Player benching viewed in world with gambling?

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

6 years ago

I was reading this and thought, that's a good point.

As I got to the bottom of the article I was thinking, why does gambling matter? Why should the NFL or any league have to change their disclosure policies to accommodate gambling?

After all, when you gamble, you are assuming risk. Are you not? If leagues are going to be forced to alternate anything to accommodate gambling, then I would rather gambling being outlawed permanently.

This part (one of several) that stuck out to me as absurd.

"Teams eventually may have to publish binding depth charts within, say, 48 hours before kickoff."

A lot can happen in 48 hours. What if the player falls in the shower, breaks their leg? Are you subjected to a penalty if the doctors x-ray doesn't show a significant enough break?

I am fine with those who want to risk their money. Its your own life, do whatever you wish, but to have things change to accommodate those risking their money is wrong.

What do you feel about this article and its point?

Here’s a great question that emerged in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision to allow legalized sports wagering in the 49 states that don’t have it: If Patriots coach Bill Belichick had planned to bench starting cornerback Malcolm Butler for the entirety of a Super Bowl (with the exception of one special-teams play) in an environment with widespread legal gambling, would Belichick have been able to keep that to himself?

The people who legally (in Nevada) and illegally (everywhere else) bet on the Patriots to cover in Super Bowl LII surely were miffed and perplexed that Butler didn’t play. If hundreds of millions of dollars legally had been bet on the Patriots and Belichick had made such an unexpected move for reasons that he chose (as he always does) to keep to himself, the reaction may have been far different.

This is just one of the many issues that NFL will have to consider as it braces for the unintended consequences of something that, on the surface, will result in much greater revenue for the sport. And it will be important for the league to anticipate the many unintended consequences and plan for them.

Continue reading @ProFootballTalk

Mike Florio wrote:

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

nerdmann
Premier Member

6 years ago

Because it goes to the integrity of the game.

For example, let’s say your star quarterback has a secret habit of sexually harassing female massage therapists. This may put him at risk of being blackmailed to throw horrible INTs in the playoffs.

Organized crime reaches deep. I mean look at the DPI rules, and what constitutes a catch. We already have officials determining the outcome of games.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

beast
Select Member

6 years ago

You got to give priorities to these things, and I think the final priority has to go to the team... which means if Bill does that kind of thing, then I think he has full right to do it... though I think he might have to explain it to the NFL (and they'll just look into it, and say it was alright and legal for Bill to do (because 1) It was, and 2) the NFL lies for themselves even if something isn't alright).

As far as betting would go, I would have a bigger problem with the purposely tanking like the Bucs seemed to do to lock up the 1st overall pick (which was used on QB Jameis Winston)...

And other teams have been accused of doing more of lately (even if that wasn't the case).

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

6 years ago

Originally Posted by: beast

No, absolutely, NO! The priority goes to the league and how their teams want to disclose their own information. If you want to be a fool and gamble, YOU assume 100% of the risk. Money is such a bullshit thing.

beast
Select Member

6 years ago

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Um, you just rudely said no... then very much agreed with what I was trying to saying... 😕

They only thing I said differently was the NFL would probably add a BS fake ass review board for PR reasons... the review board wouldn't actually be doing anything... just pretend to investigate and then give the NFL approve... sorta like all the other NFL fake investigations. So they would pretend to go investigate why Bill did it, and a couple of weeks later they'll give their seal of approval (in pretty much ever case)... sorta like all the other NFL fake investigations.

The Biggest Problem(s) the NFL Might Have

1) The interpretation of the rules (ie, is it a catch? Is it not a catch?)

2) When the NFL decides to not even follow their own written rules.

~ There was talk that the NFL didn't follow their current in place catch rules for the Super Bowl when doing NYC GameDay Central "booth" reviews, and where instead implying their new rules to it, before the new rule was even officially in place.

And I argued that late in the season that the NYC GameDay Central "booth" reviews seemed to be ignoring their own rule book. So I think the NYC "booth" lead by the head ref was going by a different rule book than the official one.

A Possible Players Problem

At one point the NFL got seriously fine crazy about big hits on ST units, trying to curve ST injuries via fines (which totally didn't work, but NFL likes trying poor management ideas).

But anyways, I noticed that if the announcer verbally pointed you out or even said your name, or talked about your hit... it was basically an automatic fine. Even if the big hit look pretty legal, they still got the fine when ever the announce talked about a big hit.

Interestingly, there were some bigger clearly illegal hits further away from the play, that the announcer didn't talk about and they were never given fines for those, because they didn't get airtime (which is how I think the NFL was halfway giving out fines... if anyone announcers or other teams, pointed out big hits, they gave them fines.)

My point being, the NFL could (stupidly) go back to very questionable fining practices, if/when the public/gambling places starts complaining more.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

6 years ago

Um, you just rudely said no... then very much agreed with what I was trying to saying... 😕

Originally Posted by: beast

The "rude" no was to giving priority to gambling over the leagues. I inferred that to mean leagues need to disclose more information to appease the betting community. Am I wrong with my inferrance?

beast
Select Member

6 years ago

You got to give priorities to these things, and I think the final priority has to go to the team... which means if Bill does that kind of thing, then I think he has full right to do it... though I think he might have to explain it to the NFL (and they'll just look into it, and say it was alright and legal for Bill to do (because 1) It was, and 2) the NFL lies for themselves even if something isn't alright).

Originally Posted by: beast

The "rude" no was to giving priority to gambling over the leagues. I inferred that to mean leagues need to disclose more information to appease the betting community. Am I wrong with my inferrance?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

It depends... I want to say, yes, you're mistaken with your inference... but it depends on how you interpret certain actions. Let's see if I can explain what I meant better and see you're thoughts. OR to save time, read the recap at the bottom

The "rude" no was to giving priority to gambling over the leagues.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I said giving priority to the teams, which I meant giving priority to the leagues over gambling (gambling needs the leagues a lot more than the leagues need gambling)

I inferred that to mean leagues need to disclose more information to appease the betting community.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Nope, I was suggesting the the league would probably set up a fake ass investigation committee or group or etc, to pretend to give a rats' ass about what their teams do and how it effects gambling...

Not because the league needs to... but because the league is huge into PR and pretending like they're taking a matter serious, when in reality it's mostly PR bullshiting...

So for example, if Bill sat Butler with no warning, then gambling people might get upset and this fake ass investigation committee will investigate, annoying the hell out of Bill for a few weeks and then sooner or later find that there is nothing to see here, you don't got to go home, but you can't stay here... because the NFL is doing their job perfectly bullshit.

So no, not because the NFL needs to... but because the NFL wants to
1) Pretend like they care
2) Pretend like they can be unbiased when monitor themselves

But the reality being, that it's nothing but PR and lies... and if they ever did find something, that they'd attempt to sweep it under the rug, just like they attempted to do with Spygate (and every other controversy)...

Recap
You're saying NO to the NFL caring about and changing for gambling.

I'm saying I think the NFL is going to FAKE caring and changing for gambling, but in reality there will be no real caring/change (at least not until the NFL gets caught in some betting scandal that they can't ignore)

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

6 years ago

I apologize for my misunderstanding. I am just very ardent that the leagues (regardless of sport) do not change anything to accommodate those risking their money. If you wanna put $100 on a team winning a game and they bench someone that you later feel cost that team a victory, tough titties. No one should have to jump through hoops for people who wish to gamble their money.

beast
Select Member

6 years ago

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I agree with that... the thing I think the NFL needs to fix (for all fans and ethics, not for gambling) is to have all the reviews following the NFL rulebook, which I'm still upset about because I feel pretty sure that the NFL/NYC headquarters review did not do at times last year... and both former NFL Head of Officiating seem to agree with me, as they publically spoke out how they couldn't figure out they made some of their calls because it went against the rulebook.

That needs to be fixed no matter what...

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (14-Feb) : Packers are hiring Luke Getsy as senior offensive assistant.

Martha Careful (12-Feb) : I would love to have them both, esp. Crosby, but either might be too expensive.

Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : Keisean Nixon is trying to get Maxx Crosby and Davante Adams lol

Mucky Tundra (11-Feb) : Yeah where did it go?

packerfanoutwest (11-Feb) : or did you resctrict access to that topic?

packerfanoutwest (11-Feb) : why did you remove the Playoff topic?

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : Tua’s old DC won a Super Bowl Year 1 with Tua’s former backup

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : *winning MVP

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : Funny observation I've heard: Carson Wentz was on the sideline for both Eagles Super Bowl wins w/guys supposed to be his back up winning

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : NFL thought it would get more attention week preceding Super Bowl.

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : Yes, the Pro Bowl. It was played Sunday before Super Bowl from 2010-2022

packerfanoutwest (10-Feb) : pro bowl

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : From 2010 to 2022, it was played on the Sunday before the Super Bowl

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : They moved it to the BYE week before Super Bowl several years ago.

packerfanoutwest (10-Feb) : it was always after the SB.....

beast (10-Feb) : Though I stop following pro bowl years ago

beast (10-Feb) : I thought the pro game was before the Super Bowl?

packerfanoutwest (10-Feb) : ok now for the Pro Bowl Game in Hawaii

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : If I was Philly I would try to end it instead of punting it

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : VICTORY! We have (moral) victory!

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : Hey they mentioned that we 3-peted

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : seems to me the 49ers should have traded Aiyuk when they had the chance

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : if the Eagles get it down to the 1, do they Tush Push or give it to Barkley?

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : 49ers have a money problem if they want to sign their QB

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : Wait for real? Didn't he just get an extension two years ago?

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : 49ers gonna trade Deebo. Interesting

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : Replays always never seem to show the holdings

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : Great throw by Hurts

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : Where Carter falls prey to bad off the field influences (to be clear, not saying he'd clip someone though)

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : Had Carter not gone to Philly were they already had a lot of old college friends, he ends up in a similar spot to Aaron Hernandez

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : I think some of his coaches told scouts to stay away

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : the street racing incident+conditioning and motivation problems

beast (10-Feb) : Then Carter was street racing, where the other car crashed and people died... and other teams were scared to pick Carter for some reason

beast (10-Feb) : I think the Saints traded up, giving their next year 1st to the Eagles, and then they sucked and Eagles got the 10th overall pick

packerfanoutwest (10-Feb) : wtf Barkley?

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : Getting Carter and Nolan Smith in the first round in 2023 was pretty darn good

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : for some reason i'm thinking of a draft where the Eagles where in the mid 20s and a top player fell all the way to them

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : I think so. I would need to look it up. Think it may have been Carolina's pick.

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : i'm not sure who i'm thinking of now

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : oh fuck me i messed that up

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : Jordan Davis was 13th overall

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : Carter was 9th overall

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : Eagles had 15th and 10th selections, moved to 13 and 9 to get Davis and Carter back to back

Zero2Cool (10-Feb) : Eagles traded up for Carter, didn't they?

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : Obviously he was a huge risk but getting a top 5 talent on the dline in the mid 20s is fortuitous

Mucky Tundra (10-Feb) : Jalen Carter falling into their lap certainly helps

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : And we could only wish to have this type of D

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : It's not like Philly has had low draft picks, but has managed to get themselves a top notch pass rush. We spend so much draft capital of D

packerfanoutwest (10-Feb) : another crap halftime show

TheKanataThrilla (10-Feb) : I think it is over, but then I think of Atlanta and want Philly to go in with the same intensity in the second half

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22