Olivia Dunne Speaks Out on $2.8 Billion College Sports Settlement

Key Takeaways:

• Olivia Dunne and other college athletes are criticizing a $2.8 billion settlement over how NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) deals are valued.
• The settlement uses outdated methods to calculate influencer value, ignoring social media impact and future growth.
• Some athletes feel the deal unfair because it undervalues their online influence and overvalues traditional athletic performance.
• The settlement includes $2.5 billion in damages for athletes from 2016 to 2024 and a new system to handle NIL payments.
• A judge has asked for changes to fix valuation issues while keeping the settlement’s main structure.

Olivia Dunne, a popular social media influencer and LSU gymnast, is speaking out against a $2.8 billion college sports settlement. She says the deal doesn’t fairly value athletes’ NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) rights, especially for those who make money through social media. This is a big deal because it’s about how much college athletes can earn from their fame and online presence.

What’s the Big Deal About This Settlement?

The settlement is a result of a long legal fight over how college athletes can profit from their NIL. It’s supposed to help athletes earn money from endorsements, social media, and other deals. But some athletes, like Olivia Dunne, think the deal isn’t fair.

At a recent court hearing, Dunne explained why she’s upset. She said, “This settlement uses old logic to calculate modern value. It takes a narrow snapshot of a still maturing market and freezes it, ignoring the trajectory we were on and the deals we lost and the future we could have had.”

In simpler terms, she’s saying the settlement doesn’t account for how fast the influencer market is growing. It’s like taking a photo of a tree when it’s small and assuming it’ll never grow taller.

What’s Wrong with the Valuation?

The settlement’s main problem is how it calculates an athlete’s value. It focuses too much on traditional athletic performance and not enough on social media influence. For example:

• Benjamin Burr-Kirven, a former University of Washington linebacker, said he got the same NIL compensation as walk-on teammates, even though he had a standout career.
• Some backup players were valued five times higher than star players who had better resumes.

This shows that the system isn’t fair. Athletes who are popular online or have strong personal brands feel undervalued. They’re making money from YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok, but the settlement doesn’t give them enough credit for that.

How Will This Settlement Work?

The settlement plan has some key rules:

1. Implementation Date: The new system is set to start on July 1.
2. School Payments: Colleges can give athletes up to $20.5 million annually.
3. NIL Deals: Any deal over $600 must be checked to ensure it’s fair.
4. Retroactive Damages: Athletes who played between 2016 and 2024 will get over $2.5 billion in damages.

There’s also a new clearinghouse to prevent schools from paying athletes directly for playing sports. This is meant to keep college sports fair and stop “pay-for-play” deals.

What’s Next?

Judge Claudia Wilken, who is overseeing the case, has asked both sides to fix the valuation issues. They need to come back with a better plan within a week. However, the main structure of the settlement will stay the same.

Sedona Prince, a TCU basketball player and plaintiff, called this the “beginning of a new industry.” She’s right—this settlement is just the start of how college sports and NIL deals will work in the future.

Why Should You Care?

If you’re into sports or social media, this is a big deal. It’s about fairness for athletes who are also influencers. Should a college athlete with millions of followers make more money than a star player? Should schools control how much athletes can earn from endorsements?

These are tough questions. The settlement is trying to balance everyone’s interests, but it’s not perfect yet. Athletes like Olivia Dunne are pushing for changes to make sure the system is fair for everyone.

What do you think? Should social media influence matter more in determining how much college athletes earn? Let us know your thoughts!