- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Livvy Dunne submits formal objection to House settlement
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:50 pm to GeauxtigersMs36
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:50 pm to GeauxtigersMs36
quote:
free labor
Well, other than room, board, health care and many thousands of dollars worth of education.
0
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:54 pm to ValleyTNTIGER
quote:
When did it become wrong to seek what one has lost or what one is worth ?
What's wrong with being thankful that they finally let you get paid at all?
Are we going to go back and pay every Division 1 athlete in the history of the NCAA because they couldn't get paid before 2022 (or whenever it became legal)? Cool, then that means the NCAA owes me money.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:59 pm to Froman
quote:
She’s a child
She’s definitely not a child. She’s an adult.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:59 pm to beauchristopher
quote:
think the issue is that other states have already passed this, so Louisiana is trying to compete with those states.
If they all jumped off a bridge should we?
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:03 pm to Choupique19
quote:
Cool, then that means the NCAA owes me money.
I was just happy when we got free gear, but yea I want my money too. And can we factor in if all the social media platforms existed and what I could have made?
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:04 pm to Choupique19
quote:
Cool, then that means the NCAA owes me money.
Me too, and I’ll take the interest also.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:09 pm to Hurricane2020
quote:
The NCAA stepped in and suspended him indefinitely from NCAA sanctioned activities for accepting YouTube ad revenue
The NCAA should have the right to do that. College athletics is a privilege, not a right
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:10 pm to Choupique19
quote:
Are we going to go back and pay every Division 1 athlete in the history of the NCAA because they couldn't get paid before 2022 (or whenever it became legal)?
Nope. Just back as far as 2016.
quote:
How did House v. NCAA evolve?
The NCAA took a hit in the case in November 2023 when Judge Wilken granted class certification in House, making the case more of a zero-sum game for the NCAA. Seven months later, the NCAA settled. It agreed to pay $2.75 billion in back-pay damages to Division I athletes from 2016 to 2024. That's one of the biggest sports settlements in history.
LINK
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:18 pm to Bayou_Tiger_225
Agree with most but what exactly has she done for LSU? Not disagreeing but I don’t think any recruit came here for her, and she isn’t making money for the university or athletic department, just herself. And before you say gymnastics ticket sales, they routinely sold out before she was here.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:28 pm to GEAUX4
quote:
Agree with most but what exactly has she done for LSU? Not disagreeing but I don’t think any recruit came here for her, and she isn’t making money for the university or athletic department, just herself. And before you say gymnastics ticket sales, they routinely sold out before she was here.
You don’t know. The more exposure for the university the better. It’s hard to put a price tag on that. I do know that she’s never done any harm to the brand.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:29 pm to LSU Neil
quote:
Can’t wait for all these kids to pay taxes and see what the real world is about.
Do they not pay taxes now? What are you talking about? Some of you change. Look, I get it. College sports isn't what it used to be, but as they say... Adapt or die. Don't get mad because they have opportunities you never had or will not have. That's life.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:44 pm to BigBrod81
quote:
But the proposed allocation of the amount due from schools is receiving some justified criticism. Under the proposal, Power conference schools will be responsible for $ 675 million or about 40% and all other NCAA I schools will be responsible for $ 990 million or around 60%. The issue is that Power conference schools account for over 80% of athletic revenues while all other D1 schools account for less than 20%.
What isn’t being said is that about 290ish schools out of 360ish are not P4. They couldn’t afford to and didn’t have to pay NIL to field competitive teams for the levels they were at. They get money for being patsies to the Power 4 and didn’t have to be competitive, just show up and get shipped back home with losses and a check
Posted on 4/7/25 at 9:53 pm to GEAUX4
quote:This. She has a massive social media following where she reps LSU in a positive manner.
The more exposure for the university the better. It’s hard to put a price tag on that. I do know that she’s never done any harm to the brand.
As colleges throughout the south have become more and more popular to attend for out of state students, her exposing LSU to these kids helps the school stand out. Now those kids don’t go there because of Livvy, but a high school kids who follows Livvy have had LSU on their page daily for the past four years, where she highlights how fun LSU is. You may not think so, but it makes a difference
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:07 pm to Swamp Frog x
Glad she is done at LSU….
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:22 pm to Froman
quote:
She’s a child. I support her as an LSU athlete. Doesn’t seem like she’s in the wrong here, either.
She’s a grown woman getting fricked on the regular.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:29 pm to lsutiger2
I'm not a legal expert, but this seems rather straightforward, to me. She (and other athletes) want to be paid retroactively for the years they were in college before NIL. Which I think is absurd. NIL is already a bad system, and they are fortunate to have it at all. Why should they be owed "damages" for money that they were not previously legally entitled to?
They came to college, knowing full well that a free scholarship was their reward for playing sports. No one told them they would make any extra money. Now, they're making extra money. Where is the "damage"? Were people walking around with Livvy Dunne jerseys? Oh, that's right, there's no such thing as a gymnastics jersey. So who stole her name, image and likeness? And if it's not the use of the actual name, image and likeness of athletes that we're talking about, then they don't know what NIL means. And that is the problem with this whole thing. It's called NIL, but these kids are just getting paid to play, and it has nothing to do with NIL, in most cases.
So, whatever Dunne thinks she's worth, her argument likely has nothing to do with what she thinks falls under NIL and "lost" earnings.
They came to college, knowing full well that a free scholarship was their reward for playing sports. No one told them they would make any extra money. Now, they're making extra money. Where is the "damage"? Were people walking around with Livvy Dunne jerseys? Oh, that's right, there's no such thing as a gymnastics jersey. So who stole her name, image and likeness? And if it's not the use of the actual name, image and likeness of athletes that we're talking about, then they don't know what NIL means. And that is the problem with this whole thing. It's called NIL, but these kids are just getting paid to play, and it has nothing to do with NIL, in most cases.
So, whatever Dunne thinks she's worth, her argument likely has nothing to do with what she thinks falls under NIL and "lost" earnings.
This post was edited on 4/7/25 at 11:31 pm
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:41 pm to Bayou_Tiger_225
quote:
This. She has a massive social media following where she reps LSU in a positive manner.
As colleges throughout the south have become more and more popular to attend for out of state students, her exposing LSU to these kids helps the school stand out. Now those kids don’t go there because of Livvy, but a high school kids who follows Livvy have had LSU on their page daily for the past four years, where she highlights how fun LSU is. You may not think so, but it makes a difference
All of that is fair if we're talking about paying a contract based on the value an individual brings. But NIL means what it stands for. Unless she can prove that somehow her name, image and likeness was used before NIL went into effect, then her value has nothing to do with NIL, and she has no case to argue for damages. This is just asking for more money for the sake of more money. No wrong has been committed against her.
If someone changes the rules to reflect total value of an athlete, and stops calling it NIL, which is turning out to be a farce, then we can have a discussion. In the meantime, these kids don't seem to know what they're arguing for.
This post was edited on 4/7/25 at 11:43 pm
Posted on 4/7/25 at 11:52 pm to Metaloctopus
quote:
So who stole her name, image and likeness? And if it's not the use of the actual name, image and likeness of athletes that we're talking about, then they don't know what NIL means. And that is the problem with this whole thing. It's called NIL, but these kids are just getting paid to play, and it has nothing to do with NIL, in most cases.
People need to understand that this settlement has very little to do with NIL & everything to do with revenue sharing. Basically Dunne's objection here is null & void because the settlement deals very little with NIL itself.
quote:
The total impact above does not include each school’s share of the House v NCAA $ 2.8 billion settlement to current & former athletes. This settlement will be paid by a combination of direct NCAA payments ($ 1.1 billion) and withheld NCAA revenue sharing distributions ($ 1.665 billion) to schools over the next ten years
quote:
Football and Men’s basketball account for close to 95% of team specific revenues at most Power Conference schools, and athletes on these two teams will be the major beneficiaries under the proposed revenue sharing model. While football receives the most revenue sharing per team, Men’s basketball ends up with a higher average per player due to much smaller roster sizes (15 versus 105).
These are estimates of the amount of revenue sharing a school could distribute to its athletes for the 2025-26 fiscal year assuming each school limits revenue sharing to 22% of its annual athletic department revenues – this is the percentage used to arrive at the initial annual cap. However, a school can elect to share any percentage of its athletic revenues as long as the total payout does not exceed $ 20.5 million annually.
quote:
Computed Athletic Department revenue includes event tickets and admission fees, game guarantees, TV, media, licensing, advertising, sponsorships and royalty rights, bowl game, NCAA and conference distributions and all related revenues. Revenue does not include direct or indirect school support, student fees or unrecompensed (i.e. charitable) contributions to the athletic department from alumni and boosters
LINK
Posted on 4/8/25 at 12:58 am to BigBrod81
quote:
People need to understand that this settlement has very little to do with NIL & everything to do with revenue sharing. Basically Dunne's objection here is null & void because the settlement deals very little with NIL itself.
The article you posted said this: "Dunne was specifically objecting to the distribution of damage claims. The settlement would offer $2.8 billion in damages to players who couldn’t earn NIL money before the NCAA changed its rules in 2021. But Dunne says female athletes—including her—are getting shortchanged in the portions of damages."
And that is what I'm responding to. She wants retroactive payment for something that didn't exist, for one (even though it states right there that they will get said payment, apparently it's not enough), and she wants that payment despite the fact that it's doubtful she can point to anything that had to do with the use of her name, image or likeness. I just don't know what her argument is, here.
And as for anything to do with revenue sharing, that is a different topic, which does not apply to the statement I responded to. I don't even want to imagine the mess that's going to come from people demanding retroactive revenue sharing.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 1:03 am
Posted on 4/8/25 at 1:17 am to Metaloctopus
quote:
The article you posted said this:
Also from that article:
quote:
Dunne was specifically objecting to the distribution of damage claims. The settlement would offer $2.8 billion in damages to players who couldn’t earn NIL money before the NCAA changed its rules in 2021. But Dunne says female athletes—including her—are getting shortchanged in the portions of damages.
quote:
She wants retroactive payment for something that didn't exist, for one (even though it states right there that they will get said payment, apparently it's not enough), and she wants that payment despite the fact that it's doubtful she can point to anything that had to do with the use of her name, image or likeness. I just don't know what her argument is, here.
She honestly doesn't have one in this instance being that this settlement is not about lost NIL earnings. It's about retro revenue share payments from 2016 to 2024 & the set up of the upcoming revenue sharing platform.
quote:
And as for anything to do with revenue sharing, that is a different topic, which does not apply to the statement I responded to. I don't even want to imagine the mess that's going to come from people demanding retroactive revenue sharing.
That's actually what the topic is. Dunne & the writers of the article brings up NIL yet the hearing was about the upcoming revenue sharing decision. Retroactive payments will occur & there will $2.8 billion dollars put aside to make those payments.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 1:24 am
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News