I’ve been told that BYU is going to allow back door betting. Apparently, it’s a loophole.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
CU becomes first NCAA school to partner with sports betting company
- Thread starter Jens1893
- Start date
Porn Hub Stadium at Folsom Field has a great ring to it!
I'm not directing this comment directly at you, but it's the prefect launching point for my thoughts on the subject.
Slippery slope arguments are bull**** IMO.
That's what logic tells me.
But the not logical part tells me that mixing amateur athletics and gambling is a bad idea - mostly for slippery slope reasons.
Which are bull****.
And I keep having to remind myself of that.
But that's the thing, anytime I "keep reminding myself" that something that "feels" wrong isn't logically wrong, I wonder if I'm talking myself into an inherently unethical position...
Just another angsty gen x guy I guess...
The Brazzers Rooftop is going to be lit
Gambling on amateur athletics is already a massive industry, the only difference is that CU’s amateur athletic department is now going to financially benefit from it.
There you go with the logic again.
Here's the thing with the "legitimate vice" industries (and yes, this is pretty much what hokie referenced earlier with the lottery comment): a very large portion of their revenue is derived from the people for whom that particular vice is a destructive addiction.
Basically, the vice industries would, in general, not be profitable if not for the business of the people whose lives are being destroyed by their addiction.
A large enough proportion of the gambling industry's revenues are derived from "people with gambling problems" that they would not be profitable without them. Enough of the liquor industry's revenues are derived from alcoholics that they wouldn't be profitable without them. Etc, etc.
The vast majority of drinkers are not alcoholics, and the vast majority of gamblers are not "problem gamblers" - but without those "customers" the business models fail to produce a profit.
So, yes, they do derive their profits from the people who are weakest (at least weakest in that particular dimension), and consequently, there is reason for ethical organizations to avoid partnerships with them, despite the potential "profits."
You'll note that I'm not arguing these industries should be illegal.
What I am saying is that one should be circumspect in accepting their money.
Oh see, where we differ is that you believe public universities are “ethical organizations”.
Amateur athletics, specifically CFB and CBB, are two of the most corrupt and unethical sports/leagues/entities in the world, and I am continually shocked that people believe differently.
Come on now. If you think CFB and CBB are two of the most unethical entities in the world you need to expand your horizons.
I'm not excusing college sports but come on.
"are" vs "should be"
Eh, perhaps some hyperbole using “entity” as a generic term, but within the sports and entertainment industry, they are. Between concussion issues, recruiting scandals, cheating, paying players, not paying players, rape/sexual assault coverups, institutional failures, etc.
I just read this morning that CU is actually not the first School to ink this kind of deal. Nevada and UNLV have similar deals (makes sense) a few years ago.
We can argue whether its ethical or not, but I can almost guarantee in the next 5-10 years that this will be prevalent throughout division 1 sports. As schek mentioned, colleges and college athletic departments are not ethical at all. They literally prey on amateurism for their betterment.
We can argue whether its ethical or not, but I can almost guarantee in the next 5-10 years that this will be prevalent throughout division 1 sports. As schek mentioned, colleges and college athletic departments are not ethical at all. They literally prey on amateurism for their betterment.
Wasn't long ago that we couldn't buy beer at CU football and basketball games. Not only has that changed, but there's an officially licensed beer using Ralphie in its branding.
Now gambling has opened up a new "sin product" revenue source.
So, the university AD embraced alcohol affiliation in connection with its sports teams which are mostly comprised of people too young to legally drink booze.
Now has embraced sports gambling sponsorship.
Doesn't bother me at all. I think most people are bothered because of what they've been socialized to react to as inappropriate.
But look at other cultures. There are betting windows inside Wembley Stadium. Sports in the UK are just fine and their society is doing just fine. Likewise, it's the drinking age in the US that's stupid. 18 year olds are considered adults in this country. Beyond that, those college students drink and everyone knows it. I'd bet that the vast majority of people drink more during their college years than at any other time in their lives. People of that age being able to legally purchase booze is the norm in pretty much the entire world.
These things aren't inappropriate. It's just a socialized perception most Americans have -- and we like to justify those perceptions by saying we need to protect our youth. Protect them from what? Basically, the things that have been parts of some of the best times in our lives (i.e., booze, drugs, sex, gambling, etc.). I like that CU is acknowledging that drinking beer and placing bets on sports is normal behavior most of us do. It's not CU encouraging it. It's CU accepting sponsorship money from products for which its fans are already among the biggest consumers. Bravo!
Now take this money and buy us a championship!
Last edited:
This deal's type of gambling might end up not being much different from playing the lottery in this state. I was just more concerned about the perception of CU but I forgot that CU thing about breaking new ground. My reaction was more to where I stand on the moral compass which doesn't align with many people.
But on the other side: Suppose the proceeds of those fees for placing a bet went to athletic scholarships? Especially if the fees (again not knowing all the details) are capped.
I think the Feds are getting close to reclassifying pot on the drug schedule and that could mean CU "blazes" another trail soon. I have hemp lotion at home and it's awesome.
House to vote on removing cannabis from list of controlled substances
The House will vote on legislation next month to remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act and erase some marijuana criminal records. The bill would not legalize the drug, which would…
thehill.com
Mostly agree. Minor disagreement about UK. Not because of gambling partnerships for sure, but not unrelated to gambling: a great many EPL matches are fixed. I don’t think of that as fine.
It’s a comprehensive licensing structure so that Colorado can get paid and they can use CU’s logo as an official partner across several of their gaming platforms.
Thanks. That's not what the article made it sound like at all.
**** you and your logic.
You're actually really close to my position - and I keep telling myself that the reason this "feels wrong" to me is the "socialized to react" part.
As an aside, I think the "protect our youth" when it comes to college age kids is dumb <<full stop>>.
And again, I have no qualms with the existence of legalized "sin" or "vice" industries - on net, I think it's beneficial for society. I'm a customer of
But I recognize that the real profits of those enterprises come from those with addictions, which inextricably means that those industries are "profiting from people's addictions." I personally generally try and avoid making my own money that way.
OTOH, I want my team to win, and if this helps that, well... certain qualms can be overlooked.
You have issues.
If the office pool doesn’t collect a vig, it is not illegal.
somebody
Well-Known Member
Arizona has a specific social gambling exclusion, but from what I can tell, Wisconsin e.g. does not. I think it's jurisdictional, not blanket as you suggest.
Many members of this board are of an age that that they remember illegal (mob driven) sports gambling being involved with some of the biggest "fix" scandals in college sports. For years, a member of the FBI would come in on one of the first days of camp for CFB and CBB to discuss with teams the downfalls of associating yourself with the "wrong" people. The point shaving scandal at ASU from decades ago was always used as a cautionary tale. Many articles were written about the slimebalms that would rope in these college kids, and then make it apparent that their Mob associates would intervene if they didn't perform on the field/court as required. No professional teams were allowed to be in Vegas until recently out of fear that the game would be corrupted. This is the lens by which I view these decisions, thus tainting my perception of the relationship between college athletics and gambling.
Sports gambling is now a broadly legal business, and it is highly regulated, thereby making supervised and transparent transactions the norm. Instead of back room cash transactions, we have highly traceable electronic transactions. With this, we also now have companies trying to gain market share of an industry that will continue to explode for years to come, and become even more regulated as a result. It is hard for me to personally make the mental transition from the "past" to today while evaluating this decision by CU, but the fact of the matter is that College sports always closely trail professional sports. We have franchises in Vegas now. We have official sports books of the NFL teams. CU is not taking a vigilante path in all of this. I believe there is too much money to be shared in this business, and sports organizations will be especially careful so as to protect its impact as a result.
Sports gambling is now a broadly legal business, and it is highly regulated, thereby making supervised and transparent transactions the norm. Instead of back room cash transactions, we have highly traceable electronic transactions. With this, we also now have companies trying to gain market share of an industry that will continue to explode for years to come, and become even more regulated as a result. It is hard for me to personally make the mental transition from the "past" to today while evaluating this decision by CU, but the fact of the matter is that College sports always closely trail professional sports. We have franchises in Vegas now. We have official sports books of the NFL teams. CU is not taking a vigilante path in all of this. I believe there is too much money to be shared in this business, and sports organizations will be especially careful so as to protect its impact as a result.
Will be interesting to see what the yearly income is on this deal. I am guessing we won't fully know exactly what it is, but will be interesting to see what type of revenue benefit the AD sees from this and how they choose to use that money. This also could be the start of a licensing deal for the stadium.
Last edited:
Since the AD rolls up under a public institution, how are the financials able to not be disclosed? Is it because the AD isn't publicly funded?
It will be. I am just thinking the School won't have a public statement about the details. I am guessing someone will have to dig to find the actual figures.
The overall revenues and expenses are disclosed, but I would think it would be possible to simply slide anything from this arrangement into a “sponsorships” sub category on the P&L and leave the exact amount ambiguous.
Or they could choose to break out the revenues as a separate line item. To my knowledge, there’s nothing that requires the AD to disclose where every dollar comes from.