College Sports (Football)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#326      
So, does that mean the funds that make up our debt are already committed to us via donations?

Question for anyone who knows: Do we plan for the interest payments within the donation, or do we take, for instance, a $100M pledge over 10 years, borrow for that $100M up front, and then the AD has to pay the interest, with the donation only going toward the principal?
Honestly not sure how that works. A pledge to fund the Smith Center, for example, does all that money come in at once, up front, and is invested at a rate such that the total value of that asset and interest fully covers the P&I of the bonds, once they start paying?

Or, is the pledge more along the lines of, once the bonds start payment out P&I, the pledge money comes in, to cover.
 
#332      
Maybe the fact that they are betting on these pro athletes will disqualify the pros from coming back and playing college ball.

Seriously....G League players now....
 
#335      
Step 1. Legalize NIL
Step 2. Legalize gambling
Step 3. DraftKings profit?
I was about to say buy DKNG, but it looks like that may had already happened.

Interesting timing of the tweet and the jump Tuesday before close. Maybe there were some rumblings before it was "official".

1000002185.jpg
 
#336      
Dear B1G,

Please take notes.

Sincerely,

Everyone All The Time Every Game

Official From Auburn vs Georgia Game Reportedly Suspended​


 
#337      
Dear B1G,

Please take notes.

Sincerely,

Everyone All The Time Every Game

Official From Auburn vs Georgia Game Reportedly Suspended​


'B1G officials' - calling now for his availability.
 
#340      
Why do they want to ruin everything we love?
Before the aliens get here?

Can’t we keep some things sacred right up until they get here?

Edit: “reveal themselves” is probably more accurate 🤣
 
#341      
It’s easy to imagine negative effects. Can anybody suggest a single positive effect, even one?

I'd guess it's the same thinking that applies to a lot of things. Specifically, if they're going to bet but are betting on pro sports, it avoids a scandal. Gives everyone an out, and makes a clear line for what's not allowed from collegiate athletes. Not suggesting it's a good rule, just why it might be that way.
 
#342      
does the NCAA have a right to restrict people from wagering in general? Lottery? Blackjack? On vacation in Asia betting on Japan baseball? On cricket which isn’t an NCAA event?

Point being it’s a slippery slope of unfairly restricting people’s behaviors. The NCAA has judgments and settlements and current court cases against it for many many many billions of dollars. The NCAA is gun shy on restricting behavior.

I’m guessing this was legal advice to reduce legal exposure.
 
#343      
I'd guess it's the same thinking that applies to a lot of things. Specifically, if they're going to bet but are betting on pro sports, it avoids a scandal. Gives everyone an out, and makes a clear line for what's not allowed from collegiate athletes. Not suggesting it's a good rule, just why it might be that way.
One might argue that introducing them to betting on the pro level increases the temptation to bet on NCAA games, with teams they understand better and games they might even be tempted to influence.
 
#345      
Or have others 'influence' them into participating to pay back existing gambling debt.
Got to get those gambling debts established early, so when they go pro later they are immediately eligible for recruitment into the fixer schemes.
 
#346      
One might argue that introducing them to betting on the pro level increases the temptation to bet on NCAA games, with teams they understand better and games they might even be tempted to influence.

No doubt. IMO the NCAA is doing what's in its best interest while trying to anticipate what it can and can't realistically do without a players union to negotiate with.
 
#347      
does the NCAA have a right to restrict people from wagering in general? Lottery? Blackjack? On vacation in Asia betting on Japan baseball? On cricket which isn’t an NCAA event?

Point being it’s a slippery slope of unfairly restricting people’s behaviors.
The NCAA has judgments and settlements and current court cases against it for many many many billions of dollars. The NCAA is gun shy on restricting behavior.

I’m guessing this was legal advice to reduce legal exposure.
Of course it does. If the NCAA can restrict your eligibility for for failing to meet certain academic requirements, they can certainly restrict it for other reasons. For example, an athlete can be banned for violating the NCAA's banned drugs policy, which does include non-performance enhancing drugs.

And the slippery slope argument fails because there has been an official ban on sports gambling for NCAA athletes since 1997, and it has not created a slippery slope. It never led to banning blackjack or lottery or cricket. This simple, reasonable ban had been in place for almost 30 years with no ill-effects.
 
#348      
Of course it does. If the NCAA can restrict your eligibility for for failing to meet certain academic requirements, they can certainly restrict it for other reasons. For example, an athlete can be banned for violating the NCAA's banned drugs policy, which does include non-performance enhancing drugs.

And the slippery slope argument fails because there has been an official ban on sports gambling for NCAA athletes since 1997, and it has not created a slippery slope. It never led to banning blackjack or lottery or cricket. This simple, reasonable ban had been in place for almost 30 years with no ill-effects.
It’s a balance between the NCAA’s tight to maintain integrity and the person’s right to earn an income / have freedom.

The ban on betting on NCAA is a reasonable restriction to maintain integrity. The ban on pro sports betting is arguably not a reasonable ban. Just like betting on blackjack is not a reasonable ban.
 
#349      
Apparently the NCAA operates from an assumption that sports gambling is an irresistible temptation in our society. Seems odd to me that self-discipline is now an unreasonable expectation for an athlete. What are we “teaching” with this change? There’s nothing good in it for the sport, schools, or players.
 
#350      
does the NCAA have a right to restrict people from wagering in general? Lottery? Blackjack? On vacation in Asia betting on Japan baseball? On cricket which isn’t an NCAA event?

Point being it’s a slippery slope of unfairly restricting people’s behaviors. The NCAA has judgments and settlements and current court cases against it for many many many billions of dollars. The NCAA is gun shy on restricting behavior.

I’m guessing this was legal advice to reduce legal exposure.
I don't know the exact rules, but my son worked at NIU in the athletic department 2 years ago & last year. He was told that as an athletic department employee he could not bet on any sport that NIU competed in. I believe it applied to both college & pro so hoops, football, baseball, etc were out. I think he coulda bet on horse racing or car racing or some of the foreign sports.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back