You can get a DUI, which is against the law, and you’re suspended one game.
What are we doing here? Not using common sense.
What are we doing here? Not using common sense.
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
DUIs don’t potentially impact the integrity of games.
I get that people are disappointed that Shannon has been declared ineligible for the year. As am I.
But the NCAA has rules. He violated a rule. The consequence is permanent ineligibility.
The NCAA already “relaxed” the potential punishment for betting on pro sports. It had the chance to “relax” the punishment for betting on teams from the same school or betting on games involving the athlete’s sport. (EDIT: My recall was off on betting on games involving the same sport . . as others have posted below, an Iowa FB player betting on Auburn/Alabama football game would be facing a 50% of the season punishment). It chose not to “relax” the punishment for such conduct. For that reason, I’d be stunned if NCAA gives Shannon a pass and reduces the suspension. Would send the exact opposite message intended by the “anti-insider trading” rule.
If a player doesn’t make grades, he/she cannot participate in games. There’s nothing “illegal” about getting bad grades. Yet, ineligibility is the result of personal conduct and decisions.
Last edited:
And..I just read an LSU star DL received 'improper benefits' and what is his punishment? Just 1 game....Aurora, file this one under the integrity of the game 'SEC style.' 
How does betting on a womens bball game impact an of-age adult on the football team?
They may have inside info that would give them an edge. That said, I think the card Kirk is trying to play is that Noah bet on the Iowa women to win. In most cases that would be questionable, I'd imagine the person would be betting the under, against them to win or cover, etc.
No, I have no knowledge. Only summarized what I had read. I have had kids at both universities, with my son finishing up at Iowa now so I follow both.
Mike Hlas is a bit too political, to say the least
sometimes it's best to just not say anything, which he is not very good at
He didn’t bet on the sport he played. Not all of these gambling situations are the same.
And it appears the NCAA is at least recognizing this, as the guidelines for punishment recently changed. It appears if Shannon's allegations were reported after May of this year, he would be facing a totally different punishment (only up to a half season suspension), which again, continues to prove this is completely unfair to the kid.
The NCAA's new gambling policy punishments, explained
The NCAA has amended the way it punishes its athletes for violating its betting policies.
ftw.usatoday.com
A
anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r
Guest
That’s what I don’t understand though….the only one that should care about having “an edge” is Vegas….
My understanding is the NCAA is more concerned with the integrity of the games….not the betting markets.
If that’s the case the University should ban ALL students from betting on contests…as if you’re in a class with Clark and see her on crutches two days before the game….then bet against the hawks that should be grounds for expulsion.
I get betting on your games, that is a big red line and frankly should warrant immediate loss of collegiate eligibility….but betting on a different sport? Come on.
Inside info, betting for Iowa to win was pretty much a given this past year. I put the biggest portion of blame for this show on the legislators that lined their pockets to get betting "legalized" for college sports.
Edit - and on the NCAA for being flaccid with their rules here, but then strict there, etc. When you don't have guardrails up for young, impressionable adults, they end up seeing how far they can stretch the rubber bands.
Last edited:
I don't really disagree with anything you said, just outlining the logic as to why the NCAA has harsh penalties for it (whether they are fair or not).
You would think that the NCAA would be calling for Gambling Commissions or Law Enforcement of every State to look into it. The integrity of the game is involved. Hard to believe that such activity only happens in two schools that happen to be in one State.
But they won't.
If the money bet is low . . . and he had no inside information I think he could have a strong case. When you look at the guidelines there is nothing that says you get worse punishment by betting on a sport at your school. I would guess ends up missing half the year.
And it appears the NCAA is at least recognizing this, as the guidelines for punishment recently changed. It appears if Shannon's allegations were reported after May of this year, he would be facing a totally different punishment (only up to a half season suspension), which again, continues to prove this is completely unfair to the kid.
The NCAA's new gambling policy punishments, explained
The NCAA has amended the way it punishes its athletes for violating its betting policies.
The changes to the rules were covered closely by Chad Leistikow of the DMR. In this tweet, he includes a screen shot of the new rules. Here's what it provides with respect to betting on games involving teams from your own school:
For wager related violations reported after May 2 . . . Student-athletes who engage in activities to influence the outcome of their own games or knowingly provide information to individuals involved in sports betting activities will potentially face permanent loss of eligibility in all sports. This would also apply to student-athletes who wager on their own games or on other sports at their own schools.
The permanent loss of eligibility rule for betting on "other sports at their own schools" existed before the recent rules modifications. Because they modified some rules, but not the "bet on other sports at your school" rule, strongly suggests - at least to me - that the NCAA is not going to be sympathetic or lenient to any Iowa football player who bet on some other Iowa sport.
Last edited:
The guidelines absolutely cover punishment of betting on a sport at your school. It is a "permanent" loss of eligibility. Shannon's punishment of 1 year is the equivalent of a "permanent" ban because he's a Senior. But, strictly speaking, a 1 year loss of eligibility is less harsh than a permanent loss of eligibility.
Laws aside, Do you think the punishment fits the crime
I'm almost always in agreement w/you but here's the thing. Your 3rd sentence was the NCAA has rules. Well, they do, but they don't always enforce them and when they do they also don't enforce them equally, which is really why almost nobody respects them as an organization. The penalties handed out to a school like North Carolina after admitting to over 20-25 years of cheating for athletes was almost criminal. Barely a slap on the wrist. They made a mockery of student athletes. I'm not going to argue what Shannon did was right. It's stupid and I'm sure he knew it. But then we encourage gambling all over stadiums, advertise the betting lines before every game, ESPN now in the betting business as well, and then when a kid bets on a game we're outraged and he's suspended for an entire Senior season? Give me a break. They pick and choose how they are going to punish kids and programs. It's wrong.
IMO, "crime" is the wrong word . . . so I'll answer it in a slightly different way and consistent with how the rule is drafted.
Q: Do I think that a student-athlete shall be declared permanently ineligible for placing a wager on a team from their own school?
A: No. I don't think that a student-athlete should be declared permanently ineligible for placing a wager on a team from their own school. However . . . I fully support a rule that college athletes should not be able to place wagers on any sports and if they do so, their eligibility to compete is at risk. The gambling industry is filled with those who seek to take advantage of others. It isn't difficult to imagine situations where an athlete finds himself/herself under water with their wagering and is subsequently approached by unsavory characters who are committed to take advantage of that player. Might that player be willing to provide "intelligence" that isn't otherwise available in exchange for gambling losses to be reversed? Might that player be willing to miss a shot or two in exchange for gambling losses to be reversed? And while I know that others might complain that a bet here and there won't necessarily lead to point shaving and that I'm guilty of a "slippery slope" argument, I think that the integrity of the games and the events is such that a blanket "no gambling" rule is the best route to go.
I would not include fantasy professional sports in that category, nor would I include Super Bowl squares.
As for the punishment for rules violations, I think "tiers" of punishment makes sense. And on the spectrum of "worst" to "most innocent," I'd go from "Betting any amount on a game in which you are participating" to "$5 on the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl."
If the goal of any punishment is to deter the conduct, I agree with the NCAA that betting on a student-athlete's own school events is high on the list of "bad" conduct. Anyone who has ever thought about gambling is encouraged to do so because he/she thinks that he/she knows something and will profit from it. Athletes at a particular school who are friends with other athletes are in a unique position (or at least think that they are in a unique position) to possess that superior knowledge and profit from it. I truly feel as though the "insider trading" analogy is fair.
If I was king of the world, I'd impose the proverbial death penalty (permanent ineligibility) for (a) betting on games that the athlete is participating in and (b) providing information to others for the purpose of them making wagers.
Betting on contests involving the same school and betting on contests involving your same sport would get a one year loss of eligibility. As to the latter, I think that it is far too easy to connect with athletes from other schools and acquire information that might lead someone to believe that could profit from that information.
As for betting on pro sports, I don't disagree with punishing by tiers based upon the level of conduct. The more an athlete bets, the more that athlete risks exposure to the criminal element.
If one were to completely strip away all other factors, do I think that Noah Shannon should be suspended for one year for placing a single $10 bet on an Iowa women's basketball game? (Caveats: This is hypothetical. I don't know that he bet on an Iowa women's basketball game and, even if he did, I don't know if it was a single bet or the amount of the bet. I also don't know if he was betting on any other sports - which may have factored into the NCAA's analysis - and, frankly, I don't know that anyone else on here knows either. Hell . . . given Ferentz's comments to the press, it appears that Iowa's FB coaches weren't completely "in the loop." Either that, or they ignored the NCAA guidelines.)
A: No. On its face, it comes off as harsh. But it strikes me that, if the goal of the guideline is to dissuade and discourage certain conduct, letting someone off or creating exceptions to the rule would have the opposite effect of what the rule is intended to do. If the rule was . . . bet on another sport from your school and you have to sit out a game, you can certainly expect that an athlete's calculus is going to involve balancing the benefits ("I think that I am going to make some $$$) with the risks ("What are the chances I'll get caught and if I'm caught, the punishment is only 1 game"). That risk calculus takes on a whole new meaning when a year's eligibility is in play.
I'll add this . . . it absolutely SUCKS ASS that the circumstances are such that Iowa's athletes were ensnared. (FWIW, I don't give a flying f about ISU's athletes) But, I have friends who have sons competing at D-1 schools in various areas of the country. The Iowa/ISU situation has been raised - repeatedly - by administrators at their schools. Like it or not (and I'm in the latter), the punishment levied on the Iowa and ISU athletes are being used as the example of "see what happens when you don't adhere to gambling rules" across the country.
Long winded answer but your question required something beyond a simple "yes" or a simple "no" (as with many things in life).
This in a nutshell. Were it Georgia or Bama, is this how it would go down? Seems unlikely since they have clearly done the soft shoe with major violations against both blue bloods UNC and KU in basketball who had I believe FIVE proven major violations and yet got bubkas for penalties. Evidently the schools, (who are the member institutions of the NCAA) can get away with whatever, but the players (who have no leverage with the NCAA) get bent over.
As others have stated, Noah did what he did, so no excuses, BUT the hypocricy of the NCAA knows NO bounds..
I'm surprised nobody is mentioning that Kirk said two additional football players will receive multigame suspensions, one longer than the other. This could also have a big negative impact on the team. We haven't been given the names of these players, but I have been hearing two more defensive starters.
We keep seeing posts that one of those is Schulte, and his family say he's not getting suspended. Thats seems very curious. The other name that seems to be out there is Harris, which COULD be very problematic for our DB depth.....
I assume you mean calling law enforcement to look into illegal gambling activity as opposed to legal gambling. A 21-year-old college athlete betting on sports and betting within the confines of the law wouldn't be any business of any law enforcement agency since they don't work for or operate under the rules of the NCAA.
This went "down" because of an IOWA legal investigation. Yes I do think if other states did investigations we would find gambling everywhere. And. yes I think the NCAA would enforce the same penalties across the board.
We need to STOP this insane attack on the NCAA. They didn't start this investigation.
I dislike the NCAA as much as anyone else, but this was NOT started by them and was NOT their investigation.
Like everyone else, I have NO idea what started this. Lots of rumors, but no real facts. But, the point is, this was started by the law enforcement offices in IOWA, not the NCAA.Every player envolved KNEW that gambling was prohibited. Whether players at other schools do it is absolutely irrelevlent .
KCeasthawk. please don't think I am pointing this all at you. In fact many others have been way more off the wall. I'm just tired of all the crying about poor Iowa and they are out to get us. I think the NCAA is a pathetic origanization that needs to be completely revamped or replaced.
I'm just tired of blaming the NCAA for something they didn't create!
My point is not that the NCAA does not have the authority to hand out these penalties, nor am I arguing that they don't have valid reason to do so. My point clearly is that they have a lllooonnnggg and sustained history of picking and choosing when they enforce their policies, and when they seem to look the other way......
Oh, I agree. And like I said I sure wasn't coming down on you per say. It's just that a lot of posters are trying to make this out as an attack on Iowa by the NCAA.
No they’re not. The majority of posters that are mad are mad at how the NCAA decides how to pick and choose who gets “disciplined.” It’s that simple.
Totally BS. Completly irrelevant to the issue. The NCAA had no choice in this, The rules were in place. Disciplining other issues is arbitrary. And I agree the NCAA is an out of date pathetic excuse for a governing board. But, in this case the rules were in place and they did NOT start the investigation!
Why is this so hard for some of you to understand?
Noah Shannon betting $20 on a women’s basketball game does not “impact the integrity of the game.” And certainly doesn’t warrant a season suspension. But we can agree to disagree.
I totally understand if you bet on your own games.
You laughed at my first reply. So tell all of us stupid people how they "picked and choose " to discipline Iowa and no one else.
Again. for someone who doesn't seem to understand. The NCAA DID NOT start this invesitgation. Plus the punishment was clearly stated in their rules. But, you keep up with your poor little IOWA stupidity.
And, again, I agree the punishment is crazy, and I think the NCAA should either go away or be completely revised. BUT , they are NOT the villains in this case!!!!!!!!!
Don't get me wrong. I'm not outraged at Shannon's decision to place a wager. I'm also not outraged at the NCAA for application of its rule. Put me in the "it is what it is" category.
I don't think that Shannon is being singled out. I don't think that he is receiving a harsher punishment than others who acted similarly.
I wonder how this all started and I don't expect to ever get that answered. For me, it's just a giant "damn, why did this happen to Iowa" situation? Anyone who knows me understands how I'd like nothing more than to see Iowa play in the CWS in Omaha just one time before I leave this planet. This year was set up very well for Iowa to make a great run. Losing Anthony (and to a lesser extent Henderson) was a kick in the ol' catcher's cup.
I have heard Jermari Harris and Schulte. Just saw this above as well.
Preach it Aurora! Football board yes however I was reeled into the baseball team like no other and living in Omaha, it would be a most glorious sight to see Iowa in the CWS. Hmmm...a Rose Bowl/CFP win or just make the CWS? That's a hard choice for me personally.
I’ve been really surprised by this as well. I feel like if our starting corner was rumored to have strained a hammy in practice we would have countless posts speculating how many games he might miss. As it is, it seems fairly clear he is going to miss multiple games and hardly anyone even comments on it.
Not many comments because we don't really know for sure who, or if any games will be missed.
That’s obviously true, but I’ve read this board for many years and I’ve never seen lack of info or knowledge on a topic stop people from posting about it.
I mean, probably 90% of posts on this board are people speculating on things with at best partial knowledge of what’s going on.
Latest posts
-
-
COMMIT: Iowa Lands 2026 Iowa City West, Three-Star OL Colin Whitters- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-