🏈 So, do you think schools should be getting a cut off of sports wagering?

[TerryP]

I've not made up my mind on it yet. I see both sides to the discussion. There's one thing that hit me weird while reading over the news this morning.

Pitt AD: - Pitt AD Heather Lyke has proposed an integrity fee for schools (a cut of gambling profits to pay for increased compliance)​

​

Increased compliance? Integrity fee?

OK. I can understand "increased" if it meant the addition of extra personnel within the compliance department. But, what throws me is "integrity fee?" Is it me or does that read like "we should be rewarded for staying within the rules?"

I do think that Penn State's president has a point that may carry forward with a lot of states. It was just recently where Vegas casinos would take wagers on teams within the state of Nevada. There's a valid counter-point when others suggest people should be able to wager on their local teams because those monies stay within the state.

 

[XXL TideFan]

Unless the schools opt to run their own wagering site, the have no claim on anyone else's money

 

[TerryP]

Unless the schools opt to run their own wagering site, the have no claim on anyone else's money

That goes against what the NFL is thinking, right? After all they want a piece as do the other professional leagues.

I don't know if you missed it but I saw where Fan Duel has lent their name, so to speak, to one of the resorts in W. VA. I've not looked at the site in detail. I wonder what they'll be looking for in return--the W. VA's and VT's of that state.

 

[XXL TideFan]

The only thing that I could agree with is payment for licensing of trademark images and such. Anything else sounds like the mob or government. Gimme a cut or Vinny/Special Agent Vinny with cause you pain.

 

[BamaFan334]

Schools have no right to a secondary transaction not dealing with licensing. By that measure Justify needs his cut, as does American Pharoah, and so do the dice at the craps table, and cards at the poker table since they were all involved in the outcome. I mean, is it people's duty these days to drum up issues with everything and attempt to complicate life? Everyone always has their hand out and simply cannot let something be.

Go ahead and give the course 10% of that $20 you won off your friends last weekend, @TerryP ,

 

[TerryP]

The only thing that I could agree with is payment for licensing of trademark images and such.

Interesting point here and it's something I hadn't considered before. Take Covers.com's Odds to win the NC. It would make sense to me if they had to pay CLC to use the logo, but I don't know if they do. I suppose the question would fall into "are they making money off of use of the logo?"

 

[TerryP]

Go ahead and give the course 10% of that $20 you won off your friends last weekend,

$20? Geez, that's gone by the front nine when an Irish coffee is $6 and a Club sandwich is $10.

Schools have no right to a secondary transaction not dealing with licensing.

If NFL. MLB, and NBA franchises get a piece of the pie (early numbers I heard was a 1% cut) is there any legal reasoning behind a school getting their piece?

Are concessions, pouring rights, isotonic beverages, and merchandising (within BDS.) considered a secondary transaction considering they aren't operated by UA? UA is getting a cut, but it's coming from Learfield.

 

[BamaFan334]

Go ahead and give the course 10% of that $20 you won off your friends last weekend,

$20? Geez, that's gone by the front nine when an Irish coffee is $6 and a Club sandwich is $10.

Schools have no right to a secondary transaction not dealing with licensing.

If NFL. MLB, and NBA franchises get a piece of the pie (early numbers I heard was a 1% cut) is there any legal reasoning behind a school getting their piece?

Are concessions, pouring rights, isotonic beverages, and merchandising (within BDS.) considered a secondary transaction considering they aren't operated by UA? UA is getting a cut, but it's coming from Learfield.

Ha Ha, I hear you on the golf course prices. Turkey club is $10 around these parts and a beer is like $5.

Those transactions you're speaking of are being completed on Alabama property for an Alabama event, so I definitely feel Alabama deserves a piece of that considering they are the landlords and the school that is making the event possible. Does Alabama get a percent of the concessions when they hold high school state championship games there? Think of it this way, just say you won that $20 at the golf course, the IRS says you technically have to claim that as income. How asinine is that? So any time a bet is made with say a Clemson buddy (you being in Charleston), you think you should have to cut Alabama a piece of that and then another piece to the IRS? A sportsbook is already paying property and income taxes in that state most likely, so that part is fulfilled. I just don't see how the university feels they deserve a piece of the pie, because this is a third party transaction in a different market than the sporting event.

 

[TerryP]

@BamaFan334, I get what you're saying here but it really doesn't clear it up fully. IE: I'm sitting in BDS and wagering on the games' over/under for the first half. That fits about every point, does it not?

In answer to your high school scenario, I don't know if Learfield has any control over those events--I sincerely doubt they do. It would make no sense for them to get anything off of those events.

By the same token, do you think the professional leagues deserve a cut?

I'm purely guessing...but I'm thinking the powers that be in Indy think "it's one of our events, we deserve a cut (to share") when it comes to some of the sports.

 

[BamaFan334]

@BamaFan334, I get what you're saying here but it really doesn't clear it up fully. IE: I'm sitting in BDS and wagering on the games' over/under for the first half. That fits about every point, does it not?

In answer to your high school scenario, I don't know if Learfield has any control over those events--I sincerely doubt they do. It would make no sense for them to get anything off of those events.

By the same token, do you think the professional leagues deserve a cut?

I'm purely guessing...but I'm thinking the powers that be in Indy think "it's one of our events, we deserve a cut (to share") when it comes to some of the sports.

I have no doubt the NCAA wants to dip their hands into the honey pot. They are almost as corrupt as FIFA and only care about the dollar.

I would just create a sportsbook online and leave it be. I have two sportsbooks I use (5Dimes) (Sportsbook.com) and I HIGHLY doubt I leave them even if there is a place I could walk into and place a bet. It's too easy to place bets on my phone and get my check if I win to walk away, not to mention the bonuses they give you for depositing. I received a 100% bonus to start the 2017 football season and many other 50,75, and 100% bonuses throughout the season so they could try and recoup some of their losses to me. They also offer online casinos (I have won handsomely and ultimately up a lot over the long haul for those that scream conspiracy with those). Ultimately it's just like most of everything we have discussed, is there really a right or wrong answer to any of this? We can all see both sides and make arguments.

 

[OldPlayer]

Not just no, Hell no. If teams got a percentage, somebody in the future will start manipulating the outcomes to generate more money. "I know you're up by 21, but if we score again..."