UPDATE: Two Colts players suspended for gambling, waived by team (merged)

[csmopar]

2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

It doesn't say if he took the over or the under

Doesn’t matter. He still bet on his own team and teammate.  Honestly, I’d be perfectly fine with a life time ban just based on what we currently know

[GoColts8818]

5 hours ago, smittywerb said:

 

Right here it says it: https://deadspin.com/isaiah-rodgers-nfl-gambling-indianapolis-colts-1850592796https://deadspin.com/isaiah-rodgers-nfl-gambling-indianapolis-colts-1850592796

 

Sorry, I didn’t want see him go but betting against your own teammate?  I get it, have to set the tone.

It doesn’t say if he took the over or under.  It says he bet on an over or under.

33 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Doesn’t matter. He still bet on his own team and teammate.  Honestly, I’d be perfectly fine with a life time ban just based on what we currently know

And I said in my post I was fine with what the Colts did so that wasn’t an issue.

[csmopar]

2 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I doesn’t say if he took the over or under.  It says he bet on an over or under.

And I said in my post I was fine with what the Colts did so that wasn’t an issue.

Colts rightfully cut him. But I think the league needs to keep the hammer down. Send a message as this wasn’t just a simple o

didnt understand the rules thing, he deliberately schemed to try and get around them

[jvan1973]

34 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Doesn’t matter. He still bet on his own team and teammate.  Honestly, I’d be perfectly fine with a life time ban just based on what we currently know

Lifetime ban seems pretty harsh for a league littered with players who have committed sexual assault and domestic battery

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

Colts rightfully cut him. But I think the league needs to keep the hammer down. Send a message as this wasn’t just a simple o

didnt understand the rules thing, he deliberately schemed to try and get around them

That’s a fine opinion to have but it had nothing to do with the sub conversation that was going on that you jumped into.  I was very careful to say in my first response rather he bet for or against his own team doesn’t change that what he did was wrong.  I was just simply pointing out it hasn’t come out that bet one of his teammates to fail yet as another poster claimed.  
 

I’ll say again just to be clear.  Rather he bet for his teammate to hit the over and he bet against his teammate to hit the under is not relevant to if this was right or wrong.   

[2006Coltsbestever]

My take remains the same on gambling. As long as you don't bet on your team to lose and play in that game to determine an outcome, I could give a Roosters fart if a player wants to gamble. Betting on your team to lose and playing in that game is obviously terrible and ruins the integrity of the game. 

 

Because of league rules, players are not supposed to bet on NFL games period. That is the rule so if I played, I would not risk it.  Players that do, will pay the price.

[GoColts8818]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

My take remains the same on gambling. As long as you don't bet on your team to lose and play in that game to determine an outcome, I could give a Roosters fart if a player wants to gamble. Betting on your team to lose and playing in that game is obviously terrible and ruins the integrity of the game. 

 

Because of league rules, players are not supposed to bet on NFL games period. That is the rule so if I played, I would not risk it.  Players that do, will pay the price.

Yep rather we agree with the rule or not it’s still a rule and the NFL has made it pretty clear they aren’t playing on it.

[csmopar]

3 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Lifetime ban seems pretty harsh for a league littered with players who have committed sexual assault and domestic battery

Well I’m also on record saying those offenses should equate to a life time ban as well. 

3 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

That’s a fine opinion to have but it had nothing to do with the sub conversation that was going on that you jumped into.  I was very careful to say in my first response rather he bet for or against his own team doesn’t change that what he did was wrong.  I was just simply pointing out it hasn’t come out that bet one of his teammates to fail yet as another poster claimed.  
 

I’ll say again just to be clear.  Rather he bet for his teammate to hit the over and he bet against his teammate to hit the under is not relevant to if this was right or wrong.   

I was agreeing with your position on that. I am of the same opinion

[jvan1973]

11 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Well I’m also on record saying those offenses should equate to a life time ban as well. 

 

But. Unfortunately they don't.   

[BlackTiger]

5 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Lifetime ban seems pretty harsh for a league littered with players who have committed sexual assault and domestic battery

Some of them deserve life too but didnt get it.  that doesnt mean they should ease up on gambling on your team mates, it means they need to be harsher on that

[AwesomeAustin]

6 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Lifetime ban seems pretty harsh for a league littered with players who have committed sexual assault and domestic battery

I see what you are saying. I really do and you are right in so many ways.  However, what you are referencing is a morality and legal issue and gambling is a business decision about making millions if not billions of dollars. I get it seems very contradictory but they are separate.
 

The league is playing with fire getting into bed with gambling but I understand bc there is too much money to be made. Eventually there will be a major scandal involving players, coaches or refs and this will all blow up. Honestly, I think it already is happening with insider information being spread. Someone will take a payoff and it will come out. 

[csmopar]

3 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

But. Unfortunately they don't.   

But that doesn’t mean they should over look other areas it just means they need to be tougher there too. The two are not codependent on each other

[LJpalmbeacher2]

7 hours ago, csmopar said:

Doesn’t matter. He still bet on his own team and teammate.  Honestly, I’d be perfectly fine with a life time ban just based on what we currently know

 

Maybe even the Electric chair. 

[King Colt]

So he gets paid zero for the year? If so. how will that amount compare to his total gambling winnings if any?

[CoachLite]

1 hour ago, AwesomeAustin said:

I see what you are saying. I really do and you are right in so many ways.  However, what you are referencing is a morality and legal issue and gambling is a business decision about making millions if not billions of dollars. I get it seems very contradictory but they are separate.
 

The league is playing with fire getting into bed with gambling but I understand bc there is too much money to be made. Eventually there will be a major scandal involving players, coaches or refs and this will all blow up. Honestly, I think it already is happening with insider information being spread. Someone will take a payoff and it will come out. 

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

[csmopar]

1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Maybe even the Electric chair. 

No that should be reserved for rapist, child molesters and murderers. 

[csmopar]

38 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

I don’t think anyone disagrees there. I don’t think they ever should have opened that box. But they did and the players have to follow the rules AND laws about it. 
 

Lost in all of this is there is in fact an ongoing criminal investigation by the gaming commission into Rodgers, his troubles may not be over yet. Whether or not charges stem from that investigation will be more telling as they’ll have to release more details when/if they charge him

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, CoachLite said:

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

It's not only a moral hazard for the integrity of the game (which a lot of people (including myself) thought was rigged in certain ways anyway), but it opens up a new can of worms for NFL players with gambling addiction that now have access to gamble with inside information that the public doesn't. The NFL really screwed up here by teaming up with the sportsbooks IMO.

 

I don't think this second wave will be the last of it.

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, CoachLite said:

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

 

  The players are welcome to gamble. With a few basic limits.

[smittywerb]

11 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

It doesn’t say if he took the over or under.  It says he bet on an over or under.

 

well, with the way we were playing I’d put my bet on the over that he definitely betted the under lol

[AwesomeAustin]

3 hours ago, CoachLite said:

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

Yes.  Bartenders and servers promote drinking but aren’t allowed to drink on the clock. Convenient store clerks promote lottery but can’t buy it themselves while working.  If those people can follow the rules for minimum wage, football players can follow the rules for much more money. Don’t gamble at work…don’t bet on the nfl. It’s really not asking much. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

On 6/29/2023 at 1:51 PM, Superman said:

 

The truth is that Tom Brady would not gamble on NFL games. 

 

We don't know that for sure BUT we do know he does have ball boys Deflate his footballs. 

[Superman]

On 7/1/2023 at 2:55 PM, CoachLite said:

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

 

People keep pointing out this so-called hypocrisy by the league. I guess the argument is that the NFL wants its share of the many billions of dollars that are spent gambling on football, so that makes the NFL greedy...? 

 

Is this what you're referring to when you speak of a moral hazard?

[Nickster]

On 7/1/2023 at 5:55 PM, CoachLite said:

So, is it OK for the league to actively promote gambling among all other people, but not the players? The NFL has created a moral hazard for itself.

It’s not a violation for NFL players to gamble unless it’s on the NFL.  It’s not a policy of morality.  It’s pragmatism.

 

It would boggle my mind to find out someone didn’t understand why the penalties are so harsh when NFL players gamble on the NFL.

 

 

[King Colt]

How many betting websites are there?

[jvan1973]

35 minutes ago, Nickster said:

It’s not a violation for NFL players to gamble unless it’s on the NFL.  It’s not a policy of morality.  It’s pragmatism.

 

It would boggle my mind to find out someone didn’t understand why the penalties are so harsh when NFL players gamble on the NFL.

 

 

Is it just the players and coaches that can't bet on the NFL?  How about training staff,  janitors, accounts payable etc?

[VikingsFanInChennai]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

Is it just the players and coaches that can't bet on the NFL?  How about training staff,  janitors, accounts payable etc?

NFL probably monitors anyone employed by the league or any of the franchises in a variety of ways just like the location tracking of bettors in team facilities or name look-up of any of these employees 

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Is it just the players and coaches that can't bet on the NFL?  How about training staff,  janitors, accounts payable etc?

No I don’t believe janitors are part of the policy.  I guess they could  make the locker room really slick and injure a player which could effect the outcome of the game,

 

[jvan1973]

31 minutes ago, Nickster said:

No I don’t believe janitors are part of the policy.  I guess they could  make the locker room really slick and injure a player which could effect the outcome of the game,

 

Or they could know who is healthy and who isn't before the public.    How about the folks that clean their uniforms?  Can they bet , when they know the player is not dressing days before the rest of the world? 

 

I know you think Gif really cemented your take.   It didn't

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

Or they could know who is healthy and who isn't before the public.    How about the folks that clean their uniforms?  Can they bet , when they know the player is not dressing days before the rest of the world? 

 

I know you think Gif really cemented your take.   It didn't

 

 

 

 

take cemented

[Nickster]

Hey everyone @jvan1973 can’t figure out why the NFL doesn’t want players and coaches betting on NFL games.

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Nickster said:

Hey everyone @jvan1973 can’t figure out why the NFL doesn’t want players and coaches betting on NFL games..   Ots

It's so funny and ridiculous .  Imagine if those players gave inside information to your mom (amongst others)

[Nickster]

4 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

It's so funny and ridiculous .  Imagine if those players gave inside information to your mom (amongst others)

Dude you have some goofy takes but you MUST be intentionally obtuse on this one.

 

good god son.

 

[AKB]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

 

People keep pointing out this so-called hypocrisy by the league. I guess the argument is that the NFL wants its share of the many billions of dollars that are spent gambling on football, so that makes the NFL greedy...? 

 

Is this what you're referring to when you speak of a moral hazard?

"Do as I say, and not as I do"

 

I think that's the point he's making. 

 

It's like students in a middle school being told that smoking cigarettes is bad, but the school advertises discount cigarettes over the PA speaker after the pledge of allegiance. 

 

It's in your face, but don't touch it. 

 

--> counterargument is that we aren't talking about children we are talking about "grown" men with more money than they have ever had. In a sense, they do become children again because its a new way of life. from not having money to having more than you know what to do with. it's an easy trap to fall into.

 

i don't think his behavior is excusable, but there are many young stars that fall into some type of addiction fueled by extra cash. not limited to football. 

 

[Nickster]

4 minutes ago, AKB said:

"Do as I say, and not as I do"

 

I think that's the point he's making. 

 

It's like students in a middle school being told that smoking cigarettes is bad, but the school advertises discount cigarettes over the PA speaker after the pledge of allegiance. 

 

It's in your face, but don't touch it. 

 

--> counterargument is that we aren't talking about children we are talking about "grown" men with more money than they have ever had. In a sense, they do become children again because its a new way of life. from not having money to having more than you know what to do with. it's an easy trap to fall into.

 

i don't think his behavior is excusable, but there are many young stars that fall into some type of addiction fueled by extra cash. not limited to football. 

 

They just can’t bet on the NFL.  And if they are so addicted to gambling that they can’t keep from gambling on NFL games and just gamble on every other possible thing i the multiverse, it’s not the league’s problem.

 

In baseball they used to have notices in all locker rooms about lifetime bans for betting on baseball games.

 

the penalties aren’t nearly as important punitively for the individual, they are to be deterrences all players.  You bet on baseball and get caught then you are done.  Full stop.  
 

it’s clear and fair and necessary IMO.

 

I don’t care about morals for the sake of morality because I don’t even believe in morality.  I do think however that rules are necessary for order amongst our species.

 

You just must have Draconian policies to deter betting on the league that you play in IMO to maintain some integrity in the game.

 

But that’s pretty obvious I think.  It’s real duh to me

[AKB]

2 minutes ago, Nickster said:

They just can’t bet on the NFL.  And if they are so addicted to gambling that they can’t keep from gambling on NFL games and just gamble on every other possible thing i the multiverse, it’s not the league’s problem.

 

In baseball they used to have notices in all locker rooms about lifetime bans for betting on baseball games.

 

the penalties aren’t nearly as important punitively for the individual, they are to be deterrences all players.  You bet on baseball and get caught then you are done.  Full stop.  
 

it’s clear and fair and necessary IMO.

 

I don’t care about morals for the sake of morality because I don’t even believe in morality.  I do think however that rules are necessary for order amongst our species.

 

You just must have Draconian policies to deter betting on the league that you play in IMO to maintain some integrity in the game.

 

But that’s pretty obvious I think.  It’s real duh to me

nothing you are saying is wrong, IMO. outside of morality existing, but that's probably a conversation for a different time. 

 

anyhow, I guess the specific point is that it's bound to happen. right? I mean you have young men, extra money, and a league that feeds off of gambling, and gambling advertising. 

 

what can go wrong, will go wrong. so when you have conditions set to promote these behaviors, I suppose that's where the moral dilemma lies. is the league doing enough to educate the players? should the league be sponsored by gambling sites if they ban it in their league? 

 

it's not a cut-and-dry answer where you just shun the player and move on, that's the easy thing to do. of course, they all made mistakes, and of course, they all knew it was against the rules. the question is, does the league share any responsibility? 

[Nickster]

11 minutes ago, AKB said:

nothing you are saying is wrong, IMO. outside of morality existing, but that's probably a conversation for a different time. 

 

anyhow, I guess the specific point is that it's bound to happen. right? I mean you have young men, extra money, and a league that feeds off of gambling, and gambling advertising. 

 

what can go wrong, will go wrong. so when you have conditions set to promote these behaviors, I suppose that's where the moral dilemma lies. is the league doing enough to educate the players? should the league be sponsored by gambling sites if they ban it in their league? 

 

it's not a cut-and-dry answer where you just shun the player and move on, that's the easy thing to do. of course, they all made mistakes, and of course, they all knew it was against the rules. the question is, does the league share any responsibility? 

Yes morality for another time lol.

 

See I just don’t think that the league shares ANY responsibility.  The players are not prohibited from gambling. They can gamble on anything but the league.

 

The league is not responsible for individual weakness of will power.  As a matter of fact the Draconian gambling rules recognize individual weakness of will and this policy is likely the most effective way to minimize players betting on NFL games.

 

If a pharmacist was caught pinching fentanyl he would lose his license.  He works in an environment that has fentanyl.  That sells fentanyl.  That promotes it to certain degree.  Are they responsible if the addicted pharmacist uses?  Of course they aren’t.

[Nickster]

31 minutes ago, AKB said:

nothing you are saying is wrong, IMO. outside of morality existing, but that's probably a conversation for a different time. 

 

anyhow, I guess the specific point is that it's bound to happen. right? I mean you have young men, extra money, and a league that feeds off of gambling, and gambling advertising. 

 

what can go wrong, will go wrong. so when you have conditions set to promote these behaviors, I suppose that's where the moral dilemma lies. is the league doing enough to educate the players? should the league be sponsored by gambling sites if they ban it in their league? 

 

it's not a cut-and-dry answer where you just shun the player and move on, that's the easy thing to do. of course, they all made mistakes, and of course, they all knew it was against the rules. the question is, does the league share any responsibility? 

I think it’s cut and dry man.  What education is there? That doesn’t seem to fit here.

hey if you bet on the NFL you will not be playing in it,

 

there lesson taught.  Education complete.

 

almost every job that I can think of has prohibited stuff that if caught doing the employment employee would be fired.

 

Seriously man, why the kid gloves?

 

Dont touch the stove.  You do you get burnt.  End of lesson.

[AKB]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

I think it’s cut and dry man.  What education is there? That doesn’t seem to fit here.

hey if you bet on the NFL you will not be playing in it,

 

there lesson taught.  Education complete.

 

almost every job that I can think of has prohibited stuff that if caught doing the employment employee would be fired.

 

Seriously man, why the kid gloves?

 

Dont touch the stove.  You do you get burnt.  End of lesson.

yeah its a hard point to argue for sure. because the default is, don't be an *. 

 

just an unfortunate situation overall

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Like I said somewhere earlier, of course its not a good look for NFL if players bet(even though Russo says owners and Goodell do?) BUT the penalty doesn't fit the violation. Being suspended for a year or indefinitely his way too harsh. Thats too severe for most players and hurts the teams too. 

 

Imo, the penalties should depend on how much they bet. If the Aggregate Bets are say $1000 or less for a week(which is peanuts for these guys, even those earning rookie minimum) then the fines/penalty should be minor. 

If their bets are much more, then heavier punishment, especially if not their first heavy bets. 

Most people Gamble for Fun, win or lose, and seriously doubt a player making small bets will go out of his way to try to influence his tiny wager becoming a winning one. 

The NFL is definitely more guilty of other, bigger  things that lower the integrity of their game, but yet the NFL is still popular ironically because of gambling.