Legalized Sports Gambling Is Coming

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah there have been some unpredictable curveballs that is for sure. That is how Vegas stays rich. The 2007 SB like you said was unreal. I never thought the Pats would lose to the Giants in a million years. When the Cubs were down 3-1 in the WS in 2016 I couldn't believe that either but they came back and won.

The 2007 SB completely tricked me, however, I made a lot of money in that Cubs series. As soon as they were down 3-1, that's when I pounced. Three $100 bets in a row straight up, and it paid off completely. That's when you have to just go with the story.

[DaveA1102]

Interesting to read the opinions of those in here as a Brit who has access to gambling at all times. It certainly can be an issue for some people but, if you want to ban all things that can lead to addition then we would have no fun at all! Say goodbye to your alcohol and cigarettes!

 

It's about promoting safe gambling habits, over here we have constant ads promoting "when the fun stops, stop". Very sensible message. As well as only betting what you are willing to lose.

 

Just to point out that I am currently on holiday in florida and can't bet on the Scottish cup final because my app won't let me due to being in America! 

[2006Coltsbestever]

28 minutes ago, DaveA1102 said:

Interesting to read the opinions of those in here as a Brit who has access to gambling at all times. It certainly can be an issue for some people but, if you want to ban all things that can lead to addition then we would have no fun at all! Say goodbye to your alcohol and cigarettes!

 

It's about promoting safe gambling habits, over here we have constant ads promoting "when the fun stops, stop". Very sensible message. As well as only betting what you are willing to lose.

 

Just to point out that I am currently on holiday in florida and can't bet on the Scottish cup final because my app won't let me due to being in America! 

I CONCUR.

[jvan1973]

On 5/18/2018 at 12:10 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

The leagues will want a cut....

 

NBA Commishioner Adam Silver has already said his league will want a cut of every bet wagered on the NBA.

 

I think it's that's HUGE mistake....

They can want,  casinos won't pay.  Sports betting has been going on legally in Vegas for years.   

[Nadine]

On 5/18/2018 at 12:10 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

The leagues will want a cut....

 

NBA Commishioner Adam Silver has already said his league will want a cut of every bet wagered on the NBA.

 

I think it's that's HUGE mistake....

FanDuel and what not will surely be sponsors.

[DaveA1102]

1 hour ago, Nadine said:

FanDuel and what not will surely be sponsors.

 

You see a lot of that in UK. At half time in our football you get adverts for "in play" betting, ie Messi to score the next goal at "boosted" odds of 5/2. 

[PrincetonTiger]

1 hour ago, Nadine said:

FanDuel and what not will surely be sponsors.

No because It will not be legal in every state 

[dgambill]

5 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

They can want,  casinos won't pay.  Sports betting has been going on legally in Vegas for years.   

Yeah I agree. Just curious how they would force casinos and the betting houses to pay? Lobby congress? I don’t see how they can get a cut? I’m really curious for someone to explain that to me. More likely you would be able to bet at the stadiums and the league would get a cut of that...the league would sponsor betting on their app or webpage. Like say sign up for fee and get no processing fee for betting or something...but how do they force other betting houses to pay them a fee. Anybody explain how they accomplish that?

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, dgambill said:

Yeah I agree. Just curious how they would force casinos and the betting houses to pay? Lobby congress? I don’t see how they can get a cut? I’m really curious for someone to explain that to me. More likely you would be able to bet at the stadiums and the league would get a cut of that...the league would sponsor betting on their app or webpage. Like say sign up for fee and get no processing fee for betting or something...but how do they force other betting houses to pay them a fee. Anybody explain how they accomplish that?

Licensing fees and sponsorship 

[dgambill]

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Licensing fees and sponsorship 

I get the sponsorships but licenses are issued by state. How does the league get that unless you mean to advertise the logos etc. Vegas doesn’t pay why would they have to now?

[PrincetonTiger]

Just now, dgambill said:

I get the sponsorships but licenses are issued by state. How does the league get that unless you mean to advertise the logos etc. Vegas doesn’t pay why would they have to now?

Team licensing   

   

[dgambill]

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Team licensing   

   

So if Vegas doesn’t pay now why would anyone else need to? Can’t you just use titles like American football and not use nfl and use city or abbreviations. If you don’t use a licensed name etc why would you have to pay?

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, dgambill said:

So if Vegas doesn’t pay now why would anyone else need to? Can’t you just use titles like American football and not use nfl and use city or abbreviations. If you don’t use a licensed name etc why would you have to pay?

Since the leagues offices were not located in Vegas and wanted to do with an illegal business they couldn’t but now that things have changed 

  IMO

   Sponsorship and Team Licensing go hand in hand

[dgambill]

6 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Since the leagues offices were not located in Vegas and wanted to do with an illegal business they couldn’t but now that things have changed 

  IMO

   Sponsorship and Team Licensing go hand in hand

Got it. So MGM say and others could sponsor a team and could use “official” nfl licensing of their logo and names etc but I would say the avg betting establishment wouldn’t necessarily have to pay anything to the NFL is what I was getting at. But agree there would be some revenue...just not like a percentage of each bet is what I’m getting at.

[buccolts]

Hmm, increased revenue.

So, what's the over/under on the length of the next strike?

[NFLfan]

On 5/15/2018 at 7:55 PM, Cynjin said:

It's not "not my problem", it's not my business.

 

On 5/15/2018 at 8:08 PM, NFLfan said:

Do you feel the same way about all personal choices as long as it is legal? 

 

On 5/15/2018 at 9:39 PM, Cynjin said:

Pretty much, yes.

 

Your comments on the other thread don't seem to show that you have no problem with other peoples' personal choices. 

[Cynjin]

11 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

 

 

Your comments on the other thread don't seem to show that you have no problem with other peoples' personal choices. 

 

In the other thread, I am not saying they can't protest, I am saying they would have been better off protesting in a different way.  They can make those choices all they want, it doesn't mean I approve of them, I do not believe the government should step in and stop them.  I do believe that the private entity of the NFL has every right to dictate how they behave while at work.  

 

In this thread, I do not approve of compulsive gambling, but I am not going to tell people to stop, that is their choice.  I would be against the government forcing them to stop gambling, but I would have no problem if a private company had a policy against gambling.

[NFLfan]

1 minute ago, Cynjin said:

 

In the other thread, I am not saying they can't protest, I am saying they would have been better off protesting in a different way.  They can make those choices all they want, it doesn't mean I approve of them, I do not believe the government should step in and stop them.  I do believe that the private entity of the NFL has every right to dictate how they behave while at work.  

 

In this thread, I do not approve of compulsive gambling, but I am not going to tell people to stop, that is their choice.  I would be against the government forcing them to stop gambling, but I would have no problem if a private company had a policy against gambling.

(See bolded.) In the other thread, you wrote several times that people should not do anything that will offend others (like kneeling, leaving hat on, taking socks off, etc.) You basically told them "to stop", but here you write that you won't tell someone to stop gambling (in bold).

 

I am just pointing out the double standard. I agree 100% that I myself should try to minimize offending others. That includes doing what is generally socially accepted (not always though). It shows good manners. However, I cannot dictate how others behave. 

[Cynjin]

8 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

(See bolded.) In the other thread, you wrote several times that people should not do anything that will offend others (like kneeling, leaving hat on, taking socks off, etc.) You basically told them "to stop", but here you write that you won't tell someone to stop gambling (in bold).

 

I am just pointing out the double standard. I agree 100% that I myself should try to minimize offending others. That includes doing what is generally socially accepted (not always though). It shows good manners. However, I cannot dictate how others behave. 

 

I believe as a matter of courtesy that people should try not to offend other people.  However, I am not telling them to stop if they want to keep doing it.  I am not going to act like I approve of those choices though and if there are negative consequences for their actions then that is the choice that they made.  One of the consequences of the protest is less public support and a loss of the message.  If they want to continue on that path fine, I just believe that it is shortsighted and counterproductive, just like I believe gambling too much is.

[NFLfan]

3 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

I believe as a matter of courtesy that people should try not to offend other people.  However, I am not telling them to stop if they want to keep doing it.  I am not going to act like I approve of those choices though and if there are negative consequences for their actions then that is the choice that they made.  One of the consequences of the protest is less public support and a loss of the message.  If they want to continue on that path fine, I just believe that it is shortsighted and counterproductive, just like I believe gambling too much is.

 

Your tone in this thread is very different than the one in the other. In the other thread you sound angry and disrespected while here it is like "No big deal. They want to gamble, go right ahead."

[Cynjin]

1 hour ago, NFLfan said:

 

Your tone in this thread is very different than the one in the other. In the other thread you sound angry and disrespected while here it is like "No big deal. They want to gamble, go right ahead."

 

You know, thank you for saying that and I am not being sarcastic.  I have often wondered if my posting style has come across as angry or being mad, which in all honesty I'm not.  I apologize for that, it is not my intent, but I fear that my message is being lost because I am coming across as angry.  I am then in the same boat as the players kneeling.  I need to try to be better about that, I am not sure I know how, but I will try to make some changes.

[NFLfan]

30 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

You know, thank you for saying that and I am not being sarcastic.  I have often wondered if my posting style has come across as angry or being mad, which in all honesty I'm not.  I apologize for that, it is not my intent, but I fear that my message is being lost because I am coming across as angry.  I am then in the same boat as the players kneeling.  I need to try to be better about that, I am not sure I know how, but I will try to make some changes.

 

I am the same way. On the Vikings site that I follow, one guy told me yesterday that he finds that I seem to always find fault with him. I told him that I appreciated his telling me that so that I could be more mindful of that. I had not realize that. 

 

I do sound angry at times, when I really am not. I wish my posting style was more like that of @2006Coltsbestever. Did you see his comment in that Anthem thread? He has a way of making his point without upsetting either side (at least on the threads I have seen). I don't think that is easy to do. 

 

I commend you. I think the forum had some good discussions today. Thank you. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

I am the same way. On the Vikings site that I follow, one guy told me yesterday that he finds that I seem to always find fault with him. I told him that I appreciated his telling me that so that I could be more mindful of that. I had not realize that. 

 

I do sound angry at times, when I really am not. I wish my posting style was more like that of @2006Coltsbestever. Did you see his comment in that Anthem thread? He has a way of making his point without upsetting either side (at least on the threads I have seen). I don't think that is easy to do. 

 

I commend you. I think the forum had some good discussions today. Thank you. 

I am just sly and have a way with words . Just messing with you, thanks for the kind words.

[Myles]

I'm torn on this.  

Positives:

I like adults to have the freedom to make their own choice, even if it is poor.

I'll like to have the option to bet if and when I want.

 

Negatives:

It is ultimately not good for the population.   Very few win in the end.  Broken down, it is a transfer of funds from the people to the companies with a portion going to taxes.  People will use money they cannot afford to use.  Go to a casino during the day.   The average person stuffing their money into the slots cannot afford it.   I'm not really worried about myself.  It's not really my thing.  

 

It gives players/coaches/managers more and easier access to betting.   No good can come from that.

The conspiracy theories will be constant.  Every time a team covers from a late score, someone will complain.  

 

I don't like watching games with people who are rooting for a team they don't like just because they have money bet on them to win.  

 

 

 

[DougDew]

I have not read the entire thread so pardon me if this has been said.

 

The NFL is losing its fan base.....in America at least.

 

Fantasy football has masked it, and now sports betting will too.   The stats reflecting revenue, money, etc, will increase, but it will come from a narrowing base.  Many of the fans who watch the games, will be the same who play fantasy football, and bet on games. 

 

Each of these fans will provide the NFL more revenue, but the fan base will get narrower and narrower.

 

Somebody will quote how the NFL's product is growing, when in fact its shrinking.  Its just being skewed by introducing more products that a dwindling number of users will use more often.

[jvan1973]

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

I have not read the entire thread so pardon me if this has been said.

 

The NFL is losing its fan base.....in America at least.

 

Fantasy football has masked it, and now sports betting will too.   The stats reflecting revenue, money, etc, will increase, but it will come from a narrowing base.  Many of the fans who watch the games, will be the same who play fantasy football, and bet on games. 

 

Each of these fans will provide the NFL more revenue, but the fan base will get narrower and narrower.

 

Somebody will quote how the NFL's product is growing, when in fact its shrinking.  Its just being skewed by introducing more products that a dwindling number of users will use more often.

Why would sports betting,   which already exists,  narrow the fan base?  I would like to see anything that can back that up

[PrincetonTiger]

The are 2 solutions one can

 

    Don’t Partake

 

    Talk to your Representative 

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Why would sports betting,   which already exists,  narrow the fan base?  I would like to see anything that can back that up

Sports betting wont cause narrowing.  If I said that I miswrote.  I think the fan base is narrowing by itself for a number of reasons.

 

I think that sports betting will increase the revenue "applicable" to the NFL.  So someone just looking at dollars isn't going to see that the people who spend money on sports betting are probably also the ones playing fantasy football.  While money spent on the NFL might increase, the number of fans may not.  Its just the same number of people spending more money on a new product.

 

Revenue goes up, but the number of fans might continue to narrow.  And for the NFL. just like any company, the number of customers getting smaller (as a percentage of customers available) is a problem.

 

I have nothing to back that up.  Its just theory.

 

[crestmount]

On 5/20/2018 at 11:07 AM, PrincetonTiger said:

Since the leagues offices were not located in Vegas and wanted to do with an illegal business they couldn’t but now that things have changed 

  IMO

   Sponsorship and Team Licensing go hand in hand

Here in Australia, nearly every sport is sponsored to some extent by a gambling organisation, as well as specific clubs.  TV broadcasts see us constantly bombarded by gambling advertising in any breaks.  While in cricket there have been serious issues from gambling--it's usually at the level below the top, and with an unlimited number of options to bet on, the opportunities for corruption are endless.  One former player told of how he was confronted by a bloke who lost $50k because of him--the guy had bet that he would concede less than a certain number of runs in an over, and he conceded 1 more than that number--the player's response was, "who would be that stupid to bet that much on a sporting event?"

[PrincetonTiger]

15 minutes ago, crestmount said:

Here in Australia, nearly every sport is sponsored to some extent by a gambling organisation, as well as specific clubs.  TV broadcasts see us constantly bombarded by gambling advertising in any breaks.  While in cricket there have been serious issues from gambling--it's usually at the level below the top, and with an unlimited number of options to bet on, the opportunities for corruption are endless.  One former player told of how he was confronted by a bloke who lost $50k because of him--the guy had bet that he would concede less than a certain number of runs in an over, and he conceded 1 more than that number--the player's response was, "who would be that stupid to bet that much on a sporting event?"

Very true

    The game day ads here are filled with alcohol mumbojumbo and Fantasy stuff but I rarely watch ads since I watch football games the same way I watched game film

   I think the gambler you mentioned needs to find a new hobby

[crestmount]

And suddenly, just as I suggested that the potential for corruption is at the level just below the top, we have a report coming out today involving a test match between Australia and Sri Lanka in 2016 (Test matches are the highest level games).  Supposedly, a large syndicate 'bribed' ground staff to 'doctor' the wicket, ensuring their bets regarding the match result would be successful.

 

Put simply, once you allow sports gambling, you do open up the potential for corruption--wherever there is money to be made, someone will come up with a means of beating the system. The reality is that gambling on sport will happen--the sporting organisations need to be able to exercise some control over the gambling--if the gambling organisations have the control, trouble will follow

 

Disclaimer: I was a huge gambler, which led to me becoming bankrupt some years ago. I don't gamble anymore (other than investing on the Stock Market), and I am not a supporter of gambling at all.

[PrincetonTiger]

7 hours ago, crestmount said:

And suddenly, just as I suggested that the potential for corruption is at the level just below the top, we have a report coming out today involving a test match between Australia and Sri Lanka in 2016 (Test matches are the highest level games).  Supposedly, a large syndicate 'bribed' ground staff to 'doctor' the wicket, ensuring their bets regarding the match result would be successful.

 

Put simply, once you allow sports gambling, you do open up the potential for corruption--wherever there is money to be made, someone will come up with a means of beating the system. The reality is that gambling on sport will happen--the sporting organisations need to be able to exercise some control over the gambling--if the gambling organisations have the control, trouble will follow

 

Disclaimer: I was a huge gambler, which led to me becoming bankrupt some years ago. I don't gamble anymore (other than investing on the Stock Market), and I am not a supporter of gambling at all.

Sports Gambling is not new and was legal in certain states

 

       This ruling took away a federal rule and gave the power to the states to decide(A Trend of the Roberts Court)

 

    Nearly every state has had some form of legal sports gambling(Horse Racing) for years 

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 5/26/2018 at 12:45 AM, crestmount said:

Here in Australia, nearly every sport is sponsored to some extent by a gambling organisation, as well as specific clubs.  TV broadcasts see us constantly bombarded by gambling advertising in any breaks.  While in cricket there have been serious issues from gambling--it's usually at the level below the top, and with an unlimited number of options to bet on, the opportunities for corruption are endless.  One former player told of how he was confronted by a bloke who lost $50k because of him--the guy had bet that he would concede less than a certain number of runs in an over, and he conceded 1 more than that number--the player's response was, "who would be that stupid to bet that much on a sporting event?"

 

I'm sorry, I'll have to go back a re-read your post.  I saw the two bolded parts above, and my mind departed to another place... the Amica cricket commercial...

 

 

Sorry for the threadjack. OK, back to starting over and reading your post.  :-)