Gambling supsensions (1 Viewer)

[pinkstapler]

At this point, if I were the NFL, I'd just say they can't gamble at all on anything. That's simple enough right? Yet, somehow I feel like that ruling would get just as much, if not more, backlash. So I think the arguments based largely upon rules being seemingly convoluted are disingenuous. They are inherently convoluted because they are trying to be "reasonable" and meet the players halfway. Not saying there isn't a better solution. But at the same time, be careful what you wish for. Otherwise you get the good old scenario where you and your brother are fighting over how Nintendo playing time is split up and before you know it, neither of you are playing.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

A dude filling in for Ben Mallar tonight (didn’t catch his name) on my drive home made a good point.

People complain that there’s hypocrisy because the NFL is sponsored by/in bed with draft kings, sports books, etc.

But no one ever cries hypocrisy when players get DUIs, even though the NFL is sponsored by / in bed with alcohol companies - Bacardi, Budweiser, etc

It’s a good point.

No it's not.

The dangers of drinking and driving is well understood by virtually everyone.

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Worse, the policy, however arbitrary, was poorly disseminated. It is shocking how few current NFL players could correctly answer "did you know you could bet on sports?" or "did you know team facilities includes hotels stayed in when playing a road game?". That alone should be enough to demonstrate the players did not understand the policy before the Jamo & co suspensions.

The player in the hotel is on company time, which means company rules.

All the rest is about supposedly poor communication.
I think that has been "fixed".

Kinda like if someone was drinking on the job.

This ain’t ‘Nam, Smokie, mark it zero.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Yes, but the issue of gambling while employed by a sports team is clearly understood by everyone.

That there are vagaries with where players can gamble is secondary to the fact that every player knows they can’t gamble on their own sport.

So it’s actually a very good point.

It clearly isn’t understood by everyone. Because the policy is neither logical nor simple to explain.

So as an NFL player I could bet on college basketball sitting in my car one block from the team hotel. But if I bet on college basketball while sitting in my room in the team hotel, I violated the rules.

Yeah. Super clear. I’m sure that was understood by everyone.

In the latest instance that it’s a year-long suspension has everyone speculating that they bet on football, and likely their own team.

That should be well understood by anyone with a pulse.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Yes, but the issue of gambling while employed by a sports team is clearly understood by everyone.

That there are vagaries with where players can gamble is secondary to the fact that every player knows they can’t gamble on their own sport.

So it’s actually a very good point.

It clearly isn’t understood by everyone. Because the policy is neither logical nor simple to explain.

So as an NFL player I could bet on college basketball sitting in my car one block from the team hotel. But if I bet on college basketball while sitting in my room in the team hotel, I violated the rules.

Yeah. Super clear. I’m sure that was understood by everyone.

In the latest instance that it’s a year-long suspension has everyone speculating that they bet on football, and likely their own team.

That should be well understood by anyone with a pulse.

And there is another latest incident that involves a dude betting on non-NFL games from the team hotel, and getting a 6 games suspension. No logical person would think that makes sense.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

At this point, if I were the NFL, I'd just say they can't gamble at all on anything. That's simple enough right? Yet, somehow I feel like that ruling would get just as much, if not more, backlash. So I think the arguments based largely upon rules being seemingly convoluted are disingenuous. They are inherently convoluted because they are trying to be "reasonable" and meet the players halfway. Not saying there isn't a better solution. But at the same time, be careful what you wish for. Otherwise you get the good old scenario where you and your brother are fighting over how Nintendo playing time is split up and before you know it, neither of you are playing.

Don’t bet on the NFL.

Bet on anything else you want.

Simple.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I like how any lack of rules awareness is considered to be obviously the NFL's fault. Because, you know, no one has ever not paid full attention at a workplace meeting.

Have you read the NFL’s material used to explain the policy to the players? Florio of PFT has written extensively about how unclear the NFL was about the policy details.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

NFL:"We can't have the perception of impropriety!"
Also NFL: "Let's build Sportsbook casinos right outside every stadium to get more of that sweet sweet gambling money!"

They don't have to go outside. State Farm stadium which hosted the last superbowl has a betting window that opened last fall. There is a Fanatics sportsbook inside FedEx field. MGM Resorts is the "Official Gaming Partner" of the LV Raiders and has a betting lounge inside Allegiant Stadium (will host the next Superbowl in Feb 2024.)

The "integrity of the game" argument is a ridiculous joke.

 

[eighsse2]

I like how any lack of rules awareness is considered to be obviously the NFL's fault. Because, you know, no one has ever not paid full attention at a workplace meeting.

Have you read the NFL’s material used to explain the policy to the players? Florio of PFT has written extensively about how unclear the NFL was about the policy details.

To be fair, no I haven't.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Don’t bet on the NFL.

Bet on anything else you want.

Simple.

Tell that to Jamo his first 6 games this year.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Yes, but the issue of gambling while employed by a sports team is clearly understood by everyone.

That there are vagaries with where players can gamble is secondary to the fact that every player knows they can’t gamble on their own sport.

So it’s actually a very good point.

It clearly isn’t understood by everyone. Because the policy is neither logical nor simple to explain.

So as an NFL player I could bet on college basketball sitting in my car one block from the team hotel. But if I bet on college basketball while sitting in my room in the team hotel, I violated the rules.

Yeah. Super clear. I’m sure that was understood by everyone.

In the latest instance that it’s a year-long suspension has everyone speculating that they bet on football, and likely their own team.

That should be well understood by anyone with a pulse.

And there is another latest incident that involves a dude betting on non-NFL games from the team hotel, and getting a 6 games suspension. No logical person would think that makes sense.

Some logical people might

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

NFL:"We can't have the perception of impropriety!"
Also NFL: "Let's build Sportsbook casinos right outside every stadium to get more of that sweet sweet gambling money!"

They don't have to go outside. State Farm stadium which hosted the last superbowl has a betting window that opened last fall. There is a Fanatics sportsbook inside FedEx field. MGM Resorts is the "Official Gaming Partner" of the LV Raiders and has a betting lounge inside Allegiant Stadium (will host the next Superbowl in Feb 2024.)

The "integrity of the game" argument is a ridiculous joke.

I’m pretty sure those are intended for event attendees, not players though.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Yes, but the issue of gambling while employed by a sports team is clearly understood by everyone.

That there are vagaries with where players can gamble is secondary to the fact that every player knows they can’t gamble on their own sport.

So it’s actually a very good point.

It clearly isn’t understood by everyone. Because the policy is neither logical nor simple to explain.

So as an NFL player I could bet on college basketball sitting in my car one block from the team hotel. But if I bet on college basketball while sitting in my room in the team hotel, I violated the rules.

Yeah. Super clear. I’m sure that was understood by everyone.

In the latest instance that it’s a year-long suspension has everyone speculating that they bet on football, and likely their own team.

That should be well understood by anyone with a pulse.

And there is another latest incident that involves a dude betting on non-NFL games from the team hotel, and getting a 6 games suspension. No logical person would think that makes sense.

Some logical people might

Some people might, for sure. But not logical people.

Edit to add: based on track record, it’s already evident that you’re dug in on this position and nothing anyone says will likely matter

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Don’t bet on the NFL.

Bet on anything else you want.

Simple.

Tell that to Jamo his first 6 games this year.

I’m not saying that IS the policy. I’m saying a) that would be a logical policy, b) and it would be simple to explain and execute

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Yes, but the issue of gambling while employed by a sports team is clearly understood by everyone.

That there are vagaries with where players can gamble is secondary to the fact that every player knows they can’t gamble on their own sport.

So it’s actually a very good point.

It clearly isn’t understood by everyone. Because the policy is neither logical nor simple to explain.

So as an NFL player I could bet on college basketball sitting in my car one block from the team hotel. But if I bet on college basketball while sitting in my room in the team hotel, I violated the rules.

Yeah. Super clear. I’m sure that was understood by everyone.

In the latest instance that it’s a year-long suspension has everyone speculating that they bet on football, and likely their own team.

That should be well understood by anyone with a pulse.

And there is another latest incident that involves a dude betting on non-NFL games from the team hotel, and getting a 6 games suspension. No logical person would think that makes sense.

Some logical people might

Some people might, for sure. But not logical people.

Edit to add: based on track record, it’s already evident that you’re dug in on this position and nothing anyone says will likely matter

Not dug in at all. Interesting projection.

I’m just in agreement with that radio dude that the accusation of hypocrisy is bogus. The policy is consistent with players who get DUIs, while the NFL has alcohol sponsors.

It doesn’t seem that complicated.

interesting that you double down on the same “no true Scotsman” logical fallacy though.

Honestly it’s not a hill I need to die on. Players are informed of the rules. Gambling at all as a pro athlete seems highly questionable to me. If they break the rules, they get punished for it.

The NFL and NFLPA agreed to the rules. It is what it is.

Also worth noting, I’ve mentioned the ambiguity in here before and agreed that it could be more clear, so your projection is inaccurate.

 

[opensourcebeer]

Zero need for the NFL to over complicate this. Change the rule to no betting on NFL games and call it a day.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Zero need for the NFL to over complicate this. Change the rule to no betting on NFL games and call it a day.

Or just no gambling for active players.

Then it doesn’t matter if they’re at the workplace or not.

Whatever it takes to eliminate the ambiguity.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The issue with a player betting on a college game while in a hotel is understood by no one.

Yes, but the issue of gambling while employed by a sports team is clearly understood by everyone.

That there are vagaries with where players can gamble is secondary to the fact that every player knows they can’t gamble on their own sport.

So it’s actually a very good point.

It clearly isn’t understood by everyone. Because the policy is neither logical nor simple to explain.

So as an NFL player I could bet on college basketball sitting in my car one block from the team hotel. But if I bet on college basketball while sitting in my room in the team hotel, I violated the rules.

Yeah. Super clear. I’m sure that was understood by everyone.

In the latest instance that it’s a year-long suspension has everyone speculating that they bet on football, and likely their own team.

That should be well understood by anyone with a pulse.

And there is another latest incident that involves a dude betting on non-NFL games from the team hotel, and getting a 6 games suspension. No logical person would think that makes sense.

Some logical people might

Some people might, for sure. But not logical people.

Edit to add: based on track record, it’s already evident that you’re dug in on this position and nothing anyone says will likely matter

Not dug in at all. Interesting projection.

I’m just in agreement with that radio dude that the accusation of hypocrisy is bogus. The policy is consistent with players who get DUIs, while the NFL has alcohol sponsors.

It doesn’t seem that complicated.

interesting that you double down on the same “no true Scotsman” logical fallacy though.

Honestly it’s not a hill I need to die on. Players are informed of the rules. Gambling at all as a pro athlete seems highly questionable to me. If they break the rules, they get punished for it.

The NFL and NFLPA agreed to the rules. It is what it is.

Also worth noting, I’ve mentioned the ambiguity in here before and agreed that it could be more clear, so your projection is inaccurate.

Fair enough.

 

[The Frankman]

The part that makes it worse to me the the inclusion of DFS. For people who remember FanDuel's old site (which had a Ustream-level chatbox and the site ran on frames), DFS sites and the NFL had spared no expense classifying those games as "not gambling"; it had been advertised that way for almost a decade. I rememebr the horrible ad blitz back in 2014-2015 and it was nonstop talked about as "a game of chance".

I guess things have evolved to a point NFL/DFS sites can change stuff since the contracts are signed everyone and everyone got their money.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I don’t know if anybody listens to the show with Lavar Arrington, TJ Houshmandzadeh, and Plaxico Burress, but they went into this discussion this morning, and they were pretty much spot on that every player knows you’re not supposed to gamble on football. Moreover, they were talking about “hustling backwards“ and that these guys were risking their entire career over $25, $50, up to maybe $1000 bets. And doing that while making 20 times that per week or more.

Super entertaining show if you haven’t listen to them. Recommended.

 

[ghostguy123]

A dude filling in for Ben Mallar tonight (didn’t catch his name) on my drive home made a good point.

People complain that there’s hypocrisy because the NFL is sponsored by/in bed with draft kings, sports books, etc.

But no one ever cries hypocrisy when players get DUIs, even though the NFL is sponsored by / in bed with alcohol companies - Bacardi, Budweiser, etc

It’s a good point.

The NFL doesn't issue DUIs
Not a very good point

 

[-OZ-]

A dude filling in for Ben Mallar tonight (didn’t catch his name) on my drive home made a good point.

People complain that there’s hypocrisy because the NFL is sponsored by/in bed with draft kings, sports books, etc.

But no one ever cries hypocrisy when players get DUIs, even though the NFL is sponsored by / in bed with alcohol companies - Bacardi, Budweiser, etc

It’s a good point.

The NFL doesn't issue DUIs
Not a very good point

DUIs put others at risk. Gambling on things outside of the person’s control, using legal sites, really doesn’t.
OTOH, the NFL doesn’t let their players smoke MJ even in legal states in their facilities or drink alcohol during games.
Charity is important here but one would think the players would have learned over the past year.

 

[ghostguy123]

A dude filling in for Ben Mallar tonight (didn’t catch his name) on my drive home made a good point.

People complain that there’s hypocrisy because the NFL is sponsored by/in bed with draft kings, sports books, etc.

But no one ever cries hypocrisy when players get DUIs, even though the NFL is sponsored by / in bed with alcohol companies - Bacardi, Budweiser, etc

It’s a good point.

The NFL doesn't issue DUIs
Not a very good point

DUIs put others at risk. Gambling on things outside of the person’s control, using legal sites, really doesn’t.
OTOH, the NFL doesn’t let their players smoke MJ even in legal states in their facilities or drink alcohol during games.
Charity is important here but one would think the players would have learned over the past year.

They don't care if players smoke weed anymore. Do they even test anymore? Once a year on a specified date?
Do they make players take breathalyzers every day?
Yet somehow now they are able to get info from players online gambling accounts.

The weed and alcohol rules seem easy enough to understand. The gambling rules were not in terms of the location of where they could do it.
I can easily see how players had no idea they were doing anything wrong by placing a soccer bet after practice while sitting in the parking lot.

Not a huge argument here, but I think we've all seen champagne and beer in the locker room after big wins. Just a fun fact

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

A dude filling in for Ben Mallar tonight (didn’t catch his name) on my drive home made a good point.

People complain that there’s hypocrisy because the NFL is sponsored by/in bed with draft kings, sports books, etc.

But no one ever cries hypocrisy when players get DUIs, even though the NFL is sponsored by / in bed with alcohol companies - Bacardi, Budweiser, etc

It’s a good point.

The NFL doesn't issue DUIs
Not a very good point

Breaking a rule is breaking a rule.

If a player is caught DUI they get suspended for breaking a rule.

They know the rules.

It’s a very good point.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Not a huge argument here, but I think we've all seen champagne and beer in the locker room after big wins. Just a fun fact

Not sure Champaign & beer after a Super Bowl win is analogous to getting a DUI, but ok

 

[ghostguy123]

Not a huge argument here, but I think we've all seen champagne and beer in the locker room after big wins. Just a fun fact

Not sure Champaign & beer after a Super Bowl win is analogous to getting a DUI, but ok

Didn't say it was.
People said can't drink in the facility. Apparently you can sometimes.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Didn't say it was.
People said can't drink in the facility. Apparently you can sometimes.

Apparently when the superbowl is over, so is the season & they make an exception to the rule?

I’m pretty sure they never make an exception to the “don’t gamble on your own team” rule though.

 

[ghostguy123]

Didn't say it was.
People said can't drink in the facility. Apparently you can sometimes.

Apparently when the superbowl is over, so is the season & they make an exception to the rule?

I’m pretty sure they never make an exception to the “don’t gamble on your own team” rule though.

Pretty sure they party after the afc/nfc championship games.
Also, not talking about gambling on NFL games.

 

[rockaction]

I've come around on this. I think, as stated and told to the players, that the rule is dumb. Betting at team facilities includes the hotel they're staying at?

I have issues with that. Especially if it's not on the NFL. These are grown men. They can either gamble online or they can't. I think they need a bright, very clearly delineated rule about that. You want to play in the NFL? Either don't gamble at all or, a lesser version of that, don't gamble on the NFL. Period. None of these distinctions about "I only bet on my team to win" or "I only bet on other teams." A. Bartlett Giamatti was brilliant with Rose and might have died early from the grief and anguish the decision gave him. But he did what was best for the game.

Bright, clean lines about no betting on the NFL. Easy peasy to understand and comport with.

Because I have absolutely no issues with losing your ability to ever play football professionally again if you bet on your team's game. That's a situation that's rife for abuse and the public will always think a guy is on the take should that happen. Ridley was the exception because it wasn't really that well understood. Beginning next year, all betting on your own team or NFL games should carry immediate expulsion from the league.

That's the only way to settle this, I fear.

I also have issues with the gambling partnerships the NFL has on general principle. They invited Pandora's Box right into their living room out of greed. Then they opened the box and danced with Pandora all damn night and into the morning. Disaster move based solely upon the lucre. So appalling in its greed that Johnny Rotten would be proud. "What a greedy little swindle. $8 billion isn't enough, Jerry?" (Say it in Rotten's accent).

 

[Leroy Hoard]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

 

[BassNBrew]

I've come around on this. I think, as stated and told to the players, that the rule is dumb. Betting at team facilities includes the hotel they're staying at?

I have issues with that. Especially if it's not on the NFL. These are grown men. They can either gamble online or they can't. I think they need a bright, very clearly delineated rule about that. You want to play in the NFL? Either don't gamble at all or, a lesser version of that, don't gamble on the NFL. Period. None of these distinctions about "I only bet on my team to win" or "I only bet on other teams." A. Bartlett Giamatti was brilliant with Rose and might have died early from the grief and anguish the decision gave him. But he did what was best for the game.

Bright, clean lines about no betting on the NFL. Easy peasy to understand and comport with.

Because I have absolutely no issues with losing your ability to ever play football professionally again if you bet on your team's game. That's a situation that's rife for abuse and the public will always think a guy is on the take should that happen. Ridley was the exception because it wasn't really that well understood. Beginning next year, all betting on your own team or NFL games should carry immediate expulsion from the league.

That's the only way to settle this, I fear.

I also have issues with the gambling partnerships the NFL has on general principle. They invited Pandora's Box right into their living room out of greed. Then they opened the box and danced with Pandora all damn night and into the morning. Disaster move based solely upon the lucre. So appalling in its greed that Johnny Rotten would be proud. "What a greedy little swindle. $8 billion isn't enough, Jerry?" (Say it in Rotten's accent).

Not really. Doubt they would be catching these players if they didn't have gambling partnerships.

 

[BassNBrew]

The part that makes it worse to me the the inclusion of DFS. For people who remember FanDuel's old site (which had a Ustream-level chatbox and the site ran on frames), DFS sites and the NFL had spared no expense classifying those games as "not gambling"; it had been advertised that way for almost a decade. I rememebr the horrible ad blitz back in 2014-2015 and it was nonstop talked about as "a game of chance".

I guess things have evolved to a point NFL/DFS sites can change stuff since the contracts are signed everyone and everyone got their money.

While I never agreed that it was a game mostly of skill, you can't give one person a 30 yard head start in a 40 yard dash.

 

[Deamon]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

 

[Snoopy]

There was an ad some time ago about NFL players picking players on their fantasy teams, then it came to Adam Vinitieri's team where he said "Just kickers, baby"

 

[Leroy Hoard]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

NFL players can play fantasy sports as long as the payout is below $250. I don't think a CB is going to risk his career and livelihood over that amount.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

NFL players can play fantasy sports as long as the payout is below $250. I don't think a CB is going to risk his career and livelihood over that amount.

250 total payout? And I thought my league was small change.

 

[Deamon]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

NFL players can play fantasy sports as long as the payout is below $250. I don't think a CB is going to risk his career and livelihood over that amount.

Wild, is this an actual rule?

 

[Wise Old Owl]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

NFL players can play fantasy sports as long as the payout is below $250. I don't think a CB is going to risk his career and livelihood over that amount.

Wild, is this an actual rule?

I've seen that number quotes by PFT a few times. Austin Ekler has mentioned a few times that he plays in leagues with either no cash or low buy-ins because of the rules. He plays mostly for bragging rights.

I think this is true for other stuff like poker as well. Players can play games for money if they are within very low limits.

 

[Gally]

At this point, if I were the NFL, I'd just say they can't gamble at all on anything. That's simple enough right? Yet, somehow I feel like that ruling would get just as much, if not more, backlash. So I think the arguments based largely upon rules being seemingly convoluted are disingenuous. They are inherently convoluted because they are trying to be "reasonable" and meet the players halfway. Not saying there isn't a better solution. But at the same time, be careful what you wish for. Otherwise you get the good old scenario where you and your brother are fighting over how Nintendo playing time is split up and before you know it, neither of you are playing.

Don’t bet on the NFL.

Bet on anything else you want.

Simple.

This risk of them betting on "anything else you want" is if they end up down $6M and the person they owe comes to them and says I will wipe that clean if you shave/throw a couple games it could lead to issues. Much easier to say you can't bet on anything. The NFL tried to be a little flexible but are probably better off if they just said no betting at all. Simple.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

At this point, if I were the NFL, I'd just say they can't gamble at all on anything. That's simple enough right? Yet, somehow I feel like that ruling would get just as much, if not more, backlash. So I think the arguments based largely upon rules being seemingly convoluted are disingenuous. They are inherently convoluted because they are trying to be "reasonable" and meet the players halfway. Not saying there isn't a better solution. But at the same time, be careful what you wish for. Otherwise you get the good old scenario where you and your brother are fighting over how Nintendo playing time is split up and before you know it, neither of you are playing.

Don’t bet on the NFL.

Bet on anything else you want.

Simple.

This risk of them betting on "anything else you want" is if they end up down $6M and the person they owe comes to them and says I will wipe that clean if you shave/throw a couple games it could lead to issues. Much easier to say you can't bet on anything. The NFL tried to be a little flexible but are probably better off if they just said no betting at all. Simple.

I’m fine either way. Just be clear and simple.

 

[Deamon]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

NFL players can play fantasy sports as long as the payout is below $250. I don't think a CB is going to risk his career and livelihood over that amount.

Wild, is this an actual rule?

I've seen that number quotes by PFT a few times. Austin Ekler has mentioned a few times that he plays in leagues with either no cash or low buy-ins because of the rules. He plays mostly for bragging rights.

I think this is true for other stuff like poker as well. Players can play games for money if they are within very low limits.

Aren't they allowed to play poker, go to casinos, bet on baseball, etc as long as it's not at the team facility?

 

[Mitchie]

So does anyone know the NFL's official position on players being involved in fantasy football leagues?

isn't that betting technically 'illegal' so wouldn't be breaking any rule/law about gambling.

So a CB can be lined up against a WR he has in his big money fantasy league and there is no problem.

NFL players can play fantasy sports as long as the payout is below $250. I don't think a CB is going to risk his career and livelihood over that amount.

Wild, is this an actual rule?

I've seen that number quotes by PFT a few times. Austin Ekler has mentioned a few times that he plays in leagues with either no cash or low buy-ins because of the rules. He plays mostly for bragging rights.

I think this is true for other stuff like poker as well. Players can play games for money if they are within very low limits.

Aren't they allowed to play poker, go to casinos, bet on baseball, etc as long as it's not at the team facility?

Doesn't seem to be a limit on that per se but there is this:

Gambling Debt: Any NFL Personnel who incurs gambling debt greater than $10,000 to any person or gambling-related enterprise shall promptly notify the NFL Security Department at (800) NFL1099.

So they'll be watching you closely.

 

[Snoopy]

Broncos DT Uwazurike suspended indefinitely for gambling on NFL games.

 

[zed2283]

I'm pretty sure Goodell just said during the pre-game that the NFL has to be in the sports betting space to protect the integrity of the game.

 

[Mister CIA]

I'm pretty sure Goodell just said during the pre-game that the NFL has to be in the sports betting space to protect the integrity of the game.

Court rulings made him do it.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Genius Sports, the NFL's official data distributor, on Tuesday unveiled the latest iteration in the United States' rapidly evolving sports betting market, a platform that for the first time will allow football fans to watch and bet on NFL games on the same screen on select sportsbook apps.

The product, known as BetVision, will feature a low-latency video feed of some regional games broadcasts and will include pop-up graphics with advanced stats such as catch probability, integrated betting odds and on-screen wagering offered during breaks. Customers will be able to place their bets on the same screen while watching the game, a first for American sportsbooks.

New product lets fans watch, bet NFL on 1 screen

A new product called BetVision will allow fans to watch and bet on NFL games on the same screen.

www.espn.com

 

[Wigglytuff's Gruff]

That sounds like a healthy product.

 

[rockaction]

They used to have this exact thing in advanced sports books back in the nineties. I lost money on the Raiders doing it.

You could bet on so many things. It was a veritable cornucopia of touch-screen betting.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

They used to have this exact thing in advanced sports books back in the nineties. I lost money on the Raiders doing it.

You could bet on so many things. It was a veritable cornucopia of touch-screen betting.

I think this is far different from what existed previously. This product is endorsed by the NFL and bundled with their branded official game broadcasts. A gambler with this app can watch a network broadcast of an NFL game and be prompted on screen to consider certain statistics and make certain bets. How long before network announcers are prompted to make specific predictions and forward-looking speculation to encourage action on one side or another? This is directed at unsophisticated casual bettors. It's like taking candy from a baby. For me, it is ridiculously hypocritical for the NFL to partner with this product, have betting windows in their stadiums and sell billions in advertising and tie-ins to sports betting companies while punishing their employees for gambling.

 

[jon_mx]

yeah sorry i have zero sympathy for the players here. these rules do not seem complicated.

Calling everywhere you are at while travelling for a road game "team facilities" is a bit complicated and confusing. It is not intuitive and is one of those fine print gotchas.