sports

NFL Concussion Economics

by Lee Doren on November 8, 2010 · 2 comments

in Economy

There has been an enormous spike of news reports regarding the National Football League and concussions. The NFL has discussed increasing fines after reports of recent helmet-related injuries. Moreover, fans have noticed an increase in penalties during the game as a result of players leading with their heads. But, has all this talk resulted from an increase awareness of brain trauma? While it is true that players and doctors are more aware of the risks involved, I’m slightly skeptical that, that is the only driving force.

The most likely catalyst are the new health insurance negotiations with the players. The players have argued that their insurance coverage is inadequate considering the value they contribute to the sport, and the costs inflicted on their families after they retire. Consequently, many players have demanded health insurance upgrades, which undoubtedly will increase costs of providing such care.  However, like any business, the NFL is always looking to reduce costs.

While I have no doubt that the League cares for its players, certain economic incentives come into play with these negotiations.  If the League foresees the possibility of accepting player demands down the line, it will need to reduce long-term costs.  One way of doing that is reducing player injuries for one of the most violent sports.

If penalizing helmet-to-helmet hits will reduce long-term costs, expect penalties and fines to increase.  One does not need to be an expert in NFL negotiations to understand that basic economics is likely driving changes to the sport.

Photo Credit.

Sports Gambling Ban Unconstitutional?

by Michelle Minton on March 2, 2010 · 1 comment

in Legal, Odds & Ends, Personal Liberty

Is the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) unconstitutional? NJ democrat Senator Raymond J. Lesniak thinks so and has succeeded in bringing the NJ senate into the suit as a plaintiff. SR19 which made it through a voice vote in the Senate allows the senate president join the suit challenging the legality of the federal government’s sports ban on 10th amendment grounds. Lesniak, along with the other plaintiffs claim that it is a state’s right to regulate gambling activities not the federal government.

Back in 1992 the PASPA made all forms of sports gambling illegal accept for those states in which sports gambling already existed (Nevada, Montana, Oregon and Delaware).

As usual, Lesniak makes the case that legalized sports gambling will bring in sorely needed tax money. While this argument misses the point, and a state regulatory authority has as little right as the feds to ban individuals from engaging in the free act of gambling with their own money, it does move the US a step in the right direction. It would also pave the way for legalized state-regulated internet gambling.

Governor Chris Christie has until March 12th to join the suit as a substitute for former governor Corzine whom the Department of Justice last year criticized for his involvement in the case, stating that he had “no cognizable interest in this litigation”; 2.) “has no interest that might be impaired by this litigation”, and 3.) “Any interest Gov. Corzine might have is adequately protected by the plaintiffs.”

NCAA V. Delaware Sports Gambling

by Michelle Minton on August 11, 2009 · 3 comments

in Legal, Odds & Ends, Personal Liberty

Over the past few months the NCAA, along with the four major pro-sports leagues, has been a vocal opponent of Delaware’s attempts to legalize per-game sports gambling in the State. They were among the group of sports leagues that petitioned a federal judge to issue an injunction to stop the state. Like the pro-sports leagues, the NCAA believes that allowing gambling in the state will damage the reputation of college athletics and increase the temptation for players to cheat.

When the federal judge denied their request for the injunction the NCAA retaliated by establishing a new policy that prevents college championships from being played in cities that allow per-game gambling. Finally, the NCAA is acting appropriately-though the championship denial will do nothing to prevent cheating and little to nothing to stop Delaware from pursuing gambling on sports as a revenue source for the state.

Could legalized, licensed sports gambling increase the likelihood that cheating will occur? Possibly, but it’s not likely. As multiple scandals involving college athletes cheating, or getting caught up in gambling show, just because an activity is illegal does not preclude people-even athletes, from engaging in it anyway.

Of course, even if cheating, gambling, drug use, or any other behavior the NCAA finds unacceptable suddenly rises in occurrence, even if it can be directly correlated with the legalization of gambling, it is not the responsibility of the court system to ensure the integrity of private organizations.

As an independent association, the NCAA, like all the pro-sports leagues, is free to create any rules it wants and penalize members for breaking them. In order to get the prestige that goes along with participating in a league, members should conduct their activities to the leagues standards. If member do not abide by the league’s rules the image and prestige of the league suffers. That is the fear with legalized gambling on sports.

Sports leagues contend that increased gambling on their game could make it more likely, or at least, make it seem more likely that players will get involved in plans to throw games.  But as I wrote about last week, that problem is not for the American taxpayer, nor the American court system to remedy. It is up to the league to set up a framework to ensure that its members continue to operate within its standards. If they think banning championships in gambling states is the way to do this, so be it (no matter how unlikely to produce results that strategy is).

DE on Defense against Sports Leagues

by Michelle Minton on August 5, 2009 · 1 comment

in Odds & Ends


Delaware is hitting back at the sports leagues lobbing threats in response to the state’s plan to legalize gambling on sports in the state.

Delaware Gov. Jack Markell issued a statement this past week saying sports betting plan will create jobs and help pay for government services.

Lawyers for the four major pro sports leagues and the NCAA are expected to seek an injunction this week to stop Delaware from implementing sports betting, however.

Delaware is one of only four states that are exempt from the nationwide ban on sports gambling enacted in 1992 (along with Nevada, Montana, and Oregon). These states were exempt because they already had sports gambling at the time congress drafted the legislation. Sports leagues, however, contend that Delaware’s, which offered parlay betting as part of its state lottery in the 70′s does not have the authority now to allow single-event gambling.

First of all, the federal ban on gambling should be thrown out with a whole lot of other dirty rotten laws surrounding gambling that should never have been enacted. The reason gambling on sports should be legalized is NOT because it would increase tax revenue or jobs for states.  The reason is because it is not the role of the American government to enforce morality, to tell them what they can and can’t do in the privacy of their homes (so long as they aren’t violating the rights of others), nor is it the role of the American legal system to ensure that athletic competition in the country retains a reputation for fair play. That is the crux of the sports leagues’ and anti-gamblers’ argument: if gambling on sports is legalized, the integrity of the games can be questioned by spectators. New Jersey, which was not one of the four states granted an exemption from the federal ban, filed a lawsuit against the Justice Department to overturn the ban for the whole country.

Late last week came word that Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) wrote a letter to US Attorney-General Eric Holder, asking him to vigorously oppose a suit challenging the Federal law banning the expansion of state licensed and regulated sports wagering in New Jersey, brought by the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA).

“We are writing to express our concern regarding the efforts in both Delaware and New Jersey to challenge Congress’ consistent and long-held prohibitions on sports wagering,” the senators wrote to Holder. “While the efforts in these two states vary, they both threaten to greatly expand sports gambling and undermine the integrity of our national pastimes. We urge the Department of Justice to defend and enforce the existing federal prohibition against sports betting and take the necessary action to safeguard amateur and professional sports.”

Secondly, a ban on sports gambling just won’t work. Will corruption run rampant throughout the league if gambling on sports is legalized?  Most likely not. Sports betting is widely (and legally) available throughout Nevada. While the sports leagues have a policy of opposing this gambling they do little to actually try and stop it. Furthermore, making gambling illegal is very unlikely to deter players from engaging in corruption. One of the biggest scandals related to sports betting occurred during the 1919 world series of baseball, during which several disgruntled members of the White Sox, angry about their low wages, made a deal with a local bookie and threw the series to the Cincinnati Reds.  Those players eventually confessed and were banned for life from major league baseball.

But even if the legalization of sports betting did result in corruption among players and the deterioration of professional or amateur sports leagues’ images, so what? It is NOT the job of taxpayer funded entities like the court system to ensure the football we watch on TV isn’t rigged.

Criminalizing gambling on sports is not going to prevent corruption in sports just like criminalizing drug use won’t stop drug use (in sports and elsewhere).  If players want to  risk their careers by throwing a game to earn extra money–they are going to do it whether the gamblers profiting off the move are gambling legally or illegally. If professional or amateur leagues want to have the appearance of legitimacy it is their duty to find a way to do this on their own with their own money. Of course, there is no reason why major league sports couldn’t profit even amidst accusations of unfair play (look at the WWF that has done very well despite the fact that most people believe matches are choreographed).  If a player breaks a contract by throwing a game the team owner has every right to take that player to court–that’s what laws and courts are for.

End the injustice, end the hypocrisy, end the ban on sports betting.