Countdown to Kickoff: Niko Lalos is the New Orleans Saints Player of Day 57. Time on the practice squad has prepared him for this opportunity
Time is flying by. There are just 57 days left until the tart of the New Orleans Saints’ 2024 regular season, which makes the current owner of the No. 57 jersey our Saints Player of the Day: Niko Lalos.
Another year on the practice squad has been good for his development. Lalos has higher goals in 2024, but what road brought him here? Let’s break it down.
Name (Age): Niko Lalos (27)
Position: Defensive end
Height, weight: 6-foot-5, 269 pounds
Relative Athletic Score: N/A
2024 salary cap hit: $915,000
College: Dartmouth
Drafted: Undrafted in 2020 (New York Giants)
NFL experience: 2 years
Lalos spent the first couple years of his pro career with the Giants, appearing in a handful of games with Big Blue before they waived him during their 2022 training camp. He joined the Saints for the rest of the preseason that summer and spent most of the year on their practice squad, returning to New Orleans in 2023. He played well for the XFL’s Seattle Sea Dragons in 2022 before re-signing with the Saints and held his own throughout the preseason but ultimately wound up on the practice squad again. They saw enough to warrant bringing him back for 2024.
Now he’s looking to make the team outright. If Tanoh Kpassagnon misses most of the season with his Achilles injury, as is expected, that opens up a slot for someone like Lalos to climb the depth chart. But he’ll have to prove he’s a better option than rookie free agent Trajan Jeffcoat or maybe even Payton Turner. Lalos has the size the Saints covet at the position and more pro experience than other players in the competition. He just needs to put it all together with a strong summer.
Dartmouth’s Tyler Brand has a story he’s going to be able to tell forever.
Playing at the Princeton Invitational at Springdale Golf Club in New Jersey, he shot 13-over 84 in the opening round on Saturday morning. However, it was the first of 36 holes that day, so there was a quick turnaround before the afternoon 18.
And how different that afternoon was — 23 shots different.
Brand shot 10-under 61 in the afternoon, an incredible improvement in a single day. A 3-over total after 36 holes was not too shabby after his start. With eight birdies and an eagle, Brand set a course record.
But that wasn’t the end of Brand’s story. He ended up withdrawing from the tournament after being injured Sunday in the final round. He suffered a concussion after walking into a tree branch with his head down and was unable to finish.
Again. What a story.
And Brand wasn’t the only golfer to shoot 61 this week. On Monday, Michigan’s Monet Chun shot 10-under 61 during the second round of the Chattanooga Classic at Council Fire Golf Club in Tennessee. And similar to Brand, Chun had a 13-shot improvement in the second round compared to her opening 3-over 74.
Chun had 11 birdies and a bogey in her 61, which is tied for the second-lowest round by a female golfer in NCAA history. It trails only North Carolina State’s Lauren Olivares Leon, who shot 60 in the fall at the Cougar Classic.
Ducks get commitment from Tyler Kinsman, top-ranked punter in 2024 class
When you think of a punter/kicker, a player that stands at 6-foot-5 and 225 pounds isn’t exactly the profile that comes to mind.
Unless that kicker is Tyler Kinsman.
The Nampa, Idaho native had offers from Boise State and Dartmouth before deciding to come to Eugene and be an Oregon Duck.
Kinsman is the top-ranked punter in the Class of 2024, according to Chris Sailer Kicking, and No. 8 by 247Sports.
Odds are Kinsman will be battling current punter Ross James for a job next season. James is just a redshirt sophomore and he’s established himself as one of the best punters in the conference. Oregon still needs to find an eventual replacement for Camden Lewis, who will be departing after this season as he is a senior.
#AGTG I’m beyond blessed to announce that I have committed to The University of Oregon! @oregonfootball has shown so much love and has made this decision easy for me. There’s nowhere like Oregon! Thank you to my parents, coaches, friends, and mentors for carrying me through this… pic.twitter.com/MBWt7Xaw1r
The Saints signed a familiar face out of the XFL after a tryout at rookie minicamp: defensive end Niko Lalos, who also joined them for training camp last year
The New Orleans Saints signed a familiar face out of the XFL after a tryout at rookie minicamp: defensive end Niko Lalos, who also joined them for training camp last year. Lalos played well for a few weeks before roster cuts but didn’t have enough time to make his case for a roster spot, so he’ll get another opportunity after competing in the spring league.
Originally signed as an undrafted free agent out of Dartmouth, Lalos started his NFL career with the New York Giants in 2020 and has bounced around the league since then, including his stint in New Orleans — he joined their practice squad in mid-November and stayed there to close out the season before teaming up with the XFL’s Seattle Sea Dragons. He played the third-most defensive snaps for them but made more plays in run defense than as a pass rusher.
He’ll be pushing Jabari Zuniga for snaps at the bottom of the depth chart, and it wouldn’t be a surprise to see either player (or both of them) brought back to the practice squad. The top five roster spots appear to be set with Cameron Jordan and Carl Granderson starting, backed up by some combination of Tanoh Kpassagnon, Isaiah Foskey, and Payton Turner.
The Ivy League school closed Hanover Country Club in 2020, and has refused the foundation’s request to return the money.
Several years before his death in 2002, at age 88, Robert T. Keeler drew up a will to make his intentions clear. His wife and family were his primary beneficiaries. Also on the list were his secretary and housekeeper, a church, seminary, and medical center, and Dartmouth College, his alma mater.
Keeler didn’t name a dollar amount for Dartmouth, choosing instead to leave a percentage of his estate, but he did specify how he wanted the money used: for the “sole purpose of upgrading and maintaining its golf course.” When Dartmouth asked for the flexibility to use the money for other purposes, the family said no.
Per their 2005 “statement of understanding,” the college was to send any money it didn’t need to maintain the course to the Robert T. Keeler charitable foundation, a nonprofit that supports children in need. That hasn’t happened. The college closed the Hanover Country Club in 2020, citing financial concerns, and has refused the foundation’s request to return the approximately $3.8 million that remains.
Dartmouth has also fought the foundation and estate’s request to be allowed to make their objections to a court. They’ve so far been denied.
The disagreement has triggered a 2½-year legal dispute between Dartmouth, Keeler’s estate and foundation, and the Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts Unit, which is charged with protecting donors’ intentions.
It has also illustrated the limits of donors’ ability to control their charitable intentions, even when they spell out restrictions, as Keeler did.
With the blessing of the Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts Unit, a circuit court judge ruled in February that Dartmouth can keep the $3.8 million and use it for “golf-related” purposes, such as the study and design of golf practice areas or administrative and equipment costs of the school varsity golf teams.
The case is now before the state Supreme Court. Keeler’s estate and foundation have asked the court to essentially reopen the modification request and give them the right to show why Dartmouth should be forced to return the money.
They believe they can show that Dartmouth didn’t close the golf course for financial reasons, which would meet the legal threshold for repurposing the money, but closed it because it wants to extract more value from the course by erecting housing and academic buildings on the course. The school’s strategic plan identifies the redevelopment of the course as a possibility.
The foundation and estate also argue the Charitable Trusts Unit failed in its obligation to sufficiently investigate Dartmouth’s financial argument.
“If this stands, the idea that when a donor makes a gift with conditions, that those conditions are supposed to be honored, that rule does not exist anymore in New Hampshire,” said attorney John Laboe, who is representing the estate and foundation. Asked how he’d advise clients seeking to protect their intentions, Laboe said, “I would say don’t give them the money.”
Dartmouth has said it is considering different uses for its golf course, which it closed in 2020, including new housing and academic buildings. (Screenshot | Beyer Blinder Belle)
Dissecting an agreement
The law allows institutions like Dartmouth to modify how they use gifts in limited circumstances: if the donor agrees or when the gift’s original purpose or restriction becomes unlawful, impracticable, impossible to achieve, or wasteful. However, the institution must still use the gift in a way that honors the donor’s wishes as much as possible, and a court must agree.
In February, Circuit Court Judge Thomas Rappa upheld the Charitable Trusts Unit’s determination that the school had met that legal burden and ruled that Dartmouth could redirect the money to other golf-related expenses. He found too that the unit had been extensively involved in reviewing Dartmouth’s request.
In oral arguments before the state Supreme Court in late March, Dartmouth’s attorney, Ralph Holmes, defended the school’s position that it is not required to return the money. He focused on a phrase in the statement of understanding that states the gift was intended to benefit future generations of Dartmouth students and members of the Dartmouth community. According to the statement of understanding Dartmouth included in a court filing, Keeler wished to support the golf course “so that future generations of Dartmouth students and members of the Dartmouth community may continue to enjoy the great game of golf at the course which he so loved.”
Holmes also told the court that the document does not identify the foundation as a beneficiary, and therefore does not require the money be returned. Holmes said that if Keeler wanted the right to have the money returned to his estate or foundation, that wish should have been included in the agreement.
“If that had been an agreement, it would be in this document, and it’s not there,” Holmes told the justices.
The agreement states that “… any amounts in excess of the amounts the executor determines to be necessary to sufficiently upgrade and adequately maintain the golf course shall be distributed to the Robert T. Keeler Foundation …”
Dartmouth’s legal team referred the Bulletin to Diana Lawrence, Dartmouth’s associate vice president for communications. Lawrence declined to comment while the case is pending.
As close as possible
Diane Quinlan, director of the Charitable Trusts Unit, also declined to comment on the case while it is pending. Assistant Director Michael Haley defended the unit’s handling of Dartmouth’s modification request during oral arguments, saying it has been extensively involved in the case. He also reiterated Holmes’ agreement that nothing in the statement of understanding requires the money be given to Keeler’s foundation.
“Now we have $3.8 million in charitable revenue or charitable assets that cannot be used,” Haley told the justices. “If we go back to the beginning … and they have a whole new hearing, and throw out everything we’ve done so far, that’s going to tie these resources up even further. And that’s certainly not what the intent of the donor was. He wanted these funds to be used for his intended charitable purposes.”
English common law first required attorney general oversight of charitable gifts in 1601, Quinlan said. New Hampshire was the first state to codify that responsibility in law. The Legislature created the Charitable Trusts Unit in 1943.
She said it’s not uncommon for institutions to seek permission to modify restrictions on a gift. She pointed to one involving two scholarship trusts established by Keene residents, one in 1929, the other in 1970.
The first required scholarships be given to male students. The second limited scholarships to male Protestant students. In 1987, the school board sought court permission to broaden the scholarships to all students, citing a fear that its administration of scholarships limited by gender and religion violated the constitutional right to equal protection. A superior court judge agreed.
The Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts Unit appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that the school board could resolve its concerns by appointing private persons to administer the scholarships. In a 1990 decision, a majority of the justices rejected the state’s argument. Then-Chief Justice David Brock disagreed, writing in his dissent, “for centuries, Americans have rightly believed that they enjoy a legally protected right to choose the objects of their bounty and to bequeath their property by will, as they see fit. Neither our state nor our federal constitution requires this court to write a ‘better’ will for a decedent in terms which reflect the breadth of concern and conception characteristic of a public welfare program.”
In other cases, the Charitable Trusts Unit has opposed a modification request or asked an organization to modify it. About two years ago, Catholic Charities told the unit it wanted to change restrictions on eligibility for the Liberty House, its transitional housing for veterans in Manchester.
The donor who had gifted the property many years ago required that it be available to only Vietnam veterans. As that population dwindled, Catholic Charities wanted court permission to lift the restriction and allow it to welcome all veterans.
Quinlan said her office told the court it would agree, but only if Vietnam veterans were given first preference. The court agreed with the unit’s recommendation, she said.
“The problem, of course, is that when someone gives the gift, and when the charity accepts the gift, they can’t always predict what might happen in the future that might frustrate the purpose of that gift,” she said
In 1928, a woman left $1,000 to provide poor residents in Manchester ice, which was then needed to refrigerate food. The trustees asked a court in 1984 to use the money instead to help needy residents with electric bills. The court agreed.
“It seemed like a good idea at the time,” Quinlan said, “but by 1984 (when the city requested to repurpose the gift), the purpose really became impractical because who, ‘Who had an icebox? Nobody.’”
‘Honorably return the money’
After Keeler graduated from Dartmouth in 1936, he earned a law degree from Yale and joined an Ohio law firm founded by the oldest son of former President William Howard Taft. He partnered with a cousin to develop 7,000 acres into a pulp and paper company that became the main supplier for Time Inc., according to his obituary.
He also continued golfing, up to two years before he died at his home in Vermont.
While an institution must notify the Charitable Trusts Unit that it is requesting court permission to modify a gift, it does not have to tell the donor. In the Dartmouth case, Peter Mithoefer, executor of Keeler’s estate and president and trustee of the foundation, learned the school was closing the golf course from a friend, who’d read about it in a golf magazine.
Mithoefer contacted Dartmouth and asked that the remainder of Keeler’s gift be given to the foundation, as Keeler requested. He said the school’s lawyer declined. In October, Mithoefer put his request to the school in writing.
He called Dartmouth’s decision to modify the terms of Keeler’s gift a betrayal and violation of the agreement. He said he had no doubt Keeler would have opposed any other use of his gift, including “golf-related” expenses. Mithoefer shared that he’d encouraged Keeler to instead leave the school money for scholarships and academics.
“His response was very clear,” Mithoefer wrote. “He was leaving money to maintain the golf course because he felt it would be a great asset for the alumni.” It would keep alumni connected to the school, often a first step in soliciting alumni gifts.
Mithoefer characterized the school’s financial argument for closing the course as misleading. He cited the school’s interest in using the land for student housing. He accused the Charitable Trusts Unit of failing to investigate the school’s real reasons for closing the school.
“I do not begrudge Dartmouth doing what it believes to be in the best interest of the college – expand its physical plant,” Mithoefer wrote, “but it should accept the ramifications of such a decision and honorably return the money given specifically to maintain the 18-hole golf course to the only other beneficiary named in (Keeler’s) will, his foundation.”
Annmarie Timmins is a Senior Reporter for the New Hampshire Bulletin, an independent, nonprofit news organization. This story first appeared in the New Hampshire Bulletin.
Men’s and women’s golf is back at this Ivy League school.
Less than seven months after it announced that a series of sports teams — including the men’s and women’s golf teams — would be eliminated, the school announced on Friday that all five sports will be reinstated and the Ivy League school will begin “a comprehensive, external review of the athletic department’s policies, practices, and governance model.”
The decision came after talk of a possible class action sex discrimination lawsuit against the university surfaced. In July, the college cited the pandemic and resulting financial challenges in making its decision. The school, located in Hanover, N.H., also announced the closing of the university-run Hanover Country Club at the time, although Friday’s news is not expected to overturn that decision.
But with a potential Title IX infraction looming and a potential lawsuit stirring, the college decided to bring the golf programs back, along with women’s swimming and diving and men’s lightweight rowing.
“To determine which teams would be eliminated, director of athletics Harry Sheehy and his team established a series of factors and considerations to be used in their assessment,” Dartmouth President Phil Hanlon wrote in a letter released on Friday. “We have recently learned that elements of the data that athletics used to confirm continued Title IX compliance may not have been complete. In light of this discovery, Dartmouth will immediately reinstate all five teams.”
“We are delighted that Dartmouth has agreed to reinstate the women’s golf and swimming and diving teams, conduct a gender equity review, and ensure that all aspects of its intercollegiate athletic program comply with Title IX,” said Arthur H. Bryant of Bailey & Glasser, LLP, the lead attorney for a group of female student-athletes preparing to file a lawsuit. “Our clients, who stood up for their rights, are incredibly proud. They sincerely hope that Dartmouth will use this opportunity to become a model for gender equity in athletics nationwide.”
The agreement states that Dartmouth will begin the search for coaches for the women’s teams by Feb. 1 and that the teams, once formed and trained, will begin to compete as soon as practicable, in accordance with Dartmouth’s COVID-19 guidelines and Ivy League decisions on competition. The teams must remain in place at least through the 2024-2025 academic year, the agreement says.
The Dartmouth men’s and women’s golf teams were among the varsity sports eliminated at the college located in Hanover, New Hampshire.
The Dartmouth men’s and women’s golf teams were among the varsity sports eliminated on Thursday at the college located in Hanover, New Hampshire. In addition to cutting sports teams, Dartmouth announced it is permanently closing the Hanover Country Club, the college-owned golf course that reportedly operated in the red for many years.
The college cited the pandemic and resulting financial challenges in its decision. A school release noted that all departments, divisions and schools at Dartmouth are facing financial cutbacks to reduce the projected deficit by the end of the new fiscal year, in June 2021. In addition to the elimination of the teams and the closing of the country club, an administrative restructuring is also underway in athletics. Those changes are projected to save more than $2 million.
“I can assure you that these decisions were made with great care and with the long-term interests of the learning experience provided by Dartmouth Athletics front and center,” President Philip J. Hanlon told faculty, students, staff, and all undergraduate families in an email.
The teams will be suspended immediately, and the cuts also amount to 15 lost staff jobs – including eight coaching positions. About 11 student-athletes will be affected by the cuts.
The country club has been closed since this past fall but the school does not plan to sell the property. The release noted that it will explore how to keep it open for community recreational use.
In addition to men’s and women’s golf, men’s and women’s swimming and diving and men’s lightweight rowing also are being eliminated. That leaves Dartmouth with 30 varsity teams.
Dartmouth competed in the Ivy League, which already announced this week it was canceling the fall sports season.
The Big Green women’s golf team finished a season-best fourth-place at the FAU Winter Warm-Up, what turned out to be its last start of the 2019-20 season. The team, coached by Alex Kirk, closed the season ranked No. 150 by Golfweek.
Dartmouth’s men, coached by Bill Johnson, had their best finish of the season (fourth) at their own Dartmouth Invitational at Hanover Country Club. The men ended the season ranked No. 236 by Golfweek.
The Ivy League announced it is canceling all fall sports for 2020.
There will be no football or other sports in the Ivy League this fall because of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was announced Wednesday.
Consistent with campus health & safety policies across the League, The Ivy League Presidents outline phased-in approach to intercollegiate athletics activity, including no competition prior to the end of the fall semester due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The eight schools that comprise the conference could be looking at a spring schedule — possibly playing against each other. However, no decision has been made regarding that possibility.
“The feeling is that once we made the decision to postpone fall sports, we will have some time to assess the situation (pandemic) before making a decision about playing next spring,” one Ivy League source told SI.com.
The release:
With the safety and well-being of students as their highest priority, Ivy League institutions are implementing campus-wide policies including restrictions on student and staff travel, requirements for social distancing, limits on group gatherings, and regulations for visitors to campus. As athletics is expected to operate consistent with campus policies, it will not be possible for Ivy League teams to participate in intercollegiate athletics competition prior to the end of the fall semester.
Practice and other athletic training opportunities for enrolled student-athletes will be permitted provided they are structured in accordance with each institution’s procedures and applicable state regulations. The Ivy League will also issue guidelines on a phased approach to conditioning and practice activities to allow for interaction among student-athletes and coaches that will begin with limited individual and small group workouts and build to small group practice sessions, if public health conditions permit.
Fall sport student-athletes will not use a season of Ivy League or NCAA eligibility in the fall, whether or not they enroll. Students who wish to pursue competition during a fifth-year will need to work with their institutions in accordance with campus policy to determine their options beyond their current anticipated graduation date.
The question in the bigger picture is will this decision have an impact on college football as a whole.
The Ivy League is officially the first conference to postpone fall sports — just like it was the first conference to cancel its conference tournament back in March. Last time, everybody else followed the Ivy’s lead. So it’ll be interesting to see if the same thing happens again.
