Mike Farrell Sports

College Football Recruiting, Opinion, and Analysis

Sorry, Charlie, You’ll Never Be Able to Fully Ban Player Props

NCAA President Charlie Baker is trying to stop an ugly losing streak for the governing body.

Pin

By Rock Westfall 

NCAA President Charlie Baker is trying to stop the governing body’s ugly losing streak. Baker is pushing for a ban on prop bets involving college players. He cited concerns about the increased pressure and harassment on student-athletes because of legalized gambling. 

Baker’s Proposed Idea: A Reaction to an NBA Incident  

Charlie Baker is calling for a ban on college prop (proposition) bets in states with legal sports wagering. An example of a prop bet would be an over/under on how many touchdowns an individual player will total in a game.

“Sports betting issues are on the rise across the country with prop bets continuing to threaten the integrity and competition and leading to student-athletes and professional athletes getting harassed. The NCAA has been working with states to deal with these threats, and many are responding by banning college prop bets,” Baker said in a statement.

His request comes after an ESPN report broke this week in which the NBA is looking into betting irregularities involving Raptors forward Jontay Porter. Specifically, there were two games in which prop bets on Porter were the two biggest winners on the NBA prop bets board on those dates. Both times, Porter left the game early, ensuring the under won on the prop bets. NBA data scientists flagged the incidents and an investigation has followed. 

More Sports News

Well-Intentioned Baker Takes on a Sports Gambling Industry that Masters in End Runs

No group of people on Earth is more resourceful and clever than sports bettors and bookmakers. With this, Charlie Baker’s idea, even if adopted, won’t change much.

Although not nearly as prevalent as in the past, underground/street bookies still take bets, and many gamblers like to use them for price-shopping purposes. Smart gamblers know that getting the best possible price helps in the long run against the 10 percent “juice” on most bets. Street bookies are not regulated and won’t observe any bans on prop betting.

Perhaps an even larger factor is offshore bookmakers. While also illegal, many gamblers have used them for the past two decades. Sports bettors have kept their offshore gambling accounts open even as many states have legalized sports wagering. Again, offshore bookmakers are used by gamblers who are shopping for the best possible line or potential hedges. The offshore books will certainly continue to offer college sports props.

The best lesson on the ingenuity of gamblers and sportsbooks comes from October 16, 2006, when President George W. Bush signed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. 

Amazingly, the bill had the opposite effect of its intended purpose. The act helped the sports betting industry flourish and rapidly grow by creating numerous alternative payment methods that eventually evolved into cryptocurrency.

As the saying goes, “Nobody beats the House.” Charlie Baker would be well-advised to take heed and fold his hand.  

https://twitter.com/SportsLawLust/status/1773436487003955294

Regardless, Players Will Feel Pressure & Be Subjected to Hate and Threats 

For one moment, let’s enter Fantasy Island and play along with Baker. Let us assume there is a total absence of prop betting on individual college players. That does little, if anything, to stop the pressure on players and the potential to receive communications of hate or threats.

Incidents such as a kicker missing a game-winning field goal, a basketball player missing a potential game-winning shot or free throw, a baseball player striking out with the bases loaded in the College World Series, etc., will decide non-prop bets and trigger those with losing wagers whether Baker’s proposed ban passes or not.

Most gamblers are not as concerned about prop bets as they are with more conventional team-oriented wagers. Baker’s proposal would have a minimal effect even if it were universally enforced.

And What About Player’s Rights & Compensation? 

Most of the media gushed in approval of Baker’s proposal. But this is the same media that enthusiastically squeals with delight about the current player rights imbalance that is helping to kill college sports as we know them. Indeed, we have quite a contradiction.

ESPN, FOX, and all television partners now have strong ties with sports gambling. ESPN Bet is a massive project launched by the self-proclaimed “Worldwide Leader in Sports.” And FOX has an ongoing option to acquire 18.6% of FanDuel. Beyond that, there are numerous advertising and related partnerships that the two key college football networks have for sports gambling.

Thus, if Baker had his way, the two largest college football network partner’s revenue would drop, which would mean less money available for potential player payments. Additionally, gambling helps fuel the NIL fire by creating massive interest and related possible revenue for games and players that would otherwise not exist.

Thus, if you are for player’s rights, you must support props betting. Especially if you are a realist that knows it can never be fully contained. 

Baker’s Time Would Be Better Spent on Bigger Fish  

The NCAA continues to be in a Wild West era regarding its own reformation or replacement, transfers, player compensation, revenue disparity, an out-of-control schedule, and the potential of more conference realignment, if not outright nuclear war.

Charlie Baker made a nice, well-meaning gesture. But it is a naïve posture born of wishful thinking. It is not reality-based.

Baker would be well advised to fish for sharks instead of guppies. 

Category: , Tag: ,
Pin

You’ll Also Like