Olivia Dunne, the LSU gymnastics sensation and social media powerhouse, is no stranger to the spotlight. With millions of followers across TikTok and Instagram, she’s arguably the most famous collegiate gymnast today. But recently, Dunne made waves for an entirely different reason—her pointed critique of NCAA gymnastics scoring, which she believes is hurting both the

sport and its ability to draw crowds.

Her frustration boiled over after a recent meet, where she noticed “empty seats” in the arena. Dunne took to social media, hinting that inconsistent and outdated judging could be a factor driving fans away. But is she right? And is NCAA gymnastics failing its biggest star—and, by extension, its growing audience?

The Scoring Controversy: Does NCAA Gymnastics Have a Fairness Problem?

Gymnastics scoring has always been a point of contention, but in the era of viral clips and social media-driven sports fandom, every judge’s decision is under a microscope. Many fans have argued that NCAA scoring can be inconsistent, favoring traditional powerhouses or judges’ subjective preferences rather than objective execution.

Dunne’s complaint is not just about her personal scores but about a broader issue: If the judging feels unfair or disconnected from what fans see, casual viewers may lose interest. In a time when sports leagues are constantly evolving to enhance viewership—like the NBA with its in-season tournament or the MLB with pitch clocks—why is NCAA gymnastics clinging to a scoring system that confuses and alienates audiences?

The Olivia Dunne Effect: More Than Just a Gymnast

Dunne is not just another NCAA athlete—she’s a brand. Thanks to NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) deals, she’s turned her gymnastics career into a multi-million-dollar empire, bringing unprecedented mainstream attention to the sport. Her meets often sell out due to her presence alone, and she has introduced college gymnastics to an entirely new demographic of fans.

So, when someone with her influence calls out an issue, it matters. If she’s losing faith in the system, how many other gymnasts feel the same but don’t have the platform to speak up? More importantly, how many fans—especially younger audiences attracted to the sport through social media—might tune out because they don’t understand or trust the judging process?

Is NCAA Gymnastics Holding Itself Back?

The NCAA has a choice: Evolve with the times or risk stagnation. Gymnastics has seen unprecedented growth in recent years, fueled by athletes like Dunne, Trinity Thomas, and Suni Lee. But outdated scoring, inconsistent judging, and a lack of transparency could hinder this progress.

If fans are paying to see their favorite gymnasts compete but feel like the results don’t reflect the performances, how long before they stop showing up altogether? Dunne’s frustrations with “empty seats” could be a warning sign that something needs to change before NCAA gymnastics squanders its biggest opportunity for mainstream success.

Final Thoughts: Will the NCAA Listen?

Olivia Dunne’s critique of NCAA scoring isn’t just about a bad score or a frustrating meet—it’s about the future of college gymnastics. With athletes like her bringing in unprecedented attention and revenue, ignoring their concerns could be a costly mistake.

The question is: Will the NCAA listen? Or will it continue to operate under an outdated system, risking the very momentum that gymnasts like Dunne have worked so hard to build?

What do you think? Is NCAA gymnastics scoring unfair? Should the system change to better reflect the modern era of the sport? Let us know in the comments.