Sports Betting

[Bash Riprock]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

@Muda69will explain the “slippery slope.”

I understand the risk of betting on your sport....I am saying the issue starts further upstream.  Why partner with betting services in the first place if integrity of the game is so important?  As if the NFL didn't open that door a little wider.

If its all about cash, then stop trying to pretend you care about image.  The NFL showed us that plenty with the handling of other issues over the past few years.

[Bobref]

2 hours ago, Bash Riprock said:

If its all about cash, then stop trying to pretend you care about image.  The NFL showed us that plenty with the handling of other issues over the past few years.

The two are inextricably intertwined, at least, in the minds of the owners. And do you really think the general population views sports gambling as tarnishing the league’s image? I don’t. Gambling is mainstream today. The fact that it is also extremely lucrative for the league doesn’t make it bad, or shady. It’s simply another form of entertainment.

[DE]

2 minutes ago, Bobref said:

The two are inextricably intertwined, at least, in the minds of the owners. And do you really think the general population views sports gambling as tarnishing the league’s image? I don’t. Gambling is mainstream today. The fact that it is also extremely lucrative for the league doesn’t make it bad, or shady. It’s simply another form of entertainment.

Like @Muda69said.

[Bobref]

4 minutes ago, DE said:

Like @Muda69said.

🤣😂 I’d say @Muda69went a little further than that. He said it was on the way to becoming the WWE.

[Bash Riprock]

9 minutes ago, Bobref said:

The two are inextricably intertwined, at least, in the minds of the owners. And do you really think the general population views sports gambling as tarnishing the league’s image? I don’t. Gambling is mainstream today. The fact that it is also extremely lucrative for the league doesn’t make it bad, or shady. It’s simply another form of entertainment.

I think the league is kidding itself of promoting something for their sport that drives dollars, then act like its horrific if their own players engage in the same.  One year suspension for betting a total of $1500 on unrelated games?  

Fine if they want to slap a hand for an undesired behavior that had minor impact....but this?  While promoting gambling to others???

I think we disagree about it being shady as well.  When you "wallow with the pigs, you are going to get muddy"........

I get it...we see this differently....that's cool.  

You have the last word....appreciate the positive discussion!!!

[Muda69]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

🤣😂 I’d say @Muda69went a little further than that. He said it was on the way to becoming the WWE.

It is.   Just waiting for the story to crack about the NFL offices dictating who wins and who loses.

 

58 minutes ago, Bash Riprock said:

I think the league is kidding itself of promoting something for their sport that drives dollars, then act like its horrific if their own players engage in the same.  One year suspension for betting a total of $1500 on unrelated games?  

Fine if they want to slap a hand for an undesired behavior that had minor impact....but this?  While promoting gambling to others???

I think we disagree about it being shady as well.  When you "wallow with the pigs, you are going to get muddy"........

I get it...we see this differently....that's cool.  

You have the last word....appreciate the positive discussion!!!

How many NFL owners have been caught betting on NFL games?

 

[JustRules]

You don't want those involved in the games involved in any form of gambling. It's a bad look and gets them potentially into some bad situations. Let's say Ridley loses $1500 on these games. He tries to get it back and loses $5000 the next time. And it grows. Suddenly he owes someone a lot of money. He could get pressured to do something in one of his games to settle his debts. The best way to avoid that is to ban gambling by the partipicants entirely.

I know from an officiating standpoint the B1G is so opposed to gambling officials are not allowed to do any kind of gambling. This includes basketball pools and fantasy sports. I believe NFL officials are not allowed in a casino at any point during the season even if they aren't gambling. Violating any of those would result in immediate dismissal from the staff. I would imagine players and coaches are under even more scrutiny.

[Bobref]

7 hours ago, JustRules said:

You don't want those involved in the games involved in any form of gambling. It's a bad look and gets them potentially into some bad situations. Let's say Ridley loses $1500 on these games. He tries to get it back and loses $5000 the next time. And it grows. Suddenly he owes someone a lot of money. He could get pressured to do something in one of his games to settle his debts. The best way to avoid that is to ban gambling by the partipicants entirely.

I know from an officiating standpoint the B1G is so opposed to gambling officials are not allowed to do any kind of gambling. This includes basketball pools and fantasy sports. I believe NFL officials are not allowed in a casino at any point during the season even if they aren't gambling. Violating any of those would result in immediate dismissal from the staff. I would imagine players and coaches are under even more scrutiny.

It is even easier today for a player to affect the outcome of bets … because there are so many different forms of gambling, e.g., prop bets. Even if he were inclined, Ridley might not be able to influence the outcome of the game. Much easier, though, to influence a prop bet on the QB’s statistics, Ridley’s own statistics, etc.

[Bash Riprock]

17 hours ago, JustRules said:

You don't want those involved in the games involved in any form of gambling. It's a bad look and gets them potentially into some bad situations. Let's say Ridley loses $1500 on these games. He tries to get it back and loses $5000 the next time. And it grows. Suddenly he owes someone a lot of money. He could get pressured to do something in one of his games to settle his debts. The best way to avoid that is to ban gambling by the partipicants entirely.

I know from an officiating standpoint the B1G is so opposed to gambling officials are not allowed to do any kind of gambling. This includes basketball pools and fantasy sports. I believe NFL officials are not allowed in a casino at any point during the season even if they aren't gambling. Violating any of those would result in immediate dismissal from the staff. I would imagine players and coaches are under even more scrutiny.

Zero disagreement.  I am not sure this crime fit the punishment, but not my call.

My only point is that when an entity partners and gets involved in the gambling business, how can they not expect their own risks to increase?  They are indeed opening the door.

But, I guess they manage it by telling their people, "don't do as I do...do as I say..."  Awesome example the NFL sets....once again.

[JustRules]

1 hour ago, Bash Riprock said:

Zero disagreement.  I am not sure this crime fit the punishment, but not my call.

My only point is that when an entity partners and gets involved in the gambling business, how can they not expect their own risks to increase?  They are indeed opening the door.

But, I guess they manage it by telling their people, "don't do as I do...do as I say..."  Awesome example the NFL sets....once again.

I see it more as them supporting something the fans do but for obvious reasons don't want their participants doing it. That's very logical because they are gambling on the outcome of games something the participants can influence. The NFL creating partnerships with the gambling entities is still valid because they make their money regardless of the outcome. I have no idea if they are advertising contracts or a percentage of bets placed, but either way they do not influence the winners of the bets.

In the scope of an athletic contest gambling is much more damaging than legal issues off the field. I'm OK with the league getting involved there as well, but the courts should be the primary arbiter and they don't impact the outcome of games.

[Irishman]

Figured it was a matter of time before something like this would come out

https://www.si.com/nfl/2022/03/11/calvin-ridley-bet-on-more-nfl-games-disclosed-falcons 

[DE]

40 minutes ago, Irishman said:

Figured it was a matter of time before something like this would come out

https://www.si.com/nfl/2022/03/11/calvin-ridley-bet-on-more-nfl-games-disclosed-falcons 

color me shocked

[Bash Riprock]

21 hours ago, JustRules said:

I see it more as them supporting something the fans do but for obvious reasons don't want their participants doing it. That's very logical because they are gambling on the outcome of games something the participants can influence. The NFL creating partnerships with the gambling entities is still valid because they make their money regardless of the outcome. I have no idea if they are advertising contracts or a percentage of bets placed, but either way they do not influence the winners of the bets.

In the scope of an athletic contest gambling is much more damaging than legal issues off the field. I'm OK with the league getting involved there as well, but the courts should be the primary arbiter and they don't impact the outcome of games.

We see this differently....as the say goes, "you show me a person's friends, and I will show them their future"......but at the end of the day, I agree with their motive...its always about following the dollars, regardless of the impact.  I agree players gambling impacts integrity of the game.  Have no issue with punishment...I am just saying how can people not predict that the probability of gambling increases, when its made to be much easier to do?

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-09-10/nfl-draftkings-lucrative-partnership-blurs-lines-between-sports-gambling

All of this brings seductive — sometimes addictive — betting much closer to kids, teens and older students while making gambling a more explicit centerpiece of sports. Young men are particularly vulnerable. As I’ve noted before, there possibly will be social fallout, and a bigger incentive for corruption, tied to these shifts. Regulation, meanwhile, will likely be scant and left to individual states.

"We've been very open about our position that we oppose legalized sports gambling,” Roger Goodell, the NFL’s commissioner, observed back in 2015. “We haven't changed our position on that, and I don't anticipate us changing that going forward at all. We think the integrity of the game is the most important thing.” What changed? An opportunity for the NFL to feast on fresh revenue streams emerged. The league said it expects to pull in $270 million this year from new gambling deals and as much as $1 billion by the end of this decade. Sports betting companies, freed by a 2018 Supreme Court ruling to operate in states other than Nevada, and given a huge boost by shut-ins looking for fun during the Covid-19 lockdown, have even bigger piles of money awaiting them.

A Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analyst recently estimated that the online sports betting market could grow to about $39 billion by 2033, up from about $900 million currently. Goldman, which the NFL also retained to find partners that can help it expand the reach of its media properties, thinks that cord-cutting and streaming have made it hard for sports leagues to attract younger fans. Lo and behold, sports betting skews much younger than traditional casino gambling — and thus offers leagues a way to reel in loyalists younger than 40.

[Bobref]

In addition to the opportunity for a cash grab — which benefits everyone, including players — I think part of the NFL’s reasoning in embracing sports betting is simply bowing to the inevitable. Since the Goodell statement in 2015 quoted in the article, the flow toward public acceptance of gambling has become a tsunami. States legalizing sports betting, online opportunities in abundance, and most importantly, the explosion in popularity of fantasy football, all make gambling on football mainstream today. What was once considered shady, back room, under the table stuff is now family entertainment. Society’s mores changed. The NFL changed correspondingly. What’s the big deal? Why would anyone attribute some sort of nefarious motive to that?

Did you know in Indiana, which has a state lottery, state licensed casinos, and legal sports betting, there are also laws on the books against illegal gambling operations. Is enforcement of those laws hypocritical? I don’t hear a lot of people beating that drum.

[Muda69]

5 hours ago, Bobref said:

Did you know in Indiana, which has a state lottery, state licensed casinos, and legal sports betting, there are also laws on the books against illegal gambling operations. Is enforcement of those laws hypocritical? I don’t hear a lot of people beating that drum.

So the bookie down the street operating out of his garage,  or the big weekly poker game in Steve's basement, those are illegal.  Got it.

 

[Bobref]

39 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

So the bookie down the street operating out of his garage,  or the big weekly poker game in Steve's basement, those are illegal.  Got it.

 

Exactly.

[Bash Riprock]

13 hours ago, Bobref said:

In addition to the opportunity for a cash grab — which benefits everyone, including players — I think part of the NFL’s reasoning in embracing sports betting is simply bowing to the inevitable. Since the Goodell statement in 2015 quoted in the article, the flow toward public acceptance of gambling has become a tsunami. States legalizing sports betting, online opportunities in abundance, and most importantly, the explosion in popularity of fantasy football, all make gambling on football mainstream today. What was once considered shady, back room, under the table stuff is now family entertainment. Society’s mores changed. The NFL changed correspondingly. What’s the big deal? Why would anyone attribute some sort of nefarious motive to that?

Did you know in Indiana, which has a state lottery, state licensed casinos, and legal sports betting, there are also laws on the books against illegal gambling operations. Is enforcement of those laws hypocritical? I don’t hear a lot of people beating that drum.

I am not really commenting whether they should or shouldn't.  I have opinions about it, but don't want to get in that debate.

I am simply saying it easy to predict an increased probability of this happening with players.  My guess, Ridley isn't the only one.  

There is impact whether you choose to accept that or not as mentioned in the article I shared.......but hey, follow the cash, right?  

[Bobref]

17 minutes ago, Bash Riprock said:

but hey, follow the cash, right?  

That’s sort of what for-profit institutions do, isn’t it?

[JustRules]

9 hours ago, Bash Riprock said:

I am not really commenting whether they should or shouldn't.  I have opinions about it, but don't want to get in that debate.

I am simply saying it easy to predict an increased probability of this happening with players.  My guess, Ridley isn't the only one.  

There is impact whether you choose to accept that or not as mentioned in the article I shared.......but hey, follow the cash, right?  

I don't expect they are surprised their players get involved with gambling. They are told what will happen if they do and get caught. I have no sympathy for any punishment up to and including permanent bans from the sport. Pete Rose was one of the best players in the history of baseball and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame based on that. But he gave up everything when he chose to gamble on baseball games. He has only himself to blame.

[DE]

3 hours ago, JustRules said:

I don't expect they are surprised their players get involved with gambling. They are told what will happen if they do and get caught. I have no sympathy for any punishment up to and including permanent bans from the sport. Pete Rose was one of the best players in the history of baseball and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame based on that. But he gave up everything when he chose to gamble on baseball games. He has only himself to blame.

Didn't a ref get busted many years ago too?  Think it was basketball.

[Bobref]

13 hours ago, DE said:

Didn't a ref get busted many years ago too?  Think it was basketball.

13 yr. NBA official Tim Donaghy was dismissed in the wake of a gambling scandal in 2007.

[DE]

12 minutes ago, Bobref said:

13 yr. NBA official Tim Donaghy was dismissed in the wake of a gambling scandal in 2007.

yeah that was the guy.

[Bash Riprock]

On 3/13/2022 at 8:07 AM, Bobref said:

That’s sort of what for-profit institutions do, isn’t it?

For the most part yes....but I think we see corporations lately making exceptions to the rules with Covid mandates, ceasing business with Russia, etc.  

But absolutely...image isn't what it used to be...and in this case...what is right for the goose, doesn't necessarily apply to the gander.

[JustRules]

On 3/13/2022 at 8:41 PM, DE said:

Didn't a ref get busted many years ago too?  Think it was basketball.

Yes, and I consider that even worse than a player or coach gambling especially within the sport they officiate even if it's not a game they work. He not only should be fired and never eligible for rehire. He should also not be allowed to attend an NBA game. Gambling is for the fans. Any participants or anyone tied to a participant should not be involved. I doubt coaches and players have the same limitations as officials on other forms of gambling, and I'm fine with that too.