Kai Trump caught savaging Miami QB Carson Beck after Hanna Cavinder breakup... as real reason behind split revealed
It did not take long for Hanna Cavinder's spilt from Miami quarterback Carson Beck to turn ugly, as Kai Trump and the social-media bombshell twins took recent turns bashing him on camera.
Haley and Hanna Cavinder, who are Hurricanes basketball alumni, ran into Donald Trump 's granddaughter during UFC 314 weekend, which was in Miami, where Hanna's recent breakup with Beck was a hot topic.
The conversation from Kai Trump's vlog was filled with insults about the former Georgia signal caller, with cheating allegations being levied as the catalyst from his split from Hanna.
'Does he have friends?' Kai Trump, a Miami golf commit, asked the Cavinder Twins of Beck.
'No, nobody likes him,' Hanna said of her ex-boyfriend.
'I broke up with him and all this cheating s*** came out, I had no idea. I didn't break up with him because he was cheating, I broke up with him because of who he was,' Hanna continued.
'Can this go in the vlog,' someone off camera asked the Cavinder Twins about their shocking comments.
'Sure, might as well,' Hanna replied.
Beck has not publicly commented on being torched by the trio. His alleged behavior on Snapchat raised eyebrows, with him appearing to send compromising photos of himself to someone that was not Hanna was a reported factor in the split.
'Never cheat on my twin,' Haley said in the video.
'At the same time, he lowkey embarrassed himself. He went to Miami because of you. he embarrassed himself,' Trump added.
'Take it from a girl. Grow up and act your age,' Haley retorted.
Beck is still a good fit for the Hurricanes on the gridiron, and he'll earn a reported $4million from NIL for one year in Miami.
Yet, if there is truth of him going to Miami to be closer to Hanna, he will head into the football season without her.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Tyson Fury waiting for Anthony Joshua to sign deal for comeback fight
Tyson Fury 's manager has refused to rule out a comeback amid talks of a potential showdown against long-time rival Anthony Joshua. Fury shocked the boxing world back in January after announcing his retirement from the sport. His announcement came just a few weeks after losing to Oleksandr Usyk for a second time. Following the defeat to the Ukrainian, many had hoped to see Fury and Joshua go head-to-head this year. Joshua has not fought since sufferin a knockout defeat to Daniel Dubois last September. The 35-year-old is aiming to return to competitive boxing before the end of the year, following elbow surgery. Eddie Hearn - Joshua's promoter - recently confirmed that 'AJ' is in discussions with Saudi boxing supremo Turki Alalshikh over a new multiple fight deal. In an interview with Boxing News, Spencer Brown - Fury's manager - provided an update on his star client's future. 'First of all, I think they've got to sign the deal first. That's the most important part. What they're very good at, the Saudi Arabians, is a course. A road, and they want to know what road it is," he said. "And if they can get the road in the right place, then they'll sign whatever deal you want as long as you're happy and they're happy with it. But they think forward. So, it's a great move for Anthony Joshua, isn't it? A three-fight deal. Amazing. Amazing. Tyson's retired. Like I say, we never know though, do we? "But he's very busy at the moment. He's actually in the best place I've ever seen him. He's 12lbs above his fighting weight as well. He looks really well. He's happy. He's got his kids with him constantly. Will he fight again? He's the Gypsy King, who knows?' Joshua has not given up hope of finally realising a bout with Fury. The Brit is not convinced that his rival's retirement is final and appears confident that a fight could still materialise. The British pair agreed a two-bout deal in 2020 but saw plans scuppered when it was ruled Fury had to permit Deontay Wilder a trilogy fight. In a recent post uploaded to Snapchat, Joshua shared an image of himself watching Fury fight, saying: "One of these days I'll be standing in the opposite corner. Ready and fully charged spiritually." Fury himself has declared that he has nothing left to prove in the sport. The 'Gypsy King' quickly dismissed rumours of a return to boxing, questioning the point of a comeback. "I hear a lot of talk about the Gypsy King returning to boxing and I ask this question: for what? What would I return for? More belts? I've won 22 of them," he said. "I've been rumped, that's it, fair play to them, they got their use out of me. But I'm happy, I am happy, content with what I have achieved and accomplished. "I've been around the world and back again. And this is what retirement looks like for the Gypsy King, not too shabby." He further added: "I'm in no rush at all, to come back to boxing and get my face punched in. For what? What would I return for? I ask that question. I am retired and I am staying retired. I have nothing to prove to anybody and nothing to return for."
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon. Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics: Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter? A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill. ___
NBC News
18 hours ago
- NBC News
U.S. judge approves $2.8 billion settlement, paving way for colleges to pay athletes millions
A federal judge signed off on arguably the biggest change in the history of college sports Friday, clearing the way for schools to begin paying their athletes millions of dollars as soon as next month as the multibillion-dollar industry shreds the last vestiges of the amateur model that defined it for more than a century. Nearly five years after Arizona State swimmer Grant House sued the NCAA and its five biggest conferences to lift restrictions on revenue sharing, U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken approved the final proposal that had been hung up on roster limits, just one of many changes ahead amid concerns that thousands of walk-on athletes will lose their chance to play college sports. The sweeping terms of the so-called House settlement include approval for each school to share up to $20.5 million with athletes over the next year and $2.7 billion that will be paid over the next decade to thousands of former players who were barred from that revenue for years. The agreement brings a seismic shift to hundreds of schools that were forced to reckon with the reality that their players are the ones producing the billions in TV and other revenue, mostly through football and basketball, that keep this machine humming. The scope of the changes — some have already begun — is difficult to overstate. The professionalization of college athletics will be seen in the high-stakes and expensive recruitment of stars on their way to the NFL and NBA, and they will be felt by athletes whose schools have decided to pare their programs. The agreement will resonate in nearly every one of the NCAA's 1,100 member schools boasting nearly 500,000 athletes. The road to a settlement Wilken's ruling comes 11 years after she dealt the first significant blow to the NCAA ideal of amateurism when she ruled in favor of former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon and others who were seeking a way to earn money from the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) — a term that is now as common in college sports as 'March Madness' or 'Roll Tide.' It was just four years ago that the NCAA cleared the way for NIL money to start flowing, but the changes coming are even bigger. Wilken granted preliminary approval to the settlement last October. That sent colleges scurrying to determine not only how they were going to afford the payments, but how to regulate an industry that also allows players to cut deals with third parties so long as they are deemed compliant by a newly formed enforcement group that will be run by auditors at Deloitte. The agreement takes a big chunk of oversight away from the NCAA and puts it in the hands of the four biggest conferences. The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC hold most of the power and decision-making heft, especially when it comes to the College Football Playoff, which is the most significant financial driver in the industry and is not under the NCAA umbrella like the March Madness tournaments are. Roster limits held things up The deal looked ready to go since last fall, but Wilken put a halt to it after listening to a number of players who had lost their spots because of newly imposed roster limits being placed on teams. The limits were part of a trade-off that allowed the schools to offer scholarships to everyone on the roster, instead of only a fraction, as has been the case for decades. Schools started cutting walk-ons in anticipation of the deal being approved. Wilken asked for a solution and, after weeks, the parties decided to let anyone cut from a roster — now termed a 'Designated Student-Athlete' — return to their old school or play for a new one without counting against the new limit. Wilken ultimately agreed, going point-by-point through the objectors' arguments to explain why they didn't hold up. 'The modifications provide Designated Student-Athletes with what they had prior to the roster limits provisions being implemented, which was the opportunity to be on a roster at the discretion of a Division I school,' Wilken wrote Winners and losers The list of winners and losers is long and, in some cases, hard to tease out. A rough guide of winners would include football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, which will devote much of their bankroll to signing and retaining them. For instance, Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood's NIL deal is reportedly worth between $10.5 million and $12 million. Losers, despite Wilken's ruling, figure to be at least some of the walk-ons and partial scholarship athletes whose spots are gone. Also in limbo are Olympic sports many of those athletes play and that serve as the main pipeline for a U.S. team that has won the most medals at every Olympics since the downfall of the Soviet Union. All this is a price worth paying, according to the attorneys who crafted the settlement and argue they delivered exactly what they were asked for: an attempt to put more money in the pockets of the players whose sweat and toil keep people watching from the start of football season through March Madness and the College World Series in June. What the settlement does not solve is the threat of further litigation. Though this deal brings some uniformity to the rules, states still have separate laws regarding how NIL can be doled out, which could lead to legal challenges. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been consistent in pushing for federal legislation that would put college sports under one rulebook and, if he has his way, provide some form of antitrust protection to prevent the new model from being disrupted again.
