It’s not unusual to analogize things happening in college sports and governance to the wild west. That’s especially true in recent years, when long held foundations of what college sports was and what its players were allowed to do and how schools aligned seemed to evaporate in a series of court cases and economic partnerships. So a lot of the rules about what you can and can’t do seem to be made up as we go.
But there are few places more third rail to college sports than the issues of sports gambling, one of the few cultural and economic constructs that can still cause considerable damage to the otherwise unflappable institution of big-time college sports. If we’re learned anything over the last few years, it’s that all the fears about losing fans in the age of name, image, and likeness were wholly unfounded. And longstanding conference rivalries are easily forgotten. But one bridge we haven’t, and probably won’t cross, is how to deal with college athletes and the increasingly pervasive world of sports gambling, an economic machine that’s crossed the Rubicon from Vegas sideshow and seedy underworld to a daily investment opportunity on your mobile device.
The NCAA is nibbling at the edges of the issue, at least from their recent decision to modify penalties given to student athletes who get caught playing the market. For example, if you get caught betting on a team from your own school, but not your sport, it’s now only a one-year suspension. Prior to that, you lost all your eligibility. And if you bet on your own sport but not for your team, you only lose half a season now. And gambling on something that’s neither your own sport or your own school is anything from losing 30% of a season to a slap on the wrist. Now, if you bet on your own games, it’s still game over. But looking more broadly at gambling and college athletes, the NCAA is definitely getting softer in its old age.
There is one thing the NCAA would like added – and that’s banning so-called prop-bets, where gamblers can wager on one play tied to one player. Like, will someone score over 20 points. That puts undue strain on an athlete who, by definition, isn’t getting paid for their services. It also opens the door wide open for bribes and outside influence. The NCAA and it’s commissioner Charlie Baker also want a stronger national policy on college sports gambling, perhaps a minimum age and some alignment on rules. Right now, sports gaming is legal in over half of all states, which means the law may change drastically by simply driving over a bridge. Whether that’s feasible in a landscape where federal policies are hard to come by is anyone’s guess. But the NCAA understands it’s staring at an issue that might make sign stealing feel like child’s play.
There is a lot to unpackage when it comes to college sports and gambling, when everyone basically has a mobile casino in their pocket and the idea of a campus bookie is as antiquated as a fake ID made out of a photo and a giant piece of poster board painted like a drivers license. One the one hand, it’s pretty clear the bright lines haven’t changed. Gambling on your own games is an existential crisis to college or any other sports. And college athletes will always be far, far more vulnerable than any professional. But what’s more translucent is how to deal with athletes betting on games that aren’t their own, especially on their own campus. Or perhaps having their friend bet for them. College students both have strong influence over their peers and are notorious for making bad decisions. Which is why trying to ebb or even understand the collective gambling behaviors of 500 athletes together on one campus is probably more than the gambling commission bargained for.
And of course, this all operates in a petri dish where we’ve unleashed the powers and potential of unlimited sports gambling at your fingertips, performing one heck of a psychology experiment in real time. So while the NCAA is trying to figure out the best way to roll back draconian penalties on college students doing what pretty much every commercial in the country incentivizes us to do, this is a far more uphill battle than a legislative adjustment.
I’m guessing this isn’t going to be solved anytime soon, and we’ll see more problems than solutions. Such is always the case in the wild west.
Keith Strudler is the director of the School of Communication and Media at Montclair State University. You can follow him at @KeithStrudler
The views expressed by commentators are solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of this station or its management.