Originally Posted by comochiefsfan:
And people will somehow continue to be shocked when games appear to be “steered”.
Why? The league will make money on sports betting regardless of who wins or loses games or who covers the spread and who doesn't. There is absolutely no argument to be made where it is beneficial for the league to steer/rig/influence outcomes of games. Why take the risk of the whole league going down? They make money hand over fist regardless of who wins or loses.
If you want to argue that a rogue official or player is doing something to influence the outcome of a game or games for personal financial gain, I'm willing to listen, but to suggest a league mandated fixing/steering of games is just stupid. [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
Why? The league will make money on sports betting regardless of who wins or loses games or who covers the spread and who doesn't. There is absolutely no argument to be made where it is beneficial for the league to steer/rig/influence outcomes of games. Why take the risk of the whole league going down? They make money hand over fist regardless of who wins or loses.
If you want to argue that a rogue official or player is doing something to influence the outcome of a game or games for personal financial gain, I'm willing to listen, but to suggest a league mandated fixing/steering of games is just stupid.
No. You're stupid for thinking that. It happens far too often for there to be anything rogue about it... Plus, nobody needs you to be willing listen to them anyway. You actualy tried to tell me that Sammy Wakins is not injury prone. That right there should tell anyone all they need to know about anything that you have to say. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TEX:
No. You're stupid for thinking that. It happens far too often for there to be anything rogue about it... Plus, nobody needs you to be willing listen to them anyway. You actualy tried to tell me that Sammy Wakins is not injury prone. That right there should tell anyone all they need to know about anything that you have to say.
I laid out why it is stupid to believe in a league mandated scheme. If you disagree then state why instead of acting like a douchebag and talking about things not related to the subject. Or you can just go fuck yourself. Your choice. [Reply]
Originally Posted by LoneWolf:
Why? The league will make money on sports betting regardless of who wins or loses games or who covers the spread and who doesn't. There is absolutely no argument to be made where it is beneficial for the league to steer/rig/influence outcomes of games. Why take the risk of the whole league going down? They make money hand over fist regardless of who wins or loses.
If you want to argue that a rogue official or player is doing something to influence the outcome of a game or games for personal financial gain, I'm willing to listen, but to suggest a league mandated fixing/steering of games is just stupid.
What about a rogue owner(s)? I only bring it up because of the fact that Jones and Kraft have investments in Draft Kings.
Again,food for discussion because we've all wondered when it comes to the extreme wealthy,when is enough,enough.
Interesting to note in the article, that the NFL actually fought the matter all the way to the Supreme Court to prevent betting.
Originally Posted by :
The NFL has been a staunch opponent of sports betting for decades and remains concerned about its impact on the integrity of the game. The NFL fought New Jersey's efforts to offer Las Vegas-style sports betting all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In May, the Supreme Court ruled against the NFL and other major sports leagues and struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992, the federal statute that restricted state-sponsored sports betting to primarily Nevada.
Since the ruling, Delaware, Mississippi and New Jersey have opened sportsbooks.
This is just greedy owners wanting to make more money. They're doing it legally. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
Interesting to note in the article, that the NFL actually fought the matter all the way to the Supreme Court to prevent betting.
So what you're saying is that Bob "the Handyman" Kraft wants to keep betting illegal? Say it isn't so!!!! [Reply]
That 1.75 Billion split between 32 teams is almost 55 million per team. Split in half for the CBA means the cap gets a boost of over 27 million. That’s on the low end.
Just wait till the new TV contracts are negotiated with new players in the “live sporting events” space pushing those prices to astronomical new highs.
The cap is going to completely explode the next 5 years.
Smart teams are trying to get stars inked to long term deals now because after the new CBA is done, lots of teams are going to have nearly endless cap space and FA deals are going to become even more ridiculous. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball:
"Integrity of the game" :-) There is no fucking integrity only how much they can steer games to profit the most.
In other news, "The Outlaw Josey Wales" just started on TV. At least Clint has some integrity amirite? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
Interesting to note in the article, that the NFL actually fought the matter all the way to the Supreme Court to prevent betting.
Originally Posted by :
The NFL has been a staunch opponent of sports betting for decades and remains concerned about its impact on the integrity of the game.
So concerned they voted to move a team just minutes from The Vegas Strip. [Reply]
