The NFL has created plenty of confusion by balancing a stream of “thou shalt nots” regarding gambling against “oh yes we shalt” when it comes to profiting from it. The confusion extends to ownership.
Consider this Super Bowl-week sound bite from Falcons owner Arthur Blank to Daniel Kaplan of FrontOfficeSports.com: “Once the Supreme Court made its decision, gambling is here. The league’s position on it has been: Protect the game at all costs, which obviously is absolutely critical. And all the ramifications of that in terms of club personnel, players, betting—I haven’t even walked into a casino [in Las Vegas this week]. I don’t want to be seen there. Theoretically, if I wanted to go to the slots I could—I’m not even sure. . . . But it is what it is. The league will be a participant, and they are a participant in all the economics that have come out of it. Hopefully, the league is being sensitive and promoting responsible betting, because we all know that some of these things can become addictions.”
Did you catch that line in the middle? If I wanted to go to the slots I could—I’m not even sure.
If the owners of the teams aren’t sure about what they can and can’t do, how can the players or other employees be expected to chart a path through an unforgiving minefield that puts livelihoods on the line?
Again, the NFL didn’t have to jump in bed with sports betting. It could have said, “Yes, it’s legal now, but we will continue to shun it.” It would have been much easier to make and to enforce the rules applicable to everyone, if the NFL had opted to continue its strong opposition to sports wagering.
No gambling, ever, while you work for the NFL or any of its teams, in any capacity.
The league has instead opted to profit from gambling and to allow owners to own up to five percent of any company that has sports betting operations while also having a convoluted list of do’s and don’ts aimed at protecting the integrity of the game.
It’s not just the actual…
..
