Premium Partners

Supreme Court to Hear Case on NCAA Sports Betting

AthleticBusiness.com has partnered with LexisNexis to bring you this content.

Copyright 2017 Gannett Company, Inc.
All Rights Reserved

USA TODAY

 

On the heels of a federal judge issuing an injunction March 7, 2013, that barred New Jersey from allowing sports betting in the midst of a legal battle between the state and five sports organizations, the NCAA affirmed its stance that the spread of gambling is "a threat to the integrity of athletic competition and student-athlete well-being."

A lot has changed since then.

Las Vegas has become the de facto hub of college basketball in the week before the NCAA tournament, with four conference tournaments held there (plus another in Reno). The NHL has expanded there. The NFL is on the way.

And now, in perhaps the most interesting stress test for the NCAA's ban on holding events in states where sports betting is legal, the Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it would hear a case that could determine whether the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act is legal.

If New Jersey wins and the federal law is ruled unconstitutional, states could be able to determine for themselves whether to allow sports betting. That could put the NCAA in an interesting situation.

It's hard to say how many states would legalize sports betting immediately. If New Jersey and a handful of others opened betting parlors, the NCAA could go on about its business without much interruption -- as silly as that might be.

But over time, this is a losing issue for the NCAA, as the NHL and NFL have tacitly admitted by moving into Las Vegas after going out of their way for years to avoid it. The reality is a large percentage of people who watch sports like to wager on sports and will find ways to do so, whether in a casino, online or with a bookie.

New Jersey isn't much of a loss for the NCAA. It's a state with one Football Bowl Subdivision university (Rutgers) and one facility (Prudential Center in Newark) that is equipped to host an NCAA basketball tournament. Even at that, the NCAA would rather play in Brooklyn or Manhattan in New York anyway.

But if Florida or Texas or California legalized sports gambling, does it stand to reason the NCAA would pull its events and ignore those states?

Again, it's difficult to handicap how the Supreme Court is going to rule. Maybe status quo wins out, but on a common-sense level it's getting more difficult every year to justify the NCAA's stance on sports betting.

While protecting college athletes from seedier elements of sports gambling remains a crucial part of its mission -- the NCAA conducts a study on the topic every four years to guide its educational efforts -- much of the negative perception of Las Vegas is rooted in a different time and place. The famous photograph of UNLV players in a hot tub with Richard "The Fixer" Perry in the early 1990s still resonates.

Still, it's difficult to reconcile a hard-line stance against holding an NCAA tournament game at T-Mobile Arena on The Strip when the Pac-12 holds its tournament there without incident one week earlier. And it's hard to justify pulling a women's soccer tournament or an NCAA track and field event out of New Jersey because of some existential gambling threat.

Even NCAA President Mark Emmert hinted at a possible softening of the policy during his annual news conference at the Final Four in April when asked if Las Vegas would be considered for the next round of bidding for the basketball tournament.

"The board has been having active discussions about that issue," Emmert said. "They have not changed the policy yet. And they won't be able to do so for this round of bidding. And I've communicated this to some of the leadership in Las Vegas. They will not be eligible for this round. Whether or not the board changes its mind before the next round, I can't say. Obviously there's a lot of collegiate athletic events going on in Nevada, both regular-season and tournament events. And the board's acutely aware of that, and they'll be considering it."

The NCAA didn't immediately respond to a request for a comment Tuesday. Ultimately, the Supreme Court could be what ends up forcing its hand.

Read More of Today's AB Headlines

Subscribe to Our Daily E-Newsletter

 
 
June 28, 2017
 
 
 

 

Copyright © 2017 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy
Buyer's Guide
Information on more than 3,000 companies, sorted by category. Listings are updated daily.
Learn More
Buyer's Guide
AB Show 2022 in Orlando
AB Show is a solution-focused event for athletics, fitness, recreation and military professionals.
Learn More
AB Show