Is this kid any relation to the other Jake locker that is rather well known?

We’re their situations very different from the Conners?

I guess the media folks had a brief hiccup today when at around 11:45 they released the “febuary 5, 2026” recruiting class list. Before they quickly realized that they had screwed up and took it down I was able to only read that is is 20 freshman and 10 grad transfers. So no new news there, but still a pretty funny development and apparently no big changes.

But not an official announcement from WSU. Or am I missing something?

Yeah, but if he got the NIL offer that he was happy with and that he accepted it directly from the collective, he did not need his agent to get this done and it would be unethical for the agent to even ask for his percentage (Usually 5-20%). Although some unscrupulous agents have been caught trying to do just that. Hey, I’m just trying to figure out why no announcement. Just a theory. Boring Saturday!

It is possible that CP got the NIL offer directly from the collective which required no negotiations and thus no agent was needed. Which also means the agent was not there to crow about “his client” getting such a “Great deal” on social media or elsewhere. It is certainly not in the best interests of WSU a at this point to advertise the deal was done until as late as they can. I.e after the portal has closed. Just a thought.

JDur, yes the Weills did apparently take their beloved dog, Angel, to the veterinary oncology department at UC Davis to receive chemotherapy for squamous cell cancer. I wonder when that was because I have made the same trip from sonoma to davis many times for essentially the same treatment for our dog Rosie. For such a dismally sad trip for a very sick dog I actually came to look forward to it. Why? The incredibly great facilities and the fresh and optimistic attitude of the residents and vet students (All young women) who took care of Rosie. She survived.. not cured but had a good life, extended only due to the fantastic treatment she received from UC Davis Vet. So I say thank you to the Weill family for your unbelievable support for a great cause.

If there is so much uncertainty why not just put it up for a vote. All those in favor of the Aggies moving up to the FBS level say so with a $1000 donation to the effort. In other words, put your money where your mouth is. Well you all know where this is probably going. I just don’t think it will fly to the tune of the Montana folks at least at this point. Economically the country is not going in the right direction now for a lot of discretionary spending. IMHO . Hope i could be wrong.

Remember when chancellor Hullar tried to change the Aggies name. I forget what he wanted to change it to but I believe it was to the Mustangs. Well, the Cal Aggie Alumni association heard about this and slammed down on Hullar hard. Never heard much about it again. Oh, and I think that the students were polled on this and were firmly against any form of name change.
So if history means anything, no name change coming anytime soon.

Was that the same game where John frost was decked by a sac guy is the back court. Which I saw with my own eyes and was never called a four. I later knew that guy who was an insurance agent in sac.
When I confronted him about this he totally ignored the question. 1967? Or so. Why do some memories never die
?

Fug, it works thru the preliminary injunction process. If the court decides the Conners have a good chance to prevail in the case and would be irreparably damaged if not allowed to play in the 2026 season, then the court could issue an injunction against the NCAA requiring it to allow the Conners to play next season. The actual trial on the merits would come later. Which of course by then be too late to effect the Conners eligibility. Fait accompli, if you will.

As I was driving home today and ruminating about the Conners situation I realized that this case may not be one where a jury trial is allowed. That is, if the court decides this is just about an equitable issue regarding whether the Conners eligibility would be reinstated solely by way of the injunction process, then a jury trial is not allowed. The judge alone would make the ultimate judgement. But that may be not the case here because the Conners could argue that the denial of their NIL benefits for the 2026 season would result in actual monetary damages. Thus, a jury trial would be called for. The reason I add this is that the two parties are now in the mediation process. All these little legal issues are relevant to the actual bigger issue “does the NCAA really want to see this case go to trial” with all the negative publicity, costs and attorneys fess (The California Cartwright Act allows for a prevailing party to get their attorneys fees) that is coming if the Conners prevail? I frankly don’t think they will. But again who the hell knows?

River, the court will have to determine if the NCAA rules that apply to this case are fair and reasonable I.e. why the “scheduled”Mercer game was considered a “non game” for all reasons except for the Conners eligibility. I think this is where the court will have to face and determine if this apparent conundrum in the rules is rational and fair or whether it is not. And considering that this case will be decided in an antitrust litigation environment and with NIL considerations, I think the court comes down in favor of the Conners or at the very least consider it a factual matter that must be decided by a jury. Do you think a jury will buy the “Scheduled game” versus “completed game” distinction? I think the NCAA should be thinking that this is a case that they should settle.

My limited research so far in 2026 has not been overly positive in terms of players suing the NCAA for additional year eligibility issues, in fact all of the courts so far have denied additional eligibility. But they were not (to my knowledge) because of a medical disability. One case which does stand out, however, is Trinidad Chambliss v. NCAA which is a medical eligibility case. Filed in Mississippi Chancery Court this year the case alleges that Trinidad who first played at Ferris state in 2022 suffered from acute tonsillitis that year and could not play due to medical conditions. He then transferred to Ole Miss and became the star quarterback. The NCAA has denied his eligibility for the 2026 season. He is projected to be a 6th round NFL pick, but alleges that if he is not allowed another season at Ole Miss he will suffer serious financial hardship because he could otherwise move up in the draft. Fairly new case. I believe the Conners case may be a bit more factually compelling but who the hell knows at this point?

Oh, and I forgot about physical education classes! They were all cut 5 years ago. And that raised such furious response that a class action lawsuit was filed against the university. It went nowhere and was quickly dismissed. PE Never was reinstated.

I still think the real simple here issue is: can a non game (Merser) per NCAA rules. Still be deemed a played game for the players eligibility status? Does the NCAA really want that fight over a couple of FCS kids who just want to play their last year of college football?

I also forgot to mention that men’s swimming and diving was cut a few years back. A lot of very upset people then as well. And this was a much bigger and more popular sport than equestrian.

You know, I thought the same. But when I saw the case was in the hands of outside counsel I knew we probably would never see the denial letter. The case is being negotiated between counsel as we speak so everything is “no comment” at this point until we get a final decision on the negotiations.

I agree this is very disappointing for the riders and coaches affected. But is hardly the first time sports teams have been cancelled by the university. Others may have better memories than I, but some I recall go way back to the late seventies I believe.
There was the freshman football team which was very popular and successful which was culled in I believe the late seventies. Not only did it allow for the younger players to play football (who would never play for the varsity team) but it was the beginning of many Aggie coaches successful careers.
Then there was men’s wrestling.
Then there was women’s rowing
Maybe I missed some more. Polo?
All these eliminations were very hard on the players involved and very unpopular.
I find the equestrian cut hard as well because most of the women in my family are now or were once equestrian riders and horse owners.
But one further thing needs to be said about equestrian: it appeals to a very narrow demographic. Only the very wealthy can afford this sport or even horse ownership. So it raises the ethical question of whether a public university should even field a sport that only caters to the rich student?
Frankly, i cringe at the thought that a sport based on cheerleading is taking equestrians place but it is what it is. NCAA likes STUNT. NCAA doesn’t like equestrian.
Sorry for the rant.

I think that when the sport was made a varsity sport at the DI level at Davis there was expectation that the NCAA would follow through and that it would become a true NCAA sport. That obviously never happened and probably never will. As previously mentioned, it’s way too expensive and very few colleges field an equestrian team, especially in the western United States. STUNT is a growing sport, but there are still very few colleges that offer it as an NCAA sport in California. I sometimes wonder why UC Davis is so concerned about compliance with Title IX while most all DI schools out west appear to care less about that issue.