Started By
Message
re: WAFB: SEC loses appeal…“Greg Sankey is a misguided missile and is going to ruin the SEC”
Posted on 9/15/26 at 3:51 pm to somethingdifferent
Posted on 9/15/26 at 3:51 pm to somethingdifferent
Can you answer for certain that all of the guys involved in the lawsuit fit this grid? Also, nothing has changed with the pro tryouts and dates to come back to school in the 5for5 screwup.
quote:
Limitations and Drawbacks
No guarantee of five full years: Delaying enrollment past the academic year after turning 19 shortens the available window. Reclassing, prep/PG years, or gap years can cost eligibility time if the age trigger is hit.
Loss of flexibility for injuries and hardships: Medical redshirts and most waivers are gone. An injury year still counts against the continuous clock.
Impact on development paths: Sports that rely on junior leagues, delayed enrollment, or extended development (notably hockey, and to varying degrees baseball and others) are particularly affected, as time spent outside college after the clock starts counts against eligibility. JUCO time starts the clock.
Roster and recruiting effects: Coaches lose redshirt strategy tools; roster management becomes more rigid and age/enrollment-date driven. It can compress evaluation windows and change transfer-portal dynamics.
No retroactive fifth year for many: Those who exhausted eligibility under the old rules by spring 2026 generally do not get an extra year (though court challenges have created some exceptions or ongoing litigation for certain classes, such as aspects involving the Class of 2022).
Still subject to other rules: Academic eligibility, amateurism, and other NCAA requirements continue to apply. An athlete can be inside the five-year window but still ineligible for other reasons.
Legal and transitional uncertainty: The rule has faced lawsuits over application and retroactivity. Implementation details and court outcomes can create short-term roster chaos.
Not universal: It does not apply the same way (or at all) in Division III, and sport-specific nuances or further refinements can exist.
In short, the model prioritizes clarity and a firmer age/enrollment-based limit over the old system’s case-by-case flexibility. Athletes and families should carefully track birthdates and enrollment timing, and consult school compliance offices or the NCAA Eligibility Center for individual cases, especially during the transition. Official details are available on NCAA.org.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 3:53 pm to JPLSU1981
Louisiana appeals court upholds Louisiana district judge decision that positively effects Louisiana's flagship college football team! News at 11!
Posted on 9/15/26 at 3:57 pm to PineyWoodsHog
Where was Trinidad Chambliss granted the injunction that he is playing under at Ole Miss?
Posted on 9/15/26 at 3:58 pm to PineyWoodsHog
quote:
Louisiana appeals court upholds Louisiana district judge decision that positively effects Louisiana's flagship college football team!
This affects lsu football in no way
Posted on 9/15/26 at 3:58 pm to TeeteringBrink
quote:
A conference does not dominate the market like the NCAA does, and is therefore much less vulnerable to Sherman Act liability.
You know antitrust isn’t just about being a monopoly right?
In fact, the antitrust issues in CFB have absolutely nothing to do with monopoly & everything to do with efforts to restrict free trade.
How are the conferences less vulnerable if the conferences are extensions of the NCAA?
Once again
quote:
Alston applies to conferences when they engage in agreements or coordinated conduct affecting interstate commerce.
The SEC has literally paid a massive settlement on the record to resolve antitrust claims… including almost $3 billion in damages last year (House v. NCAA / Hubbard / Carter)
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:00 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Where was Trinidad Chambliss granted the injunction that he is playing under at Ole Miss?
I don’t think any of these people understand what an appellate court actually is, nor do they seem to understand the fact that LSU isn’t party to this issue aside from being enjoined in the injunction.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:01 pm to TeeteringBrink
quote:
A conference does not dominate the market like the NCAA does, and is therefore much less vulnerable to Sherman Act liability.
Really? The SEC doesn’t dominate the college athletic market in 12 states?
The SEC also defers to the NCAA on just about everything, so its choice to counter NCAA eligibility rules on this issue smacks of selective outrage. The league literally decided that one group of players can play but not these others after the LA court case was filed, thus exempting every athlete suing from the updated rules.
The SEC stepped into this unnecessarily. Sankey and the conference legal team should’ve explained to its members that entering this argument could expose the conference to legal rulings and penalties that will make it harder to operate as is. It would’ve been smarter for the league to let the court cases play out and then tighten rules for next year. Now, the league is exposed legally and will likely have to settle for tens of millions with Wright and Harris.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:05 pm to TeeteringBrink
quote:In principle, you are wrong about this and it is explained in my legal thread
I pointed out that the conference and the NCAA are not “equally vulnerable,” which they aren’t
quote:Go read the legal thread. This objection is addressed. Horizontal restraint of trade, tortuous interference, etc.
A conference does not dominate the market like the NCAA does
quote:I don't know where you are getting your information from
allowing the NCAA to remove the case to federal court.
NCAA v. Alston, House v. NCAA, State of Tennessee & Virginia v. NCAA, Fontenot v. NCAA, Carter v. NCAA, Wisne v. NCAA
The NCAA is getting destroyed in federal court. The conferences are possibly next
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:07 pm to PineyWoodsHog
quote:Sigh. Why do people insist on being stupid. You post this on p10 after it's been obliterated about a dozen times already
Louisiana appeals court upholds Louisiana district judge decision that positively effects Louisiana's flagship college football team!
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:08 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
This should have never gone to court. It's been well established that you get to play 4 years
Damn Sankey posts here
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:12 pm to DeathByTossDive226
Jesus.
There’s no point in arguing abstract things with someone like you, so let’s just see if DQ and or Xavian ever file an antitrust suit against the SEC. You seem to think they have a slam dunk antitrust case for millions; I don’t. I’ll go out on a limb and say they won’t file such a suit, but if they do, they won’t prevail. Get back to me when the suit is filed.
There’s no point in arguing abstract things with someone like you, so let’s just see if DQ and or Xavian ever file an antitrust suit against the SEC. You seem to think they have a slam dunk antitrust case for millions; I don’t. I’ll go out on a limb and say they won’t file such a suit, but if they do, they won’t prevail. Get back to me when the suit is filed.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:13 pm to somethingdifferent
LOL...I never swore up and down anything buddy. I have called it what it was from the get go...a means to show LSU that the rest of the conference saw their conduct outside of the norms of what is expected of member institutions. I never in a million years thought they were going to kick LSU out unless something was happening behind the scenes we didn't know about.
Yes, some of that is about Kiffen. He is a lightning rod and is never going to get the benefit of the doubt. You knew that when you hired him. Well don't be shocked when said lightning rod attracts lightning.
Yes, some of that is about Kiffen. He is a lightning rod and is never going to get the benefit of the doubt. You knew that when you hired him. Well don't be shocked when said lightning rod attracts lightning.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:15 pm to Dawgs2122
quote:
I have called it what it was from the get go...a means to show LSU that the rest of the conference saw their conduct outside of the norms of what is expected of member institutions.
Interesting that you folks barely had anything to say when Alabama played a pro basketball player, other than an affidavit.
Why is this conference so hypocritical?
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:18 pm to somethingdifferent
Well, we shall see. If they blow the whole thing up to be honest after this Sunday watching what college has become the NFL is the better product.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:19 pm to Diamondawg
quote:The judges who have ruled in favor of the players are doing so based on the exclusion being an "Unreasonable Restraint of Trade" and the bar for "Irreparable Harm" is seen to be easily met
Can you answer for certain that all of the guys involved in the lawsuit fit this grid?
quote:Not sure what point you're making but Sankey demonstrated stupendous ignorance of this in court and the SEC is taking heat in the media, rightfully so, for having a farcical idea of what a pro player actually is. As for the dates, that's a big reason why they are winning in court. The NCAA told them to take a hike then unfairly changed the rules behind their backs. It is absolutely inexplicable that rant@rds on this board have been sticking up for the NCAA/SEC on this matter who clearly screwed up yet again, and none of these halfwits have bothered to see the players' point of view
Also, nothing has changed with the pro tryouts and dates to come back to school in the 5for5 screwup.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:24 pm to SidewalkTiger
Who is you folks? I had plenty to say as did pretty much everyone not a fan of The University of Alabama. Fans like you are as bad as freaking Dabo. Poor little LSU.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:24 pm to TeeteringBrink
quote:Again, read my legal thread and tell me what I said that's incorrect
There’s no point in arguing abstract things with someone like you
quote:First, Sankey proved what an idiot he is and you're relying on him to win when the stakes are even higher? Second, the NCAA is already getting obliterated in court. What makes you think the SEC won't also? Third, the players are already winning in multiple states and the SEC backed off of its big and scary federal case
You seem to think they have a slam dunk antitrust case for millions; I don’t
quote:You're probably right. There will likely be a quiet settlement so the SEC can try to save face but it would absolutely be a monumental concession by the conference
I’ll go out on a limb and say they won’t file such a suit,
This post was edited on 9/15/26 at 4:30 pm
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:26 pm to Dawgs2122
quote:Oh yeah because the conference has been made up of choirboys over the last 3 decades. What a joke
.a means to show LSU that the rest of the conference saw their conduct outside of the norms of what is expected of member institutions
quote:What did he do wrong? Lay it all out point by point
don't be shocked when said lightning rod attracts lightning.
Posted on 9/15/26 at 4:29 pm to Dawgs2122
quote:Fans started this freight train and the industry was all too happy to oblige. We were the ones who pushed for facilities arms race, semi pro players, modern recruiting, tv availability. Don't cry because we got what we wanted. If you want the true amateur student athlete, go watch division II. But no one is doing that because they want to watch the best of the best and that's what fans are paying through the nose for
If they blow the whole thing up
Popular
Back to top


1





