Did two rookie first rounders just violate the NFL gambling rules?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
41,054
its a bet based on performance

I think its dumb though... should always be able to bet on yourself to win or do well.
Which isn't listed in what the players can't bet on.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
41,054
It is a bet on the “performance of individual participants,” which is not allowed and, as I said, the bet would play out after they sign their deals (the rule is not limited to gambling at the facility if a bet involves the NFL).

I’m not suggesting that it was nefarious or likely to be harmful, but zero tolerance means ZERO tolerance.

its a bet based on performance

I think its dumb though... should always be able to bet on yourself to win or do well.
Which performance did they bet on? This isn't the first time bets like this have been made and it has been determined to be fine. IIRC Baker Mayfield had to pay off Barkley on a similar bet and there was no action by the NFL.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
41,054
Yes, it is. I quoted the relevant portion of the rule before.
Read my last replay, that's talking about prop bets like a player is going to score 3 touchdowns. I read the article I posted and others and they all say the same thing. Also as I said before you replied this isn't the first time rookies have bet on this. Also two college teammates bet on a future bet before they're even in the NFL or have declared for the NFL draft the NFL can't and shouldn't suspend them for that.
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #25
Which performance did they bet on? This isn't the first time bets like this have been made and it has been determined to be fine. IIRC Baker Mayfield had to pay off Barkley on a similar bet and there was no action by the NFL.
I don’t recall that, and the rule may have changed since then.

The reaction to this is interesting. Nobody is questioning the players’ intentions or integrity. It’s a question of following a strict rule that preserves the games’ integrity.
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #26
Read my last replay, that's talking about prop bets like a player is going to score 3 touchdowns. I read the article I posted and others and they all say the same thing. Also as I said before you replied this isn't the first time rookies have bet on this. Also two college teammates bet on a future bet before they're even in the NFL or have declared for the NFL draft the NFL can't and shouldn't suspend them for that.
Who said anything about suspending them?

The subject of the bet clearly falls within the rule, though, which includes the catch-all of “any kind of proposition bet.”

Their bet is a prop bet:
 
Last edited:

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
41,054
Who said anything about suspending them?

The subject of the bet clearly falls within the rule, though, which includes the catch-all of “any kind of proposition bet.”

Their bet is a prop bet:
So you think they violated the rule on gambling which calls for suspending players but you don't think they'll get suspended? Ok I guess we're done here.
I don’t recall that, and the rule may have changed since then.

The reaction to this is interesting. Nobody is questioning the players’ intentions or integrity. It’s a question of following a strict rule that preserves the games’ integrity.
The NFL hasn't allowed gambling for a very long time.

 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #28
So you think they violated the rule on gambling which calls for suspending players but you don't think they'll get suspended? Ok I guess we're done here.

The NFL hasn't allowed gambling for a very long time.

Suspensions are not mandatory. Penalties are determined on a case-by-case basis. Here, the players in question are not yet signed, so I’d expect that they’ll just get a warning.

And, of course, gambling rules have always existed, but they are amended, as recently occurred.
 

Londoner

Twitchy sophomore.
Joined
Apr 29, 2023
Messages
2,617
Three things:

a) It’s a private bet between two individuals
b) These individuals were not in the NFL at the time the bet was struck
c) The bet requires the participants to be BETTER so there is no question of the integrity of the game being threatened

The rule needs to be revised, by the way.
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #30
Three things:

a) It’s a private bet between two individuals
b) These individuals were not in the NFL at the time the bet was struck
c) The bet requires the participants to be BETTER so there is no question of the integrity of the game being threatened

The rule needs to be revised, by the way.
a) Does not matter - still contrary to the rules.
b) Relevant, but not necessarily dispositive, as previously noted.
C) Does not matter - still contrary to the rules.
 

Londoner

Twitchy sophomore.
Joined
Apr 29, 2023
Messages
2,617
a) Does not matter - still contrary to the rules.
b) Relevant, but not necessarily dispositive, as previously noted.
C) Does not matter - still contrary to the rules.
As I said, the rules need to be changed.

How does a bet which forces players to be better bring the game’s integrity into question?

Surely the league wants its stars to push themselves to improve their performance?
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #32
As I said, the rules need to be changed.

How does a bet which forces players to be better bring the game’s integrity into question?

Surely the league wants its stars to push themselves to improve their performance?
By that logic, they might also allow PEDs.

I’m fine with zero tolerance.
 

RhodyRams

Insert something clever here
Rams On Demand Sponsor
SportsBook Bookie
Moderator
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
12,468
give em a slap on the wrist, burn the tapes and move on
 

ScotsRam

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
3,234
Name
Niall
There's a difference between sanctioned gambling through a legal company, illegal betting through a 3rd party bookie and this, which appears to be a bet between friends. 1 and 2 are what the gambling rules are designed to stop.

Nothing to see here.
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #36
There's a difference between sanctioned gambling through a legal company, illegal betting through a 3rd party bookie and this, which appears to be a bet between friends. 1 and 2 are what the gambling rules are designed to stop.

Nothing to see here.
Wrong. Read the rule. Prohibits bets (involving NFL) made “directly or through a third party.”
 
Last edited:

Alaskan Ram

Last Frontier Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
1,206
There's a difference between sanctioned gambling through a legal company, illegal betting through a 3rd party bookie and this, which appears to be a bet between friends. 1 and 2 are what the gambling rules are designed to stop.

Nothing to see here.
I agree. Seems the "spirit" of the law is to restrict participation in organized gambling in order to preserve the integrity of the game.

The letter of the law would require a suspension for any mic'd up player caught saying in the middle of a game:

"I bet Yo momma's armpits are so hairy, it looks like she's got Buckwheat in a headlock".

Sanction:
"Prop bet... Number 45 on the defense. 3 game suspension. And may GODell have mercy your soul."

Go Rams.
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #38
I agree. Seems the "spirit" of the law is to restrict participation in organized gambling in order to preserve the integrity of the game.

The letter of the law would require a suspension for any mic'd up player caught saying in the middle of a game:

"I bet Yo momma's armpits are so hairy, it looks like she's got Buckwheat in a headlock".

Sanction:
"Prop bet... Number 45 on the defense. 3 game suspension. And may GODell have mercy your soul."

Go Rams.
The “spirit” of the law is why nobody thinks a severe penalty is warranted. The zero tolerance concept, though, requires that they be told this type of bet is not allowed.
 

ScotsRam

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
3,234
Name
Niall
Wrong. Read the rule. Prohibits bets (involving NFL) made “directly or through a third party.”

With respect, I think it's you who is reading the rule wrongly. "Directly" means player phoning bookie himself or putting an online bet on by himself with his own account. "Third party" means someone else doing it on the players behalf.

Bets between friends are by definition unsanctioned. It would be absolutely impossible to police those and they aren't explicitly banned in any of the rules you've shared.

Still nothing to see here.
 

AvengerRam

Benevolent Troublemaker
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
5,390
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #40
With respect, I think it's you who is reading the rule wrongly. "Directly" means player phoning bookie himself or putting an online bet on by himself with his own account. "Third party" means someone else doing it on the players behalf.

Bets between friends are by definition unsanctioned. It would be absolutely impossible to police those and they aren't explicitly banned in any of the rules you've shared.

Still nothing to see here.
Wrong. Directly means without the involvement of a third party. That’s what this was - a bet made directly between two bettors.

By your definition, any two players could make a bet with each other on any NFL outcome or proposition with impunity. That is clearly not allowed.