A national college football injury rprt may be coming soon if Big10 ADs get their way

[Padreruf]

Yep - it keeps honest people honest and protects the integrity of the sport.

Protects whose integrity and for whom? Not the athlete...nor the school...only for the gambling industry and those foolish enough to believe that they can beat the system. Those hotels in LV are not built because people win more than they lose.

Legalized gambling will be an interesting journey for our sports industry...better than back room bookies? Who knows?

[RedWave]

Just report that everyone is healthy and expected to play. Then if they don't, you're not required to divulge why a player didn't play - unless the NCAA is going to impose penalties on programs that don't report injuries? Really? Since it sounds absurd, probably. But what about this: since the State of Alabama will likely never approve betting on any level, why should UA have to report injuries for people living in NY or NJ who want to make bets against them?

I don't wager on anything, especially the performance of college aged kids following a Friday night. If people are crazy enough to stake a portion of their income bases upon how college kids play a game, then they're obviously willing to lose that wagered money - and rightfully so. This is just another step toward bringing the college game more in line with the NFL.

Better yet, just report the entire team as questionable and be done with it. I am pretty sure there was an NFL coach who used to do that on occasion.

Whatever weaknesses or vulnerabilities that we have as a team, I can't possibly fathom why I would have any interest in revealing that to my opponent," Washington State coach Mike Leach told USA Today in January.

I tend to agree with Coach Leach on this one.

[RedWave]

Protects whose integrity and for whom? Not the athlete...nor the school...only for the gambling industry and those foolish enough to believe that they can beat the system. Those hotels in LV are not built because people win more than they lose.Legalized gambling will be an interesting journey for our sports industry...better than back room bookies? Who knows?

You realize that LV sets the line to try to get equal betting on both sides, right? I mean you are exactly correct that they are always going to set things up to where they will win, but they do not want a situation in which one team is bet more heavily than the other. It places them at great financial risk. What they want is both sides to be bet equally, then they just get the fees on all the bets. In table games and such, though, you are completely correct. Almost all of them are set up statistically to win for the house in the end if you play the game an infinite number of times.

[B1GTide]

Edited - maybe this is not still a problem. I don't bet on sports, so have no idea. But I would guess that there would be a "market" for injury information. But if that market exists, does extending the betting to more states really change anything? I just don't know.

[Redwood Forrest]

Well....it is called gambling....

Wow. Like the headphone count this is just plain silly. If I have a player hurt Monday I will wait until Friday when he comes up "lame." Major or Minor violation?

The whole world seems to have gone into the FEEL GOOD mode making rule after rule of unenforceable or won't enforce rules. Geeze.

[UntouchableCrew]

Better yet, just report the entire team as questionable and be done with it. I am pretty sure there was an NFL coach who used to do that on occasion.

It's pretty much what Bill Belichick does. Anyone who isn't 100% healthy is "questionable."

[RedWave]

Edited - maybe this is not still a problem. I don't bet on sports, so have no idea. But I would guess that there would be a "market" for injury information. But if that market exists, does extending the betting to more states really change anything? I just don't know.

It really doesn't change much at all. The betting was always there, but was more of the dirty little secret that everyone knew but didn't acknowledge. With the exception of the odd flyer Johnny Lunchbox makes on the Super Bowl now and then, I doubt there will be a huge increase in how much gambling people do because of this new law (or removal of a law). They will just be doing it through legal channels now instead of illegal bookies. The states will get their cut of the action, and life will move on. The market for the injury information will be more for the line setters' benefit than anything else. Remember, they want equal betting on both sides, so this will help them get that. Come to think of it, I might not want to be a bookie in the state of Alabama once it goes legal(though I doubt it will...only state around still without a lottery because they live in the stone age). People in Alabama are already football crazy, and if they decide to bet on football, you know many are going to bet on Alabama no matter who they are playing or the spread. When the line is high enough that the Bama betters lose, you would do well. But when Bama goes over, you would lose your shirt.

[rgw]

Who gives a crap about the bettors? If they affect the game, there's already an issue that needs to be addressed. If it's about people being able to make 'better' bets. Screw them. I couldn't care any less.

I don't see any benefit for the collegiate athlete.

I think the issue they seek to address is the corruption that will come with insider information in sports betting by just making it all above the board info.

[TomFromBama]

I guess I don't know all the legal subtleties - so take this suggestion with a grain of salt - but SEC competition isn't a requirement for the player. The conferences possess the power to disqualify players who will not waive their HIPAA protections in the interest of fairness in competition. Schools possess the right to not retain an athletic scholarship for those who do not participate in the majority of their sport's season despite being healthy. Seems like a solved problem other than the PR problem from the hardball being played by the schools.

Uh - what's "Fair" about forcing minors to surrender legal protections, so BOOKIES and GAMBLERS can make more money?

Make No Mistake - this has NOTHING to do with "fairness" of the game and EVERYTHING to do with appeasing the "smart money" gamblers and major casino's/book-makers in Vegas.

[TomFromBama]

It is about avoiding the possibility of undisclosed injuries resulting in betting improprieties. People on the medical or coaching staff could be tempted to sell that sort of information when there is betting involved.

Ok, well if the "evil" to be prevented is "insider trading" or selling injury info, then ban insider trading, selling injury info, and betting based on ill-gotten info. That's what they do on Wall Street - and people go to jail for divulging information improperly, and for using such information.

IMO, this is just a smoke-screen to appease the bookies in Las Vegas. This will do NOTHING to help athletes - despite all the braying of the nzaa about how they are "all about" the "student athlete"....

[rgw]

Uh - what's "Fair" about forcing minors to surrender legal protections, so BOOKIES and GAMBLERS can make more money?

Make No Mistake - this has NOTHING to do with "fairness" of the game and EVERYTHING to do with appeasing the "smart money" gamblers and major casino's/book-makers in Vegas.

Smart money is gonna get that info no matter what and I don't want my teams getting staffers and players leveraged by smart money because that is when the stupid stuff starts happening.

[RollTARDIS]

I think the issue they seek to address is the corruption that will come with insider information in sports betting by just making it all above the board info.

That is exactly it. And it should be done.

[crimsonaudio]

I think the issue they seek to address is the corruption that will come with insider information in sports betting by just making it all above the board info.

Because that's never been an issue before?

LOL

Basically, if the B1G is for something, it's probably stupid.