You are the one trying to twist this into a "nanny-state" comparison. My topic has always directly been related to the integrity of the competition, whereas you keep bringing up the privileges of adulthood.
Update: Noah Shannon CLEARED TO PRACTICE. 26 UI student-athletes investigated for online gambling, incl in FB, Men’s BB, Baseball, T&F & Wrestling
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
I think an argument can be made that the betting rule is overly broad, especially in this day and age where bookies are pretty much a thing of the past and everyone in the current athletes' generation is only betting thru online apps. I seriously doubt that a college athlete betting thru FanDuel on the FIFA World Cup, for example, is going to get into any serious debt, have any sort of inside info, etc.
However, because I'm also a firm believer in the Law of the Slippery Slope, I do tend to agree with the NCAA's stand that rather than making a whole bunch of different loopholes in the rules, it's just easier and more efficient to say that one of the rules for being a college athlete is no betting on sports, period.
I do not subscribe to any of the arguments being made concerning "nanny state" or "they're adults", etc. We all in our lifetimes become part of organizations (schools, businesses, etc) that have a certain level of requirements (dress codes, NDAs, etc) to be part of them. No one is forcing anything, the gov't certainly isn't requiring anything, and we're all free to leave those associations if they place an undue burden or requirement on the things we value or think are important.
However, because I'm also a firm believer in the Law of the Slippery Slope, I do tend to agree with the NCAA's stand that rather than making a whole bunch of different loopholes in the rules, it's just easier and more efficient to say that one of the rules for being a college athlete is no betting on sports, period.
I do not subscribe to any of the arguments being made concerning "nanny state" or "they're adults", etc. We all in our lifetimes become part of organizations (schools, businesses, etc) that have a certain level of requirements (dress codes, NDAs, etc) to be part of them. No one is forcing anything, the gov't certainly isn't requiring anything, and we're all free to leave those associations if they place an undue burden or requirement on the things we value or think are important.
I’m a little simpler - no betting on college sports. I’m okay with it for professional sports, as long as it’s legal where they live.
I could not agree less. And since it appears my Cyclones are going to impacted more, I feel I can comment here.
They are privileged athletes who agreed to a set of rules to play in return to be rewarded in scholarships, NIL, and praise and recognition. They chose to violate the rules and got caught. The rules are in place to stop behavior that could destroy the sport. They put themselves above their teammates.
Whatever punishment they receive is fully justified.
If they want to be treated like everyone else, don't play the sport. Simple.
It’s a clear cut rule, that impacts probably less than half of college athletes anyway? Since gambling age 21 (where legal), and most wouldn’t turn 21 until their third year anyway.
No, it impacts them all. They ALL sign a paper from compliance that gambling on any NCAA sponsored sport, at any level, will cause them to become ineligible. Cut and dried.
Yes I know that. I’m referring to it being illegal for those under 21 to gamble anyway. So less than half of athletes at any time would be able to gamble anyway.
Well put. Especially clarifying that they chose to break the rules.
Student-athletes are hammered over the head with these rules on a yearly basis, even at the DIII level.
I think it’s a tad overblown. As a college athlete you know it’s forbidden so proceed at your own risk. It really is that simple. Now if the rule changes then so be it. This is not a shocker to any student athlete. I still go back to wondering why all of this recent activity started in Iowa. It’s still violates the rules but it seems pretty odd….and why in the eff is it taking so long to find out who and what sports (except Iowa baseball as it was in season).
Something smells wrong.
Something smells wrong.
I don't see your argument as one mostly towards the integrity of the competition. To think some college lacrosse players betting on pro baseball is messing with the integrity of either sport is ridiculous.
I have not been talking about the privileges of adults, but adults having equal rights.
I agree with much of what you say. I have no problem with them being punished for violating rules they agreed to abide by.
My problem is that some of these rules exists in the first place.
Thus, I doubt you could not agree less.
When a rule is overly broad, as you pointed out, yet people want them in place to "protect" these adults, it is a form of a nanny state.
I have no problem with them paying the price for breaking the rules. I have a problem with the rules. People this age were flying the B17s over Europe and storming the beaches of Iwo Jima. They're adults. Let them participate in the rights other adults have when it does not affect their sport or make anything unfair.
I do not recall seeing sports betting as being one of the rights listed in the bill of rights nor constitution.
I doubt too many guys age 18 -19 were flying B17s - maybe riding and shooting, but not pilots. I personally had mixed feelings about 18 year olds even voting, but since they can die in vietnam, etc I reluctantly figured it was ok. These people have no real life experiences and don't see the big picture many times.
And as for 'rights', etc. they have the same rights - if you want to play FB you can't bet, your right to chose. No one took away any rights - they signed a contract. Same as a non-compete clause for some employees when they leave a company.
Obviously, the average age of a college athlete is older than 18 or 19. That's what they start at. I do remember reading the average age from a couple sources of pilots was 21 or 22. But it's irrelevant anyway. As you said, they were in the aircraft risking their lives.
And I don't know why posters keep bringing up the aspect that these athletes agreed to not bet. We all know this. It goes without saying. I'm addressing that they shouldn't be limited in that area when it doesn't jeopardize their sport or performance.
This dude was 26 at Midway in a dive bomber and had two hits on ships (meaning he hit once went back to his carrier got reloaded and went and had a second hit). Had not recalled his story until seeing a documentary recently. What a freakin' bad*ss! Those dive bombers were nuts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Kleiss
That is a separate issue. If my aunt had balls she would be my uncle, as the saying goes.
Wow. The fact you don't recognize potential problems is definitely a "you" thing. What "god" do you "liv 4"...
Oh, I recognize potential problems. But I believe you don't unnecessarily strip people of legal activities unless you truly need to.
The God I worship is the great "I AM." From the Hebrew Tetragrammaton, YHWH, often translated as Jehovah, or Yahweh.
Nobody is having their rights stripped. It's an agreement between the NCAA and athletes. You don't have to compete in sports if you want to gamble. Happy birthday.
that sounds like you are jewish... but the great "I AM" is the Lord Jesus Christ
gambling is absolutely a sin.. the love of money is the root of all evil.
it should never be encouraged.
Matthew 6:24
No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Yeah, all that goes without saying.
My argument is (and I think it will eventually happen) that the NCAA will throw out this unnecessary restriction upon athletes.
I am not Jewish. Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Father all comprise the one Entity that identifies as YHWH. This is a common Christian belief.
Gambling is not absolutely a sin. It depends. Many things in life are a gamble. And you won't be able to find a single Bible verse that condemns gambling.
However, I don't gamble on sports because I don't think it is a wise practice conducive with being a good steward of the funds the Lord has given us.
I think this may be the root for so many people defending the indefensible here. We sometimes want to force our vision of morality upon our athletes. The problem is that once you start not allowing people to do what is legal for all other adults, who knows what legal activity may be stripped of others. Power corrupts.
Because, as an example, a lacrosse player betting on a pro hockey game won't have any measurable deleterious impact on lacrosse as a sport, or her give her any advantage in her competing in her sport. Necessary rules protect things such as that.
It makes total sense if the athlete was betting on lacrosse games. It's a potential direct conflict of interest.
If you don't like the rules don't accept the scholarship. It's not difficult. No athlete is being denied of any rights.
The first sentence goes without saying. It's irrelevant to the discussion.
The second part isn't the whole truth. They are being denied a legal right that other citizens possess, that is the legal right to bet on sports. I believe there should be better reasons to deny them that.
So, your concept is about as insightful as saying fifty years ago when aluminum bats came out, "If you don't like wooden bats then don't play baseball." Of course, if only wooden bats are allowed, and you didn't want to use one then you couldn't play. We're talking about allowing new type of bats here, less restriction on the future athletes.
So are professional football players (edit: athletes). Are you going to complain about that as well? The Lions just had at least 4 players suspended. You play by your employer's rules or get a new job.
If a professional athlete is penalized for betting on a sport they're not a part of then I would advocate the same thing.
I am of legal age to drink alcohol. My employer will not allow me to drink at work. Is this a violation of my rights?
Last edited:
I gave you 2 verses already that are in contradiction with gambling.
Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
gambling absolutely is covetousness
Luke 12:15
And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.
it should be simple logic that these young kids could develop a gambling problem.. be in debt to another man.. and blackmailed to influence the outcomes of the games they perform in.
the whole thing stinks.. and as a man of God.. you should in no way condone such a thing.
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
No, but if he says you can't drink alcohol, even having a glass of wine with your wife on your anniversary, or you would be fired, he has stupidly and unnecessarily denied you your legal right to drink while being his employee.
I know all these verses by heart, but none of them directly prohibit gambling. You are making them go beyond their context, and thus it's merely your commandment. Binding where God has not bound is not a good to be a part of. Be careful, you could be making the same error the Pharisees did concerning money, saying what people could and could not use their money for. Christ responded:
Matthew 15:8–9 - 8‘These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. 9And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
Even putting money in a 401K is a gamble. Buying a house is a gamble. It's a strategy to make more money through putting your money into something you believe in. It may pay off, it may not. Do you disallow those because it is coveting?
And your statement these young kids could develop a gambling problem.. be in debt to another man.. and blackmailed to influence the outcomes of the games they perform in, is weak on a couple counts.
First, they're not young kids. They are legal adults, and people that age saved the planet in two world wars.
Second, they could, and in numerous cases are, getting in problems with money/debt outside of gambling. They could owe somebody for anything, like borrowing, and be pressured by anybody. Should we also not allow them to borrow money, or owe anybody any money?
Latest posts
-
-
-
COMMIT: Iowa Lands 2026 Iowa City West, Three-Star OL Colin Whitters
- Latest: clayborn_94
-