College Sports (Football)

Curbelo Fanboy said:

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.

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

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.

Click to expand...

the juiceman cometh said:

While sports betting is still legal, there are still some shady operators in that arena. Again, look at the particulars of today's news. If you're betting on pro sports with the wrong people, and you get in a deep hole, these guys are going to see an opportunity. And that opportunity is going to hurt the integrity of NCAA competition. The NCAA absolutely has a reasonable reason to restrict this activity.

Click to expand...

SoCal Illini said:

I fear opening betting for college players will lead to more bs. College kid getting 500k, bets $250k in pro sports but can’t or doesn’t want to pay it and does a ‘favor’ instead for someone that can bet on college. A fumble here, missed tackle there, an interception, just to make sure his team doesn’t cover the spread. Or something to make sure his buddies back home can make a little dough also, peer pressure to spread the wealth

It’s happened before, but now it’ll likely be more often. My small school’s all time leading scorer in basketball did that, got busted.

Michael franzese, a former mafia guy, talks to professional and college athletes about gambling. He’s on YouTube if you’re curious how easy it is for those types of people to get player, ref, or a coach in their pocket

Click to expand...

Fighter of the Nightman said:

Someone made a comment about lingering SEC bias in another thread, and another poster mentioned that the SEC was still kicking butt in TV ratings ... and I must say it's true. I remember reading an article once that said TV executives see 4 million viewers as a bit of a magic number for a big-time game. So, here are all of the games so far this year that have had 4 million or more viewers by conference. For a non-conference matchup, I gave both conferences credit for the game (so it will be listed twice).

Color Key for Conferences
SEC
Big Ten
Big XII
ACC

TV Viewers in Thousands
16,620 for #1 Texas at #3 Ohio State (11:00 am on FOX)
16,620 for #1 Texas at #3 Ohio State (11:00 am on FOX)
12,580 for #6 Georgia at #15 Tennessee (2:30 pm on ABC)
10,419 for #17 Alabama at #5 Georgia (6:30 pm on ABC)
10,404 for #6 Notre Dame at #10 Miami (FL) (Sunday at 6:30 pm on ABC)
10,400 for #8 Alabama at Florida State (2:30 pm on ABC)
10,400 for #8 Alabama at Florida State (2:30 pm on ABC)
9,800 for #5 Ole Miss at #9 Georgia (2:30 pm on ABC)
9,700 for #15 Michigan at #18 Oklahoma (6:30 pm on ABC)
9,700 for #15 Michigan at #18 Oklahoma (6:30 pm on ABC)
9,787 for #9 LSU at #4 Clemson (6:30 pm on ABC)
9,787 for #9 LSU at #4 Clemson (6:30 pm on ABC)
8,730 for #6 Oklahoma vs. Texas in Dallas, TX (2:30 pm on ABC)
8,300 for #6 Oregon at #3 Penn State (6:30 pm on NBC)
8,251 for #11 Tennessee at #6 Alabama (6:30 pm on ABC)
7,460 for Florida at #3 LSU (6:30 pm on ABC)
6,990 for #8 Alabama at #14 Missouri (11:00 am on ABC)
6,690 for #10 Georgia at Auburn (6:30 pm on ABC)
6,690 for #4 LSU at #13 Ole Miss (2:30 pm on ABC)
6,460 for Florida at #4 Miami (FL) (6:30 pm on ABC)
6,460 for Florida at #4 Miami (FL) (6:30 pm on ABC)
6,400 for #16 Vanderbilt at #10 Alabama (2:30 pm on ABC)
6,184 for TCU at North Carolina (Labor Day Monday at 8:00 pm on ESPN)
6,184 for TCU at North Carolina (Labor Day Monday at 8:00 pm on ESPN)
6,120 for #22 Auburn at #11 Oklahoma (2:30 pm on ABC)
6,030 for #3 Miami (FL) at #18 Florida State (6:30 pm on ABC)
5,900 for #10 LSU at #17 Vanderbilt (11:00 am on ABC)
5,800 for #16 Texas A&M at #8 Notre Dame (6:30 pm on ABC)
5,590 for #7 Indiana at #3 Oregon (2:30 pm on CBS)
5,295 for #21 Michigan at Nebraska (2:30 pm on CBS)
5,275 for #1 Ohio State at #17 Illinois (11:00 am on FOX)
5,229 for #1 Ohio State at Washington (2:30 pm on CBS)
5,165 for Virginia Tech vs. #13 South Carolina in Atlanta, GA (Sunday at 2:00 pm on ESPN)
5,165 for Virginia Tech vs. #13 South Carolina in Atlanta, GA (Sunday at 2:00 pm on ESPN)
4,800 for #20 Ole Miss at Kentucky (2:30 pm on ABC)
4,800 for #12 Clemson at Georgia Tech (11:00 am on ESPN)
4,751 for #21 USC at #13 Notre Dame (6:30 pm on NBC)
4,627 for Wisconsin at #20 Michigan (11:00 am on FOX)
4,510 for Wisconsin at #19 Alabama (11:00 am on ABC)
4,510 for Wisconsin at #19 Alabama (11:00 am on ABC)
4,395 for #8 Florida State at Virginia (Friday at 6:00 pm on ESPN)
4,321 for Washington at Michigan (11:00 am on FOX)
4,300 for #15 Michigan at USC (6:30 pm on NBC)
4,278 for Iowa at #16 Iowa State (11:00 am on FOX)
4,278 for Iowa at #16 Iowa State (11:00 am on FOX)
4,255 for #22 Notre Dame at Arkansas (11:00 am on ABC)
4,116 for #21 USC at #23 Illinois (11:00 am on FOX)
4,072 for #9 Texas at Florida (2:30 pm on ESPN)
4,039 for #17 Texas Tech at #16 Utah (11:00 am on FOX)
4,010 for #17 Kansas State vs. #22 Iowa State in Dublin, Ireland (11:00 am on ESPN)
4,000 for #1 Ohio State at Wisconsin (2:30 pm on CBS)

FWIW, here is a list of teams by conference that have played in at least one game with 4 million or more viewers.

SEC
Alabama (x6)
Georgia (x4)
LSU (x4)
Texas (x3)
Ole Miss (x3)
Oklahoma (x3)
Florida (x3)
Tennessee (x2)
Auburn (x2)
Vanderbilt (x2)
Missouri (x1)
Texas A&M (x1)
South Carolina (x1)
Kentucky (x1)
Arkansas (x1)

Missing - Mississippi State

Big Ten
Michigan (x5)
Ohio State (x4)
USC (x3)
Wisconsin (x3)
Oregon (x2)
Illinois (x2)
Washington (x2)
Penn State (x1)
Indiana (x1)
Nebraska (x1)
Iowa (x1)

Missing - Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers, UCLA

ACC
Miami (FL) (x3)
Florida State (x3)
Clemson (x2)
North Carolina (x1)
Georgia Tech (x1)
Virginia Tech (x1)
Virginia (x1)

Missing - Boston College, Cal, Duke, Louisville, NC State, Pitt, SMU, Stanford, Syracuse

Big XII
Iowa State (x2)
TCU (x1)
Texas Tech (x1)
Utah (x1)
Kansas State (x1)

Missing - Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, BYU, Cincinnati, Colorado, Houston, Kansas, Oklahoma State, UCF, West Virginia

Click to expand...

SoCal Illini said:

I fear opening betting for college players will lead to more bs. College kid getting 500k, bets $250k in pro sports but can’t or doesn’t want to pay it and does a ‘favor’ instead for someone that can bet on college. A fumble here, missed tackle there, an interception, just to make sure his team doesn’t cover the spread. Or something to make sure his buddies back home can make a little dough also, peer pressure to spread the wealth

It’s happened before, but now it’ll likely be more often. My small school’s all time leading scorer in basketball did that, got busted.

Michael franzese, a former mafia guy, talks to professional and college athletes about gambling. He’s on YouTube if you’re curious how easy it is for those types of people to get player, ref, or a coach in their pocket

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

The NCAA cannot unreasonably restrict a student athlete from doing something. While I understand it’s debatable, the NCAA’s attorneys obviously believe it’s an unreasonable restriction.

Click to expand...

Dkayak said:

It’s very reasonable to expect them to avoid all sports gambling. The rationale is articulated by @SoCal Illini and is confirmed by the recent FBI arrests. You can’t silo the betting restriction to just college sports because “gambling interests” have no such firewalls. Buy all the lotto tickets you like, but don’t bet on any competitive sports.

If the NCAA isn’t willing to enforce this, individual teams/schools could do it on their own. It’s pretty obvious that there are no benefits whatsoever to allowing sports betting and huge risks to all involved. Just do the right thing please.

Otherwise the sport itself is at risk. Look at what happened when doping infected pro cycling. Many fans became disillusioned and abandoned the sport. The damage trickled down to the amateur and recreational level when top riders/teams were revealed as frauds and cheats. You only need to have a few confirmed cheats to cast suspicion on everybody. The suspicions remain to this day, despite layers of new and rigorous doping safeguards.

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

I’m not disagreeing with you (or agreeing with you). I’m just pointing out that someone in a big chair has to decide do we give student athletes freedom or do we defend a BILLION(s) dollar lawsuit. The NCAA is/was/will/would have been defendants in a large lawsuit. They decided to avoid it. If you were in charge maybe you are right. If you are wrong, you further bankrupt the NCAA and do significant damage to every athletic department in the country. It’s not as obvious of a decision as you are making it. And they made it after significant legal input so they probably made the right decision legally.

Click to expand...

Dkayak said:

Who would have standing to sue for billions? Surely not students. They’re not losing an opportunity to make billions gambling. Maybe gambling interests could sue? Or the mob, LOL? It’s a sad mess, a mad, mad world.

Every small town bar or restaurant now has a bank of video gaming machines operated by local zombies in a trance. One place even opens its doors to gaming on days the restaurant itself is closed. Those machines are big money, hovering billions from many folks who can’t resist or afford it. Years ago a management employee in my group lost his home and marriage to his inability to stay off the local boat. Today you don’t need to look for a casino. And we can’t bring ourselves to expect even a little self-discipline from student athletes to protect the integrity of their sport. Yeh, i guess I’m a curmudgeon, so I’ll shut up now.

Click to expand...

Dkayak said:

It’s very reasonable to expect them to avoid all sports gambling. The rationale is articulated by @SoCal Illini and is confirmed by the recent FBI arrests. You can’t silo the betting restriction to just college sports because “gambling interests” have no such firewalls. Buy all the lotto tickets you like, but don’t bet on any competitive sports.

If the NCAA isn’t willing to enforce this, individual teams/schools could do it on their own. It’s pretty obvious that there are no benefits whatsoever to allowing sports betting and huge risks to all involved. Just do the right thing please.

Otherwise the sport itself is at risk. Look at what happened when doping infected pro cycling. Many fans became disillusioned and abandoned the sport. The damage trickled down to the amateur and recreational level when top riders/teams were revealed as frauds and cheats. You only need to have a few confirmed cheats to cast suspicion on everybody. The suspicions remain to this day, despite layers of new and rigorous doping safeguards.

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

I’m not disagreeing with you. You are making valid arguments.

The student athletes absolutely would have standing to sue. Every student athlete in the NCAA for as long as the “unreasonable” restriction was in place and the statute of limitations hasn’t expired.

Let’s say there are 1 million student athletes in the NCAA over a 5 year period. Let’s say in a class action lawsuit they claim the unreasonable restriction on their freedom damages them by only $1000. That’s $1 billion. Hope they don’t claim $10,000 or $40.000.

It’s a big risk when you know you are going to get sued.

Click to expand...

Dkayak said:

How do they argue students suffer damages? Collectively speaking, the class would have been prevented from losing money, not from earning it. This is a mathematical certainty. So maybe they’d put a $1b price tag on having less fun?

Universities impose lifestyle restrictions without being sued. Most require freshmen to live in university approved housing for example. Why? It’s for their own well-being, even if they might find something else more entertaining. The military imposes less-than-fun lifestyle restrictions too. So maybe universities could restrict it on their own? Yeh, I know, it wouldn’t be tolerated. College is increasingly about having a good time.

But most of all, there’s a previously unimaginable amount of money involved: media revenue, mega donors, NIL collectives, soaring salaries, gambling money, and students with huge discretionary funds (often borrowed for life). Remember the old saying about how power corrupts? Money is at least as corrupting. Once you introduce gambling, you have to worry about the mob too. Thank the NCAA and the courts.

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

I am an attorney who worked on (small part) all the NCAA major cases that happened in the last five years.

Again, I’m not arguing whether it’s correct or not just it’s at a minimum high risk to take away student athletes freedom and a certainty the NCAA are defending a $1B lawsuit if they continued.

I’m not positive all of the claims but two of them would have been an unreasonable restriction (1) on earning income (I understand your point) and (2) personal freedoms/enjoyment.

Very few (if any) analogies are going to be relevant as student athletes are a unique class and have already won multiple multi billion dollar lawsuits.

The point isn’t really debating the merits as they are debatable as you point out. The point is the NCAA was at a legitimate risk (and certainly were going to be sued) and choose allowing freedom rather than restricting student athletes. I think you can agree if that was on legal advice (and it certainly was) it was a wise decision on behalf of the NCAA.

When the courts repeatedly gives you billion dollar judgements for restricting student athletes, you stop restricting student athletes.

Click to expand...

Dkayak said:

One root cause is the conflict between “student” and highly paid “professional athlete”. If I understand you correctly, they’re far more pro than student. Students accept restrictions on personal freedoms, like many other groups in our society. Pros OTOH have enough money to wage legal wars even for minor privileges of no economic value. No group has ever earned income gambling (except of course the house). Individuals might have some temporary success but groups are always losers.

Maybe just drop the student facade and admit each school now has a professional team playing under their banner, warts and all? But fan loyalty is tied to the university and that banner/campus setting is what generates the revenue.

I just came across this NBC article on gambling in the NBA. https://www.nbcnews.com/sports/nba/nba-gambling-scandal-chauncey-billups-terry-rozier-rcna239490

It’s now deeply embedded in the culture and obviously has nothing to do with making more money. I wonder if the NFL is much different? Anyway, if universities and the NCAA won’t/can’t control gambling corruption, the FBI will do it for them. We either risk lawsuits or public scandals.

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

First, I agree with you in that we either risk lawsuits or scandals.

Second, your point of “root cause” at the beginning on your post is not correct. The “root cause” is universities and the NCAA have different authority. Universities have wide ability to restrict ALL students behaviors in the interest in student benefit. But if they restricted a subset of students they would be sued.

The NCAA is a different type of organization and does not have the same rights. The NCAA would be saying even though students can gamble on pro sports we are restricting student athletes from doing so. The argument (albeit debatable) is that it is an unfair restriction that treats students and student athletes differently.

The NCAA must successfully defend why it’s treating student athletes differently. While good arguments can be made why, the NCAA has lost A LOT on similar concepts multiple times in the very recent past.

Click to expand...

Mr. Tibbs said:

why cant a school make it a condition of the scholarship, or even just a spot on the team as a walk on, in any sport, that they
oluntarily agree to a prohibition against gambling of any kind,
and while they are at it,
against any number of drugs, legal or illegal ?

if you need to do it for consideration, pay them $100 for that signature , or no spot on the team

make them agree to it

Click to expand...

STLini25 said:

If it was “collectively bargained” then that would work. However, that would be argued as an “unreasonable restriction” the way you are describing it. As an example, a pro sports can “collectively bargain” restrictions with the players association. It’s an important distinction.

Click to expand...

Mr. Tibbs said:

I understand how its done it pro sports with unions

but why cant it be done individually ?
why is a prohibition against stupid behavior a restraint of trade ?
like why is a curfew allowed then?

Click to expand...