Some Bets Are Off
On the NFL's new gambling era
The NFL’s love/hate affair with the new age of sports gambling is off to a rollicking start.
The league has now handed down more gambling-related bans and suspensions this offseason (nine) than over the rest of NFL history (five), as it pursues a zero-tolerance policy and a press campaign to match.
You might’ve seen all the BREAKING news alerts, and might have even read on to find that you hadn’t heard of any of the players named, save the Lions’ Jameson Williams, who’s flashed all sorts of deep-threat potential since his Alabama days, but whose total stat line in the NFL is:
Shock and awe, gentlemen. Shock and awe.
Williams won’t get to go for his second career catch for at least the first six games of this season, for which he is suspended.
At least he’s not getting the Calvin Ridley treatment, because although he did place an online bet while in a team facility, said bet was not on an NFL game.
Which just goes to show: the policy isn’t really zero tolerance, now is it?
I don’t know what scale they’re using, but if it’s out of ten, I’d give their gambling rules a six, maybe seven. They’re downright lenient.
I’m summarizing, but the main rules are:
A.) You can’t gamble on NFL games (which, yup)
B.) You can’t visit sportsbooks during the season (seems reasonable)
C.) You can’t pal around with gamblers (harder to police, especially considering a bigger portion of the media than ever before might be termed “professional gamblers,” but okay, I see what you’re going for here)
D.) You can gamble on other sports, but not in NFL facilities or generally on “company time” ((including travel, which I would bet (is that allowed?) has been broken more than nine times in the last year))
And then they spell out a bunch of other stuff that should go without saying, reminding players that they have to try and win (someone tell Russell Wilson), you can’t fix games, and no insider trading. Fair, fair, and fair.
In support of these rules, they’re sending the NFL’s D.A.R.E. brigade to each team’s practice facility to deliver what I assume is only a slight variation on Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” speech.
I would love to sit in, by the way. Hope there’s time for Q&A.
Making Deals
That all checks out to me, but the one interesting choice the NFL made — and has since walked back, ever so slightly — has to do with endorsements and promotions.
In 2018, it was part of a long list, reading simply:
“8. Endorsements and Promotional Appearances: NFL Personnel are prohibited from using or allowing others to use one’s name and/or image directly to promote, advertise, or publicize gambling-related enterprises (as defined in Section 3 of this Policy); or making personal, promotional appearances on behalf of any entity in a casino gaming area or Sportsbook.”
By 2022, the same rule had taken on its own section.
Behold the NFL twisting itself into a regulatory pretzel, sprinkled with tasty caveats. You’re welcome, Auntie Anne’s.
“3. ENDORSEMENTS AND PROMOTIONS
NFL Personnel are prohibited from engaging in, using or permitting the use of one’s name or images in connection with activities or materials that depict, advertise, market or promote any form of gambling (including, but not limited to, Sports Betting) or any Gambling Entity, subject solely to the following exception as determined in advance by the League Office. NFL Personnel (excluding NFL Officials and Officiating Staff) may make promotional appearances at or on behalf of a Gambling Entity, including at events sponsored by such an entity, and use or allow others to use their names and images in marketing and promotional materials related to the appearance, provided: (i) the appearance and all related materials do not involve, depict or promote any gambling (including, but not limited to, Sports Betting); (ii) the appearance does not take place in a physical location whose primary purpose is to offer Sports Betting (or that is otherwise promoted as a “sportsbook”); (iii) the appearance and/or marketing and promotional materials are solely and specifically promoting a legitimate non-gambling line of business (e.g., hospitality, fantasy sports games, free-to-play games); and (iv) if the appearance takes place on premises that offer Sports Betting, the appearance must not be in connection with an NFL “watch party.” Appearances in advertisements for a Gambling Entity may similarly be permitted where the advertisements promote only established, non-gambling lines of business offered by the Gambling Entity (e.g., fantasy sports games, free-toplay games), and no gambling is involved or depicted. Any such appearance or promotion must be approved in advance by the League Office.
League Talent appearances on League owned-and-operated properties in programming and similar content related to Sports Betting are subject to separate guidelines and League Office pre-approval.”
If you actually read that, first off, I’m proud of you.
If you didn’t, I forgive you, but the takeaway is that the NFL seems to have realized over the last few years that banning all promotional interactions with this burgeoning industry might be a mistake.
The above looks like a blanket ban slowly unraveling, and maybe they’ll finish the job in the years to come.
For now, the NFL has by far the most restrictive policy with respect to marketing.
NHL and MLB players can be spokespeople for gambling companies. The NBA allows players to appear in their ads. They’re all leaning in.
And while I share some of the trepidation expressed about the road pro sports are going down with gambling in general, the train has left the station.
The NFL’s on board, but they’re in the caboose, and it’s hard to say why. They waited the longest to sign partnerships with the major players — Caesars, DraftKings, and FanDuel — too.
Is that the NFL just being slow on the trigger, or a signal that they’re taking all this in more skeptically than their peers?
You’d have to ask the commish, who I’m sure will give you a satisfying answer.
Standards? Double ‘Em
In the meantime, one refrain seems to keep popping up. It goes something like: “How can the NFL double down on gambling restrictions for players while openly partnering with gambling companies?”
I’ve got an answer to that one, which for some reason needs to be said: players are subject to rules that fans aren’t. Good! Duh!
The NFL has also had a longstanding partnership with Ford. That does not mean that Derrick Henry can take his next HB Dive in an F-250, though I imagine that’s what running into him must feel like anyways.
I get the spirit of the commentary. There’s been a palpable shift in terms of the NFL’s comfort with gambling as a legitimate business interest, and it’s happened remarkably quickly. Much like an F-250, it’s gone from 0 to 60 in short order.
Gambling seeping into sports has been a problem forever, going back to the Black Sox scandal, point-shaving in college basketball, the Tim Donaghy saga, Pete Rose, etc. The list goes on and on.
In football, too, the (relatively short) history of issues started with bans for two Hall of Famers — Paul Hornung and Alex Karras — back in 1963. They got the Ridley treatment decades before Ridley was born.
That’s all to say: it’s not as if the leagues are unaware of what can happen.
Their primary concern is over the integrity of the game. If people were to stop seeing the games as actual competitions, rather than exhibitions with fixed outcomes, then that could endanger the appeal of the product.
We’re not there yet, and I doubt we get there, but they’re clearly worried about it.
They’re just not worried enough to shut the door on what is also a powerful new tool for driving interest in their sports. Such is the time-honored tradition of wanting to have it both ways.
It’s a tight rope to walk, but I bet (is that allowed?) they’ll make it across. They always do.