We have a good-sized list of famous athletes from New Jersey. Carli Lloyd and Mike Trout, just to name a few.

Another one just got added to that list today when Chris Gotteruo won the Genesis Scottish Open Sunday afternoon. He was tied for the lead with Rory McIlroy heading into the final round and held him off, ultimately winning by two strokes.

It was Gotterup’s second career victory on the PGA TOUR, and his first this year.

SEE MORE: Delicious bar and grill in central NJ

Gotterup was born in Maryland but played college golf at Rutgers University (2017-2021), where he had a standout career. He won the New Jersey State Open in 2019. He transferred to the University of Oklahoma in 2022 to finish his collegiate career. While there, he won the Haskins Award and the Jack Nicklaus Award as the top college golfer.

His win on Sunday earned him an entry into the final major of the golf season this week at the Open Championship. It will be his first ever start in the event. Gotterup has played in two majors thus far in his career, the PGA Championship (2024), where he missed the cut, and the U.S. Open (2025), where he finished tied for 23rd.

He made the entire state proud with his victory today in large part because of how he fended off the number two-ranked player in the world, Rory McIlroy, arguably the greatest player of this generation.

I’m a big Rory fan, but was pulling hard for Gotterup today because of my New Jersey pride. Golf is a hard sport to win at, but early into Gotterup’s career, the talent is clearly showing. Best of luck to him this week at the Open Championship.

The post above reflects the thoughts and observations of New Jersey 101.5’s Kyle Clark. Any opinions expressed are his own.

Click here to contact an editor about feedback or a correction for this story.

Penn State’s 2025 season ended in disappointment, as the Nittany Lions fell to seventh place in the NCAA championships.

It was the fourth consecutive year the Nittany Lions finished outside the top five, in addition to the disappointment, the blue and white had these poor results at home with national competitions being held in Happy Valley for the first time since 2021.

The below-average finish was a shock considering the successful reputation that Penn State has established for winning hardware, a trend that began in 1990 when the NCAA voted to combine both men’s and women’s scores in vying for a singular team championship.

This rule change benefited the Nittany Lions, as they’ve won 13 times over the past 35 years — more than any other school in the country. Before the change, Penn State had won only one fencing national championship, claimed by the women’s team in 1983.

Uniquely in fencing, Division I programs also compete with Division II and Division III universities in the final national competition, making Penn State the most successful program across the entire nation in this stretch.

Yet, only a few months into the offseason, Penn State’s fencing team has experienced a whirlwind of news that has changed the landscape of its program for the foreseeable future.

On June 26, the NCAA Division I Council passed a successful measure to eliminate the team championship, essentially splitting the championships by gender for the first time since 1989. Although it has not been officially approved yet, both Division II and Division III councils are expected to pass the vote in late July.

The change has massive implications. There are currently only nine universities that send a women’s team, and under the previous format, they were mathematically unable to compete against universities with both a men’s and women’s team for NCAA championships.

Now, an estimated 150 student-athletes at these nine programs can compete for national championships, and the NCAA estimates more schools will join the playing field in launching women or men-only fencing teams as their sole fencing unit.

The rule change is a massive development not only in women’s athletics but in college sports as a whole, and it gives Penn State athletics a lot to think about in navigating this for next season. It’s a decision made even more difficult by recent allegations reported by The Daily Collegian regarding current head coach Matteo Zennaro.

Zennaro’s leadership faces criticism from former and current members of Penn State’s team who allege neglect, misconduct and unsafe conditions.

Zennaro has been at the helm in State College for two seasons now, posting a 32-22 record in men’s competitions and 28-27 in women’s. This is his first head coaching job in college athletics after a very successful stint as an associate coach at Harvard.

The Penn State administration now faces the challenge of both managing this new format and addressing these allegations. The athletic department has recently demonstrated a willingness to pursue an overhaul of its programs, with increased investment, intensified recruiting efforts and the development of new facilities to support various teams.

It’s possible to envision a revamp of the fencing unit and a shift in Zennaro’s role, given the differing results in women’s and men’s fields. Regardless, the head coaching job has been one typically held for both squads, a trend that’s evolved since 1986.

Whatever changes fans see Penn State make before next season — if any — it’s clear that in recent years, the form on the piste has taken a hit for one of the most prestigious teams in the competition as the Nittany Lions haven’t taken home national honors since 2013-14.

If Zennaro remains at the helm, it will be a make-or-break season for him in righting the ship, which will involve navigating a lot of outside noise.

MORE SPORTS COVERAGE

On May 15, the NCAA’s committee on women’s athletics recommended granting full championship status to two cheer-adjacent disciplines: acrobatics & tumbling and stunt. 

Set to take effect across all three divisions by spring 2027, the decision capped years of parallel—and often adversarial—campaigns for acceptance by college sports’ governing body. The announcement of their joint endorsement came just weeks before the final court approval of the House v. NCAA settlement and was made through simultaneous press releases, each highlighting the milestone in slightly different terms. Acrobatics & tumbling was described as having “made significant progress,” while stunt was credited with taking “a major leap forward.”

As part of the House settlement’s new participation parameters, stunt programs may now field up to 65 athletes, compared to 55 for A&T—an important allowance for institutions looking to meet gender equity targets through large, cost-effective rosters. The NCAA has welcomed both as important pathways to expand opportunities for women in sport.

Yet for those who spent the past two decades pushing their disciplines toward legitimacy, the idea of arriving at the finish line together feels more than a little surreal.

For much of their history, acrobatics & tumbling—a gymnastics-inspired outgrowth of early competitive cheer—and stunt—Varsity Brands’ effort to retool its all-star cheer model into an NCAA-friendly format—saw each other as direct competitors in a heads-up, zero-sum race for college admission.

“The sentiment we received so often from administrators and experienced people within college athletics is that only one will make it,” Janell Cook, executive director of the National Collegiate Acrobatics & Tumbling Association (NCATA), said.

“Both sports were building, and when you’re building something, you want to take care of that thing,” added Kentucky head stunt coach Blair Bergmann.

Their rivalry also served as a kind-of proxy battle over Varsity Brands’ longstanding (and legally scrutinized) grip on the entire cheerleading industry. The multibillion-dollar company—acquired last summer by private equity giant KKR—had regarded the NCAA’s involvement in the cheer space as a potential threat to its tightly controlled empire of camps, competitions and branding deals.

For those who saw Varsity’s dominance as a troubling concentration of power—if not an outright antitrust issue—the collegiate space offered a rare opportunity: a chance to build something outside the reach of a deeply entrenched corporate force.

“The first 10 years felt like you were straddling the line between proactive and reactive,” said Quinnipiac head A&T coach Mary Ann Powers, a trailblazer of her sport who has expressed concern about Varsity’s sway over the cheer world. “On one hand, I work at a university that was truly supporting it, not just with smoke and mirrors. But the reactive part is seeing the same sport—or what looks like the same sport—making progress and knowing that [Varsity] had all the antitrust [issues].”

Meanwhile, the uneasy launch of what was then called college competitive cheer—first introduced at the University of Maryland in 2003—rekindled concerns among Title IX advocates committed to ensuring that new women’s sports offered legitimate, equitable opportunities.

That tension would soon erupt into one of the most consequential gender equity battles in modern NCAA history.

In 2009, Powers’ Quinnipiac program joined forces with those at five other universities—Maryland, Oregon, Baylor, Azusa Pacific and Fairmont State—to formalize a new varsity sport blending elements of gymnastics and cheerleading. Their collective effort led to the creation of the NCATA in early 2010. Initially named the Collegiate Stunts and Tumbling Association, the group elected Oregon’s senior woman administrator Renee Baumgartner—a former collegiate golf coach—as its first president.

“Acro and tumbling was built on a strong foundation by administrators and coaches in the NCAA that wanted to provide opportunities to young girls,” Baumgartner said. “And we did it. We created the first NCAA female sport.”

At Quinnipiac, however, the rollout of this new sport quickly became embroiled in legal controversy. In an effort to save money, the university attempted to simultaneously cut women’s volleyball. That decision prompted a Title IX lawsuit filed by five volleyball players and the team’s head coach, alleging the school was disguising a club activity as a legitimate varsity sport to artificially inflate its female participation numbers.

The trial, which unfolded in spring 2009, featured testimony from both Powers and Varsity founder and CEO Jeff Webb—each making the case for or against competitive cheer’s (or Acrobatics & Tumbling’s) legitimacy as an NCAA-caliber sport.

“It continues to call itself cheer—which they don’t cheer and they don’t lead—which creates confusion with the classical cheerleader team,” Webb argued. “And they perform the same type of routine that classical cheerleaders have provided as part of their entertainment component for 25 years, which further confuses things.”

Despite Varsity’s previous admissions to the SEC, Webb insisted he had no issue with the formation of a new varsity sport so long as it didn’t undermine or compete with what he called “classical cheerleading.”

Powers countered on the witness stand, challenging whose rhetoric was the real threat.

“I think what offends [cheerleaders] more than anything is other women degrading them and knocking what they do,” she testified.

But Webb was not alone calling into question this new, cheer-like activity. The plaintiffs also drew on the expert testimony of Donna Lopiano, a prominent Title IX authority, college athletic administrator and former CEO of the Women’s Sports Foundation. Years earlier, Lopiano had played a key role in shaping the Department of Education’s 1979 guidelines on Title IX compliance in athletics and had since remained a vigilant observer of how educational institutions applied the law in practice.

In her expert report, Lopiano wrote, “QU should not be eliminating viable, existing women’s varsity sports and replacing them with an activity that has not been approved as a sport.” She pointed out the hastily assembled nature of the Quinnipiac cheer team, which lacked formal recruiting and coaching protocols, as evidence that the move was more strategic than substantive.

The court ruled in favor of the volleyball players, halting the planned elimination of the sport. In the verdict’s wake, the National Collegiate Acrobatics and Tumbling Association (NCATA) solidified an alliance with USA Gymnastics to officially sanction its competitions. Just days later, USA Cheer—a nonprofit supported by Varsity—put forward “STUNT,” in demonstrative all-caps, kicking off a decade-long battle for formal NCAA acceptance.

In 2011, the NCAA committee on women’s athletics (CWA) urged both organizations to collaborate on a unified sport proposal. However, each declined, opting instead to forge rival paths.

Acrobatics & tumbling was the first to advance. In 2018, the NCATA submitted its initial proposal for emerging sport status. The CWA endorsed it in 2019, followed by formal approval from the Division I Council in June 2020. That decision was conceivably influenced by the presence of Baumgartner, then NCATA president and athletic director at Santa Clara University, who held a seat on the D-I council at the time. 

“I think it was pretty clear to everybody in the room that I advocated for acrobatics & tumbling,” Baumgartner admitted. “But you follow the rules and know exactly what benchmarks need to be met.”

By contrast, USA Cheer’s 2018 proposal to establish stunt as an emerging sport failed to secure initial approval from either the CWA or the NCAA’s strategic vision and planning committee. Reviewers determined the application lacked a clear explanation of how stunt was “philosophically and operationally separate” from traditional cheerleading, and how it would deliver a student-athlete experience comparable to other NCAA sports.

Undeterred, USA Cheer resubmitted its proposal for stunt in 2019 and received CWA approval in 2020. However, the process was paused for two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The effort regained momentum in 2022 when the CWA re-endorsed the sport.

Ahead of the 2023–24 academic year, stunt finally secured emerging status across all three NCAA divisions—drawing level with acrobatics & tumbling in the race toward full championship designation.

If, as expected, both disciplines receive that at the upcoming 2026 NCAA Convention, they will become the sixth and seventh women’s sports to do so under the emerging sports program, joining join rowing (1996), ice hockey (2000), water polo (2000), bowling (2003), beach volleyball (2015) and wrestling (2025).

Though their competition for NCAA recognition may be over, stunt and acrobatics & tumbling are now trying to secure institutional sponsorship from many of the same schools.

“I think most will pick one [sport] or the other for the fact that they aren’t in the position to add multiple programs,” said the NCATA’s Cook.

In making its case, stunt hails its direct lineage to the popular world of all-star cheerleading.

“Our whole entire sport was built from cheerleading skills,” noted USA Cheer CEO Lauri Harris, who estimates that approximately 95% of collegiate stunt athletes come from traditional cheerleading backgrounds.

Acrobatics & tumbling asserts its athletic diversity, drawing on a wide range of strengths from its participants.

According to NCATA survey data from the 2023–24 season, the largest share of collegiate acrobatics & tumbling athletes (approximately 43%) came from artistic gymnastics. Another 27% previously participated in competitive cheer, while 11% had backgrounds in spirit or sideline cheer.

In terms of format, the two emerging sports feature some key distinctions. Stunt is structured around head-to-head matchups, with two teams simultaneously performing the same compulsory routines across four quarters: partner stunts, pyramids and tosses, jumps and tumbling, and a final team routine. A&T, by contrast, resembles a gymnastics meet, with two or three teams competing in six categories—compulsory, acro, pyramid, toss, tumbling and team—separated by a halftime break.

Despite their differences, stunt and A&T are perhaps as closely related as any two college team sports.

“If someone walked into a gym, I don’t think the average person could tell whether they were watching acrobatics & tumbling or stunt,” Powers said.

For the upcoming 2025–26 season, there will be 66 varsity stunt programs at the collegiate level, including seven in Division I, compared to 49 acrobatics & tumbling teams—11 of which compete in D-I. Following the House settlement, one D-I institution, the University of West Georgia, chose to postpone launching its stunt program from 2026 to 2027.

According to USA Cheer, two other Division I schools that had been exploring stunt put those plans on hold after House, while two additional institutions have since begun seriously considering the sport in light of the ruling. (USA Cheer declined to name these four schools.)

In terms of athlete participation, the University of Kentucky boasts the largest stunt roster in the country, with 61 athletes on its team last season. That number far exceeds any other program nationwide. Kentucky—whose traditional cheerleading squad is a perennial powerhouse at Varsity’s UCA College Nationals—finished second to Cal Baptist at the 2025 USA Cheer College Stunt National Championship. Cal Baptist, by comparison, fielded a roster of 28 athletes.

Kentucky launched its stunt program during the 2021–22 academic year, amid a Title IX lawsuit filed in 2019 by two former students who alleged that the university failed to offer proportional athletic opportunities for women.

Why stunt instead acrobatics & tumbling?

“Cheerleading is very big in [the] state of Kentucky,” said Bergmann, the Wildcats’ head coach. “Stunt spoke more to that heritage.”

Prior to the House settlement, the NCAA had capped the number of scholarships for both stunt and acrobatics at 14. Although schools are now allowed to exceed that figure significantly for stunt, Bergmann said he expects Kentucky to remain at 14 scholarships for the upcoming year in order to keep the program cost-effective.

“We are at a point where the sport is so new and it is such at the ground level that basically what we do the next couple years is going to set the sport up for success in the next 20 years,” Bergmann said.

To be sure, schools are not required to choose between the two sports. Missouri State, for example, added both stunt and A&T last season, becoming only the second university to adopt both programs. (Hawaii Pacific, which previously sponsored A&T, also added stunt in the same year.)

Currently transitioning from FCS to FBS, Missouri State has acknowledged ongoing challenges in maintaining Title IX compliance—particularly as the female share of its student body has risen from 55% in 2008 to 61% in fall 2024. In an interview, Missouri State senior associate athletic director Casey Hunt made no bones about the fact that the stunt/A&T twofer was a gender-equity play, noting the relatively low cost and high roster capacity of both sports, especially post-House.

Both MSU teams now share the Hammons Student Center with MSU’s volleyball and swimming & diving programs, following a $2.7 million renovation that added a new weight room and dedicated locker rooms for stunt and A&T.

In their first spring season, Missouri State’s stunt team included 28 athletes, while its A&T team fielded 23. Both used the NCAA-allowed maximum of 14 scholarships. Hunt said the goal for the upcoming year is to grow each roster to between 30 and 35 athletes, with plans for continued expansion.

“We really could grow those to what, 120 [roster spots]?” Hunt said. “That becomes very significant for us, where maybe we don’t have to explore adding another sport program down the road, or we could just add individuals to one of those two programs, if not both.”

Since both sports compete in the spring, Missouri State has not experienced any athlete crossover—and likely won’t. Still, Hunt noted that the coaching staffs actively collaborate on recruiting.

The skill overlap between stunt and sideline cheerleading means that schools can feasibly transition existing cheer squads into varsity stunt teams. Hunt predicted that traditional sideline squads could increasingly lose ground to both sports, a shift she says is already evident on MSU’s campus.

“I think part of that is [A&T and stunt] get scholarships, there is a competitive aspect, you get the travel, you get the gear,” Hunt said.

USA Cheer’s Harris, however, downplays the fear of that kind of cannibalization.

“There’s such a small number of opportunities at the college level for cheer that we really haven’t seen a lot of athletes have to make a choice,” Harris said. “This has just kind of expanded more opportunities for high school cheerleaders to actually do something in college.”

To that end, the battle-wearied advocates of acrobatics & tumbling and stunt say they’re ready to embrace a future of co-existence.

“Since the NCAA has chosen to [have] them both, who am I to say it should be one or the other?” said Powers. “I don’t feel that way anymore.”

There is no shortage of star power in college football this year, and some of the game’s biggest names are projected to rake in millions of Name, Image and Likeness dollars as they compete for a postseason berth.

Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood is the only true freshman ranked inside the top 10 of college football’s top NIL earners after signing a reported $12.5 million deal with the Wolverines. The former five-star holds an On3 NIL valuation of $3 million as he prepares to take the starting role.

Experienced starting quarterbacks like Arizona State’s Sam Leavitt ($3.1 million), Penn State’s Drew Allar ($3.1 million) and Clemson’s Cade Klubnik ($3.4 million) passed up the opportunity to declare for the 2025 NFL Draft, but more development and enticing NIL earnings were too good to ignore.

Among the SEC’s top quarterbacks, Florida’s DJ Lagway ($3.7 million) and South Carolina’s LaNorris Sellers both hold NIL valuations of $3.7 million after breaking out as freshmen last season.

LSU quarterback Garrett Nussmeier, another star passer that declined turning pro, ranks fourth nationally with a $3.8 million NIL valuation after leading the SEC in passing.

The only non-quarterback on the list is Ohio State star wide receiver Jeremiah Smith. The sophomore holds an NIL valuation of $4.2 million after helping lead the Buckeyes to a national championship.

Miami paid handsomely for Georgia transfer quarterback Carson Beck, a two-year starter that posted a 24-3 record leading the Bulldogs. The sixth-year senior ranks second with an NIL valuation of $4.3 million and reportedly accepted $4.5 million to play for the Hurricanes.

Top-10 NIL earners in college football (On3)

No. 10 Michigan QB Bryce Underwood, $3 million
No. 9 Arizona State QB Sam Leavitt, $3.1 million
No. 8 Penn State QB Drew Allar, $3.1 million
No. 7 Clemson QB Cade Klubnik, $3.4 million
No. 6 Florida QB DJ Lagway, $3.7 million
No. 5 South Carolina QB LaNorris Sellers, $3.7 million
No. 4 LSU QB Garrett Nussmeier, $3.8 million
No. 3 Ohio State WR Jeremiah Smith, $4.2 million
No. 2 Miami QB Carson Beck, $4.3 million
No. 1 Texas QB Arch Manning, $6.8 million

Leading all college athletes is non other than Texas quarterback Arch Manning. The former five-star has only started two games through his first two seasons, but his talent and family legacy have propelled him to the top in NIL valuations ($6.8 million) by a wide margin.

The Michigan football team is hoping to land a big commitment soon as four-star linebacker Nick Abrams is set to announce his college decision this week. The Wolverines are one of his top schools, but they have a lot of tough competition. Abrams is one of the best LBs in the 2026 class, so Sherrone Moore and the rest of the Michigan staff are going to have to really show how the program is above the rest.

Nick Abrams is set to announce his decision next week as he commitment date is July 16th. Abrams has offers from a plethora of major programs around the country, but the main teams to watch are Michigan, Alabama, Georgia and Oregon.

In this new era of college football, NIL is a big factor in every player’s recruitment. Even if guys aren’t going pro, they have a chance to make a name for themselves in college. The Michigan football program is known for being a big NIL program, and that is something that Abrams likes to see.

“For me and my family, it is the true NIL; the name, image, likeness,” he said, according to an article from 247Sports. “It’s branding, exposure. Revenue sharing, that will come, but just looking for ways to enhance my brand. That is kind of how we look at it.”

Abrams is a four-star recruit, according to 247Sports. He is the #229 player in the 2026 recruiting class, the #14 LB and the #6 player in the state of Maryland. Abrams currently attends McDonogh School in Owings Mills, MD. Michigan is hoping to keep Abrams in Big Ten country.

The Michigan football team doesn’t have to wait very long to hear a commitment as Nick Abrams will make a decision in just a few days. Sherrone Moore and the Wolverines are hoping to continue the momentum that they have built on the recruiting trail.