0
Started By
Message
Posted on 10/7/26 at 11:49 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
The SEC, by the SEC's own admission, did not need any new rules or punishments to keep the Bediako issue from continuing. They had all the rules and power needed when the Bediako situation occurred to prevent that from happening then. IDK why you keep ignoring that.
I don't follow you at all about the "SEC. . . not needing any new rules or punishments to keep the Bediako issue from continuing."
If that were true, the RJ Luis case, just for example, would have never have come up at all if SEC had enough rules to prevent him seeking a TRO supported by Wade/LSU.
The SEC/Sankey did nothing in the Bediako case except saying and testifying that they were vehemently opposed to it. The NCAA not the SEC fought it and winning it depended 100% on the judge in that specific case!
RJ Luis case was attempting to get a different ruling from a different judge.
The SEC would have no way to go against the judge's rulings either way, win or lose.
That's why they tried to get the 16 member schools to agree to self-police as a league to keep any of the schools from supporting/pursuing Bediako/Luis type court cases.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 11:54 am to wm72
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:05 pm to JohnnyKilroy
Never got an answer, huh?
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:05 pm to 3down10
quote:
You were directly told not to do it and continued to do it anyway. The SEC's lawsuit was not their first move.
If you want to pretend like LSU didn't do nothing, be my guest. It's just delusion though.
What did LSU do?
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:07 pm to 3down10
quote:
LSU filed to have the suit dismissed, because they want to end it without being penalized for their actions
Wrong.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:08 pm to Dixie.Reb
quote:
LSU wants to dismiss the lawsuit because they never put ineligible players on their roster
Wrong.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:10 pm to wm72
quote:
I don't follow you at all about the "SEC. . . not needing any new rules or punishments to keep the Bediako issue from continuing.
Have you read the SEC's complaint against LSU?
The SEC goes on and on and on about how their professionalism rules have been in place since day 1 and that the emergency 8/25 rulemaking session didn't expand or create any "new" rules, but rather clarified the rules that already existed and had existed for nearly a century.
If that's the SEC's argument, then they could have enforced eligibility requirements against Bediako and Alabama, but didn't.
quote:
The NCAA not the SEC fought it
Correct. And unlike the Pyburn case, the SEC took no further action after the TRO was granted against the NCAA. In the Pyburn case, the SEC held and emergency meeting to signal to its member institutions that it would enforce penalties against a school that rosters certain members of the pyburn case, regardless of the TRO against he NCAA.
What prevented the SEC from having that exact same meeting in January of this year after Bediako was granted his TRO against the NCAA? Why didn't the SEC tell Alabama that rostering and allowing Bediako to participate in team activities, regardless of the TRO against the NCAA, would result in sanctions, fines, and possibly expulsion from the conference?
This post was edited on 10/7/26 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:10 pm to 3down10
quote:
The SEC isn't facing penalties here, and they aren't the ones trying to dismiss a lawsuit.
Yeah, about that......
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:14 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
It's interesting how the narrative was originally that Landry would keep LSU from hiring Kiffin due to his salary comments, but now it's flipped to Landry actually hired Kiffin.
Posted on 10/7/26 at 12:32 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
The SEC goes on and on and on about how their professionalism rules have been in place since day 1 and that the emergency 8/25 rulemaking session didn't expand or create any "new" rules, but rather clarified the rules that already existed and had existed for nearly a century.
quote:
If that's the SEC's argument, then they could have enforced eligibility requirements against Bediako and Alabama, but didn't.
The disconnect is between your first point and second one.
Yes, of course NCAA and SEC "professionalism rules" have long been in place.
However, these TROs are being granted though arguing and having some judges agree that these specific players are not or have been unfairly ruled "professional" under the SEC/NCAA rules.
That's why the SEC couldn't do anything about it simply based on the old rules:
A certain judge rules a certain player "not professional" because they only entered draft, only practiced, only played in French league etc etc etc.
They grant a TRO preventing the SEC from subjecting the player or school from any punishment for breaking the "professionalism" rule on the basis of the player's status as a professional being in question.
That's why the SEC couldn't enforce the rule that's on the books in these cases!
The entire new development this summer (post-Bediako) is the SEC attempting to argue that the SEC, as a group of members should have legal standing to determine for themselves which players are professional or not.
That's where they attempted to get all the 16 members on board to agree to rules and punishments for attempting to circumvent the professionalism rule through player specific court cases.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News