the conference's authority to enforce them. That's why eventual compliance doesn't necessarily settle the larger issue.
I know this is difficult to pretend to understand when you're taking it personally.
I know this is difficult to pretend to understand when you're taking it personally.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:24 pm to theballguy
quote:
then why have conference rules at all? And if LSU is as indispensable as you suggest, why did the SEC even consider expelling it?
I didn’t say LSU was indispensable, I was simply trying to ask…..is it worth the loss of revenue Alabama will initially lose over a dick measuring contest where zero illegal athletes have been rostered?
Is it worth the loss of a founding member over “rules” being broken that no one can supply me with concrete evidence.
Is it worth having to travel to Miami every other year because Sankey included the LA AG in his suit and expected her to simply roll over? Come on man, these people are politicians with higher desires than present offices held.
Or maybe it’s Clemson or FSU.
I’m pretty sure the Alabama faithful enjoy their yearly win against LSU.
This post was edited on 10/14/26 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:25 pm to 3down10
quote:
It basically boils down to this - LSU thinks it can use state laws to prevent the SEC from enforces it's own rules and the SEC thinks they should be able to kick LSU out of the conference for it.
The conference can kick LSU out any time it wants to, they just need two thirds of the remaining members to vote them out.
The SEC seems to be seeking the authority to kick members out without that vote, why is that? Certainly, the SEC isn't using this case to seize more authority from the member institutions, that definitely isn't it.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:25 pm to Madking
quote:
He’s a clown, look at his posts.
He certainly doesn't understand how this type of case works.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:26 pm to bluestem75
Yet you proceed .... autism spectrum disorder as an institution....
Posted on 10/14/26 at 1:26 pm to theballguy
quote:
The SEC Should Seriously Consider Kicking LSU Out
Would be one of the dumbest things the SEC's ever done.
Imagine kicking out one of your SEC Blue Bloods while the Big10 is expanding coast to coast with USC and Oregon.
Brilliant
Page 3 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News