No Playoffs in Delaware

[93henfan]

So says the NCAA:


http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090806/SPORTS/90806067/NCAA+ruling++No+playoffs+at+Del.+schools


What's the stadium size/attendance requirement for FBS/I-A again?

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

I hate the NCAA. xnonono2x

They have no business being an activist organization.

[Go...gate]

So says the NCAA:


http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090806/SPORTS/90806067/NCAA+ruling++No+playoffs+at+Del.+schools


What's the stadium size/attendance requirement for FBS/I-A again?

You guys are right there - you have a bigger ballpark than several MAC teams.

What a BS ruling.

[bobcatfan06]

So no playoffs in Nevada then either right? There has never been an NCAA playoff game in any sport played in Nevada?

That sucks. The NCAA is out of control and have been for about 5 years.

[BDKJMU]

Could Delaware take legal action against the NCAA?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jfluhQn3750k35xUxEB-lwSRZylQD99TLQD82

[93henfan]

I still don't get why they're penalizing Delaware, Del State, and Wesley when you won't be able to bet on any of those teams in Delaware.

[mtgrizfan4life]

I think that is BS too. I guess Montana got lucky due to different gambling rules and regulations in Montana verses Delaware.

[93henfan]

I think that is BS too. I guess Montana got lucky due to different gambling rules and regulations in Montana verses Delaware.

I am happy for Montana that they are not getting dragged through this BS.

Can anyone give me a history primer of lawsuits against the NCAA? Are schools ever successful overturning NCAA bans like this? UD, as the school with the biggest pot and the most to lose in terms of playoff dollars, would seem the likely candidate to lead a suit. It's either that or get out of FCS with haste. We obviously won't be able to recruit with the tagline "we build character by playing nothing but road playoff games".

[th0m]

Yikes. That sucks.

[tribe_pride]

This ruling sucks but I have trouble off the top of my head seeing how Delaware could win a suit against the NCAA. If I'm right the NCAA is a private organization that can make up its own rules (as long as they don't violate any specific laws or violate the rights of a protected class) or are violating a contract or agreement.

I'll never say impossible but it would seem like an uphill battle for the Delaware to win. Maybe some sort of settlement too.

[jonmac]

I am happy for Montana that they are not getting dragged through this BS.

Can anyone give me a history primer of lawsuits against the NCAA? Are schools ever successful overturning NCAA bans like this? UD, as the school with the biggest pot and the most to lose in terms of playoff dollars, would seem the likely candidate to lead a suit. It's either that or get out of FCS with haste. We obviously won't be able to recruit with the tagline "we build character by playing nothing but road playoff games".

Wouldn't that same NCAA have to approve that? Seems that UD is stuck smack dab between a rock and hard place.

[93henfan]

Wouldn't that same NCAA have to approve that? Seems that UD is stuck smack dab between a rock and hard place.

Nevada is FBS. No issues moving up.

[UNH Fanboi]

This ruling sucks but I have trouble off the top of my head seeing how Delaware could win a suit against the NCAA. If I'm right the NCAA is a private organization that can make up its own rules (as long as they don't violate any specific laws or violate the rights of a protected class) or are violating a contract or agreement.

I'll never say impossible but it would seem like an uphill battle for the Delaware to win. Maybe some sort of settlement too.

If they sued it would be on some type of anti-trust grounds. The NCAA gets sued all the time for anti-trust reasons and has sometimes lost:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2009-07-26-ncaa-lawsuits_N.htm

[BDKJMU]

I am happy for Montana that they are not getting dragged through this BS.

Can anyone give me a history primer of lawsuits against the NCAA? Are schools ever successful overturning NCAA bans like this? UD, as the school with the biggest pot and the most to lose in terms of playoff dollars, would seem the likely candidate to lead a suit. It's either that or get out of FCS with haste. We obviously won't be able to recruit with the tagline "we build character by playing nothing but road playoff games".

Yep, if this stands I see UD moving up within 5 years- thats probably about as fast as it could realistically be done if they stated laying the groundwork this yr.

[bluehenbillk]

UD is done messing around in FCS. It's time to fast-track a move to the FBS and get there as soon as the moratorium on switching levels expires.

[LacesOut]

Damn.

Just damn.

And wow. I really didn't think the NCAA would make this move.

I guess their balls are bigger than I thought. But their brains are smaller than a pea!

[DX Man]

I hate the NCAA. xnonono2x

They have no business being an activist organization.

How right you are!xthumbsupx

[LUHawker]

Now that UD won't be hosting playoff games, maybe we'll see the Blue Hens up in Bethlehem in December.

What, Lehigh making the playoffs and hosting a game you say?! Mark it down!

Would love to see UD fans up in Bethlehem for the first time since '97 (I think or is it longer?)

[GannonFan]

Well, that pretty much settles it, UD is certainly going to move to FBS in the next few years. They've certainly started the steps to do so and now they have an outside entity forcing their hand. The shame of it is that UD has really been a huge supporter of the FCS level of football even before there was an FCS and probably doesn't want to move. However, the NCAA has decided that matters little.

The stance will become more interesting in the next few years. Delaware won't be the first state to take this step, and New Jersey will do everything in their power to overturn the 1992 law banning sports gambling outside of the grandfathered states. It's like yelling at the tide to stop coming in.

[4th and What?]

Will be interesting to see if the NCAA keeps this up if NJ wins it's lawsuit to allow sports gambling in all 50 states. If they do, NJ and NY have said they would possibly soon follow DE. And I would think any state with cash issues (CA?) would take a look at it.

And for once I am in complete agreement with FCS_pwns statement.

[Go...gate]

Well, that pretty much settles it, UD is certainly going to move to FBS in the next few years. They've certainly started the steps to do so and now they have an outside entity forcing their hand. The shame of it is that UD has really been a huge supporter of the FCS level of football even before there was an FCS and probably doesn't want to move. However, the NCAA has decided that matters little.

The stance will become more interesting in the next few years. Delaware won't be the first state to take this step, and New Jersey will do everything in their power to overturn the 1992 law banning sports gambling outside of the grandfathered states. It's like yelling at the tide to stop coming in.

It could also mean a new Eastern/Middle Atlantic FBS football league. Army and Navy might find such an affiliation of interest if there was some reasonable bowl tie-in. Three other schools which might well be interested would be Temple, Buffalo and East Carolina. Add a SoCon or CAA which might like to move up (UMass, James Madison ODU or Georgia State come to mind) and you would be on your way. Of course, there is also the Big East, which, IMO, makes even more sense...

[Go...gate]

This ruling sucks but I have trouble off the top of my head seeing how Delaware could win a suit against the NCAA. If I'm right the NCAA is a private organization that can make up its own rules (as long as they don't violate any specific laws or violate the rights of a protected class) or are violating a contract or agreement.

I'll never say impossible but it would seem like an uphill battle for the Delaware to win. Maybe some sort of settlement too.

It would be something like what Jerry Tarkanian did in the 1970's and 80's. It costs a fortune and would probably be an inconclusive result at best.

[LacesOut]

It's like yelling at the tide to stop coming in.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLLLLLL

I would be extremely excited at the idea of UD moving up. But I would definitely miss the 'big fish in a little pond' mentality and stature that I've personally developed from being from Delaware and attending UD and being a UD fan since the mid 80's (quasi-fan for the past 5-6 years though).

[GannonFan]

It could also mean a new Eastern/Middle Atlantic FBS football league. Army and Navy might find such an affiliation of interest if there was some reasonable bowl tie-in. Three other schools which might well be interested would be Temple, Buffalo and East Carolina. Add a SoCon or CAA which might like to move up (UMass, James Madison ODU or Georgia State come to mind) and you would be on your way. Of course, there is also the Big East, which, IMO, makes even more sense...

Well, there's no doubt that schools like JMU and ODU are two CAA schools that not only could move up in the future, but are schools that already have plans in place that could easily be interpreted as steps to move up. Appy St of course is another one as well. I don't know if UD ever would've made this decision on their own as UD's been perhaps the most ardent supporter of this level of football and has turned down chances to move up before. However, that changes now.

Of course the big prize out there would be the Big East, but they couldn't take too many teams so much of those mentioned will be left out of that conference. But yes, very possible that there could be an FBS conference created out of this decision.

[93henfan]

If we move up to FBS, are we allowed to get Joe Flacco back as a transfer from the next level up? xeyebrowx

That was my first thought. If we move up, where will we get our QBs then? :p

[BDKJMU]

Will be interesting to see if the NCAA keeps this up if NJ wins it's lawsuit to allow sports gambling in all 50 states. If they do, NJ and NY have said they would possibly soon follow DE. And I would think any state with cash issues (CA?) would take a look at it.

And for once I am in complete agreement with FCS_pwns statement.

Correct. If the NJ lawsuit overturns the fed ban, then a # of other states will soon allow it. I couldn't see the NCAA trying to enforce a ban then, because pretty soon they'd have to prohibit half the I-AA teams from hosting the playoffs.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06/gov_corzine_to_join_federal_la.html

On the other hand you have this:
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/sports/20090723_Sports_betting_in_N_J___Delaware_challeng ed.html

So if the NJ democrat lawsuit wins, or on the other hand if the Republican Senators in DC prevail, then this whole thing probably becomes moot. xcoffeex

[aust42]

So the NCAA's reasoning is:

"No predetermined or non-predetermined session of an NCAA championship may be conducted in a state with legal wagering that is based upon single-game betting (high school, college or professional) in a sport in which the NCAA conducts a championship,”.

Hey NCAA what about Nevada hosting NCAA sanctioned post season games?

Per Wikepedia: The Maaco Bowl in Las Vegas is an NCAA-sanctioned Division I-A post-season college football bowl game that has been played annually at 40,000-seat Sam Boyd Stadium in Las Vegas, Nevada since 1992."

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Nevada a state with legal wagering? Please clarify the difference?

[Head Cat]

You are confusing a bowl game with a playoff game. A bowl game isn't part of an NCAA championship event.

[93henfan]

So the NCAA's reasoning is:

"No predetermined or non-predetermined session of an NCAA championship may be conducted in a state with legal wagering that is based upon single-game betting (high school, college or professional) in a sport in which the NCAA conducts a championship,”.

Hey NCAA what about Nevada hosting NCAA sanctioned post season games?

Per Wikepedia: The Maaco Bowl in Las Vegas is an NCAA-sanctioned Division I-A post-season college football bowl game that has been played annually at 40,000-seat Sam Boyd Stadium in Las Vegas, Nevada since 1992."

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Nevada a state with legal wagering? Please clarify the difference?

I don't believe the NCAA considers non-BCS bowl games to be a "predetermined or non-predetermined session of an NCAA championship".

[93henfan]

You are confusing a bowl game with a playoff game. A bowl game isn't part of an NCAA championship event.

I would say the four BCS bowl games might be, especially the designated championship bowl game. But none of those are ever in Vegas anyway.

[GannonFan]

So the NCAA's reasoning is:

"No predetermined or non-predetermined session of an NCAA championship may be conducted in a state with legal wagering that is based upon single-game betting (high school, college or professional) in a sport in which the NCAA conducts a championship,”.

Hey NCAA what about Nevada hosting NCAA sanctioned post season games?

Per Wikepedia: The Maaco Bowl in Las Vegas is an NCAA-sanctioned Division I-A post-season college football bowl game that has been played annually at 40,000-seat Sam Boyd Stadium in Las Vegas, Nevada since 1992."

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Nevada a state with legal wagering? Please clarify the difference?

Wiki, in that case, is wrong (although not technically, as the NCAA does allow the bowl system, but they don't really have any other option. But the NCAA doesn't sponsor them, as they do the playoffs, hence the difference. The NCAA is unable to do much about the schools that make up FBS, especially the BCS). The NCAA has nothing to do with bowl games at the FBS level. Nevada will, apparently, be banned now in the future from holding NCAA events such as the NCAA Skiing championships, as they had been allowed to do when the NCAA conveniently forgot their prior policy.

[GOKATS]

I don't believe the NCAA considers non-BCS bowl games to be a "predetermined or non-predetermined session of an NCAA championship".

FBS is immune because they don't play for a National Championship. Only FCS football plays for a National Championship!!xnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxxthumbsupx

[aust42]

Well the whole premise still seems hypocritical. If the NCAA cared about gambling and the integrity of the sport why not ban NCAA members from playing in Las Vegas, Nevada of all places. Common sense should come to play in this case. Anyone across the country with computer access can bet on an NCAA game by setting up an account overseas. What about Toledo's football and basketball's recent point shaving fiasco? Is there legalized gambling in the state of Ohio? Penalizing the NCAA schools in the state of Delaware is completely unfair to the students, players and faithful fans.

[93henfan]

Well the whole premise still seems hypocritical. If the NCAA cared about gambling and the integrity of the sport why not ban NCAA members from playing in Las Vegas, Nevada of all places. Common sense should come to play in this case. Anyone across the country with computer access can bet on an NCAA game by setting up an account overseas. What about Toledo's football and basketball's recent point shaving fiasco? Is there legalized gambling in the state of Ohio? Penalizing the NCAA schools in the state of Delaware is completely unfair to the students, players and faithful fans.

Oh we hear you. We're just trying to explain the NCAA's web of plausible deniability.

[GannonFan]

Well the whole premise still seems hypocritical. If the NCAA cared about gambling and the integrity of the sport why not ban NCAA members from playing in Las Vegas, Nevada of all places. Common sense should come to play in this case. Anyone across the country with computer access can bet on an NCAA game by setting up an account overseas. What about Toledo's football and basketball's recent point shaving fiasco? Is there legalized gambling in the state of Ohio? Penalizing the NCAA schools in the state of Delaware is completely unfair to the students, players and faithful fans.

Come on now, the NCAA is what they've always been - a petulant and often impotent agency that does very little to help the student athlete, despite the fact that is their stated goal. They have no power to do anything to schools with money (i.e. BCS schools) and most anything they do is hypocritical because of this. The whole APR fiasco is like that - amazingly, football factories at virtually every FBS school are completely clean and are somehow putting together great APR's, while the only schools hit with the NCAA's hammer as the small schools at the FCS level that don't have the resources to hoodwink the NCAA. In this case, it's more of the same - seriously, the school most hurt by this decision is little 'ol DIII Wesley College, who's managed to scrap together and become a dominant DIII team. Easy for the NCAA to squash little Wesley.

Yes, the Toledo example is very interesting and telling. The NCAA is apparently completely unaware that universal gambling has existed for years - that darn internet thing. xrolleyesx

[DFW HOYA]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Nevada a state with legal wagering? Please clarify the difference?

Nevada does not allow wagering on events in the state (e.g., no UNLV bets).

[pitpen]

Nevada does not allow wagering on events in the state (e.g., no UNLV bets).

Kinda like Delaware.

[aust42]

Nevada does not allow wagering on events in the state (e.g., no UNLV bets).

Yes they do. I was in the Venetian Sports Book last year in Vegas and bet on the Running Rebel basketball team playing at home. I'm pretty sure they have a line on the Vegas Bowl games every year.

[Grizzaholic]

Great to hear for Montana. Really sucks the big one for Delaware. The NCAA is all about the money, first and foremost. I really wish they would go back to caring about the student-athletes and rewarding them accordingly.

[FCS Go!]

That really sucks Hens. Hopefully the Committee won't send y'all out to Missoula in the first round this year. What cruel irony that would be.

[Green26]

A battle lost for Delaware, but the war is not over. The ncaa could lose some of the gambling litigation battles occurring in various jurisdictions. Perhaps Delaware could even win a legal battle over the new policy in Delaware courts. The wording of the new policy catches Delaware, but perhaps the new policy could be attacked in courts in Delaware because it was created to catch Delaware or it was capricious. No one likes the ncaa. Courts and judge in Delaware would look for a way to decide against the ncaa. Also, the ncaa is afraid of litigation.

As for posters like Gannon, I must say that I told you so. You kept wanting to lump Montana and Delaware in the same basket, and I kept saying you were wrong, the state gambling laws were very different, and the ncaa could certainly conclude the Montana law was fine.

[ChickenMan]

http://www.desu.edu/userfiles/image/KC%20Keeler%20140.jpg

Playoffs? Playoffs... Don't talk about playoffs. Are you kidding me? Playoffs? I'm just hoping we can win another game.

[GannonFan]

A battle lost for Delaware, but the war is not over. The ncaa could lose some of the gambling litigation battles occurring in various jurisdictions. Perhaps Delaware could even win a legal battle over the new policy in Delaware courts. The wording of the new policy catches Delaware, but perhaps the new policy could be attacked in courts in Delaware because it was created to catch Delaware or it was capricious. No one likes the ncaa. Courts and judge in Delaware would look for a way to decide against the ncaa. Also, the ncaa is afraid of litigation.

As for posters like Gannon, I must say that I told you so. You kept wanting to lump Montana and Delaware in the same basket, and I kept saying you were wrong, the state gambling laws were very different, and the ncaa could certainly conclude the Montana law was fine.

I wasn't wrong - the NCAA policy at the time did not in anyway separate the gambling that was done and has been done in Montana versus the gambling that could be done in Delaware. The NCAA, up to this point, never differentiated different forms of gambling.

Even more interesting, the NCAA's now apparent allowance of gambling in other forms, including parlay bets, is an interesting change in policy as when the state of Delaware first reintroduced gambling, it was only going to be parlay bets, not single game bets. The NCAA, at that time, was very clear that any betting, parlay included, would still result in a ban. So, really for the first time ever, the NCAA has approved various forms of gambling.

Really, the only thing this policy was written for was to ban UD, DSU, and Wesley College from hosting playoff games. And it was in direct rebuttal to the NCAA's own Championship Committtee that recommended that student athletes not be singled out and punished for the actions of the state legislatures in which their school happens to reside. I'm not sure this is the final word in this matter, as the NCAA's actions here are certainly very specific to punish Delaware only. We'll see where this leads.

[bluehenbillk]

I can't speak to legal challenges, I'm not a n antitrust lawyer. But, Delaware should've made the jump to 1-A (FBS) years ago. It's time to pony up, put the UDAF in high gear, put some concrete plans in place for new digs & make the move.

[Bull Fan]

Hasn't LV hosted an NCAA basketball tourney game in the past? (I'm asking this without googling)....

Damn, every time I see a picture of that big ol' head on Keeler, I laugh. I mean really, can't he have that surgically repaired?

Wonder if UD would move future "home" playoff games to a site in Pa or Md? You guys are a stone's throw away... Of course it's negating the creature comforts of the Tub and the feeling of "home", but it's also better than playing on your opponent's home field...

[GannonFan]

Hasn't LV hosted an NCAA basketball tourney game in the past? (I'm asking this without googling)....

Damn, every time I see a picture of that big ol' head on Keeler, I laugh. I mean really, can't he have that surgically repaired?

Wonder if UD would move future "home" playoff games to a site in Pa or Md? You guys are a stone's throw away... Of course it's negating the creature comforts of the Tub and the feeling of "home", but it's also better than playing on your opponent's home field...

Nope, they wouldn't play elsewhere - still would have to bus students, the athletes, etc. Home is home, playing anywhere else would still be at least a 30-45 minute trip. UD fans will still travel to a local site for an away playoff game.

I don't believe Vegas has ever hosted an NCAA tourney game. The bowl games are sanctioned by the NCAA (players still need to meet NCAA requirements to play in the game, schools need to follow NCAA policies, etc) but in the NCAA's infinite wisdom, the bowls are not part of an NCAA "sponsored" championship and are therefore exempt from this policy.

[aust42]

Nope, they wouldn't play elsewhere - still would have to bus students, the athletes, etc. Home is home, playing anywhere else would still be at least a 30-45 minute trip. UD fans will still travel to a local site for an away playoff game.

I don't believe Vegas has ever hosted an NCAA tourney game. The bowl games are sanctioned by the NCAA (players still need to meet NCAA requirements to play in the game, schools need to follow NCAA policies, etc) but in the NCAA's infinite wisdom, the bowls are not part of an NCAA "sponsored" championship and are therefore exempt from this policy.

The WAC Basketball tournament will be played in Las Vegas in 2011 & 2012. Is this not a NCAA sanctioned event?

[Bull Fan]

GannonFan, I should have clarified. NCAA tournament game for basketball. Completely understand the point about bowl games not being NCAA sponsored / sanctioned / blessed events.

Busing off to a relatively "local" area in Md or Pa- still better than having to play in a playoff opponent's home stadium and on their field. A neutralizing factor I would think. Just my thoughts; I know it's not a real home game for you, but it would still be a road game for an opponent.

[Uncle Buck]

Why can't they just allow single game bets but put a ban on offering a line on any NCAA sponsored championship events? I know it probably makes too much sense and is too easy, but if UD or one of the other schools makes the playoffs, no line can be offered and no wagers placed. Of course that only counts for your gambling establishments, not the nickel and dime bookies who will take bets on the DL.

[henfan]

Why can't they just allow single game bets but put a ban on offering a line on any NCAA sponsored championship events?

That type of change to DE legislation would not affect how the NCAA is applying its ruling. NCAA policy would not distinguish between single game bets on pro vs. college sports. DE legislation already excludes betting that would involve any DE team.

Oddly, the NCAA policy does distinguish between various types of gambling it finds acceptable. For example, single game betting is not OK but the type of gambling that involves sports lotteries, pools & parlay betting is perfectly fine. The latter three all rely on game outcomes and yet the NCAA has deemed them as somehow not in contrast to their anti-gambling philosophy.

I'd be suprised if UD, DSU & Wesley didn't present a challenge to the NCAA's targeted, unevenly applied, seemingly retaliatory policy in court.

[Bull Fan]

You'd think Joe Biden's mouth would start going on about this somehow. Is he a Hen backer?

[Grizzaholic]

The WAC Basketball tournament will be played in Las Vegas in 2011 & 2012. Is this not a NCAA sanctioned event?

It is not the fact that it is an NCAA event, but it is a conference thing. The NCAA is just worried about playoff/championship stuff. Conference tourneys have nothing to do with playoffs or championships.

[henfan]

You'd think Joe Biden's mouth would start going on about this somehow. Is he a Hen backer?

You obviously haven't been paying attention.
http://www.udel.edu/udaily/2009/sep/images/CHAMPS092.jpg

Biden aside, UD will do what it feels it has to do to protect the well being of its student-athletes. My hope is that a common sense resolution can be reached with the NCAA. It would be really unfortunate for the UD and the FCS if this decision drove the school to FB reclassification.

[Bull Fan]

honestly no, henfan. I'm not a Biden fan at all. He's a schmuck with a big mouth and phony air to him. A complete turnoff, and not the ideal #2 man for anyone embracing the era of "change" that most of us wanted. Not going to get political here (though this thread is political in nature).

[GoDukes86]

No need for despair Delaware, winning a NC on the road isn't unprecedented! :)

[griz8791]

It is not the fact that it is an NCAA event, but it is a conference thing. The NCAA is just worried about playoff/championship stuff. Conference tourneys have nothing to do with playoffs or championships.

Actually, conference tourneys have a lot to do with how the kinds of schools that play FCS football qualify for the Big Dance in basketball. In most cases I don't see any of us (beyond special cases like Georgetown, Villanova, and UMass) getting an at large bid to the NCAA tourney.

I also don't see how you can carve out a conference tourney from the purported "wholesomeness of the competition" rationale that supposedly drives this policy.

[89Hen]

This ruling sucks but I have trouble off the top of my head seeing how Delaware could win a suit against the NCAA. If I'm right the NCAA is a private organization that can make up its own rules (as long as they don't violate any specific laws or violate the rights of a protected class) or are violating a contract or agreement.

I'll never say impossible but it would seem like an uphill battle for the Delaware to win. Maybe some sort of settlement too.
I'm sure there's room in there somewhere for a successful anti-trust suit.

[89Hen]

Intersting to see what this would have done to the playoffs the last time the Hens were in the playoffs (2007). Here is what the bracket was...

UNH @ UNI (1)
DelSt @ Delaware

EIU @ SIU (4)
Fordham @ UMass

EWU @ McNeese (2)
JMU @ AppSt

Wofford @ Montana (3)
EKU @ Richmond

I think it's safe to assume that the other 3 non-seeded hosts would continue to host. JMU is the next logical host after UD (they actually should have hosted over Richmond). So that probably means that UD and JMU just change spots and the NC game now is a first rounder AND the much anticipated UD/DSU game never happens. xeyebrowx

UNH @ UNI (1)
DelSt @ JMU

EIU @ SIU (4)
Fordham @ UMass

EWU @ McNeese (2)
Delaware @ AppSt

Wofford @ Montana (3)
EKU @ Richmond

So the way I see it, you JMU boys (along with the Lehigh contingent) should be writting letters of support to the NCAA. :p

[State Line Liquors]

It's a very spiteful move by the NCAA, but an effective one that definitely stings for fans like me. I don't even live in Delaware, and it's got me thinking about the downside to sports betting. I don't even think the state has approved table games at this point, have they?

It'll end up getting resolved in court one way or another. If the NCAA wins, we'll be moving on to FBS sooner that we hoped, and probably not in the company of the teams we'd prefer, at least at first. Maybe we can get the State to chip in some of their gambling revenue to the facilities project, since they're the ones who set the snowball in motion, right?

This will def test the mettle of our brand new AD. Unchartered waters for most, that's for sure.

[89Hen]

Maybe we can get the State to chip in some of their gambling revenue to the facilities project, since they're the ones who set the snowball in motion, right?

This will def test the mettle of our brand new AD. Unchartered waters for most, that's for sure.
Good call on both. Hey State, you f'd us for hosting so you need to fix this. xthumbsupx

[Grizzaholic]

Actually, conference tourneys have a lot to do with how the kinds of schools that play FCS football qualify for the Big Dance in basketball. In most cases I don't see any of us (beyond special cases like Georgetown, Villanova, and UMass) getting an at large bid to the NCAA tourney.

I also don't see how you can carve out a conference tourney from the purported "wholesomeness of the competition" rationale that supposedly drives this policy.

I understand that, but because it is not a sanctioned NCAA tourney, it is a conference one, the NCAA has no say in what/how/when it is done. Don't ask me. You try reading the NCAA rules and regs and then tell me if your brain is mush. I have tried a couple times on rules or whatever and the legalese and cross talk is so rampant in that thing it could mean just about anything.

[Ivytalk]

Stupid retaliatory act by the NCAA, coming the day after the NFL's TRO motion was denied.xmadx

[State Line Liquors]

Good call on both. Hey State, you f'd us for hosting so you need to fix this. xthumbsupx

And wouldn't it be great if the State flipped the bird right back at the NCAA and invested some of the evil gambling revenue into the athletics of their state schools?

That would be an amusing thumb in the NCAA's eye.

[Uncle Buck]

I think the whole thing stinks and the NCAA needs to get taken down a peg on this one. I don't even like Delaware and i would still be upset that they are getting railroaded like this.

[griz8791]

I understand that, but because it is not a sanctioned NCAA tourney, it is a conference one, the NCAA has no say in what/how/when it is done. Don't ask me. You try reading the NCAA rules and regs and then tell me if your brain is mush. I have tried a couple times on rules or whatever and the legalese and cross talk is so rampant in that thing it could mean just about anything.

So it's even more confusing than I thought it was and there is a point in the post-season where you cross into their jurisdiction. They need to mark that point with a sign, much like those signs at state lines, that says "leaving realm of common sense, entering NCAA-land."

[henfan]

honestly no, henfan. I'm not a Biden fan at all.

Gimme a break. If your intention wasn't to interject your personal political views into the discussion, why in God's name would you have not simply conducted a simple web search on the terms "Biden" and "Blue Hens"?xliarx

This action by the NCAA should concern all schools in the FCS. What happens if NJ's lawsuit is successful and they are permitted to begin single-game sports betting, opening the door for other states? How long before PA, NY or some other financially strapped state turns to single-game betting as a source of revenue and have their universities and colleges hit by the same sanction?

[GannonFan]

That type of change to DE legislation would not affect how the NCAA is applying its ruling. NCAA policy would not distinguish between single game bets on pro vs. college sports. DE legislation already excludes betting that would involve any DE team.

Oddly, the NCAA policy does distinguish between various types of gambling it finds acceptable. For example, single game betting is not OK but the type of gambling that involves sports lotteries, pools & parlay betting is perfectly fine. The latter three all rely on game outcomes and yet the NCAA has deemed them as somehow not in contrast to their anti-gambling philosophy.

I'd be suprised if UD, DSU & Wesley didn't present a challenge to the NCAA's targeted, unevenly applied, seemingly retaliatory policy in court.


That's the thing that gets me - the NCAA, in the course of a year, has gone from a full blown, all gambling is bad position (even threatening Delaware with the loss of playoff games if the state institutes parlay betting only and not even single game betting), to now, for the first time I think, approving certain forms of gambling. Of course the policy is written to only punish the student athletes at 3 schools, and oddly enough the most hurt by all of this is probably little ol Wesley, who as a DIII school will most likely lose money every year during the playoffs now and they don't have the deep pockets or the ability to reclassify like the Hens do and probably will.

Gotta hand it to the NCAA, they have the ability to turn a blind eye to the biggest transgressors in sports but can really stamp the little guy when they want to. Take that Wesley!!!!! xrotatehx

[Bull Fan]

Gimme a break. If your intention wasn't to interject your personal political views into the discussion, why in God's name would you have not simply conducted a simple web search on the terms "Biden" and "Blue Hens"?xliarx

This action by the NCAA should concern all schools in the FCS. What happens if NJ's lawsuit is successful and they are permitted to begin single-game sports betting, opening the door for other states? How long before PA, NY or some other financially strapped state turns to single-game betting as a source of revenue and have their universities and colleges hit by the same sanction?

Simply put, I don't want Biden to be part of my google search cache. He's that reprehensible. Let's let this die.

[89Hen]

And wouldn't it be great if the State flipped the bird right back at the NCAA and invested some of the evil gambling revenue into the athletics of their state schools?

That would be an amusing thumb in the NCAA's eye.
xlolx xnodx xbowx

[Grizzaholic]

That's the thing that gets me - the NCAA, in the course of a year, has gone from a full blown, all gambling is bad position (even threatening Delaware with the loss of playoff games if the state institutes parlay betting only and not even single game betting), to now, for the first time I think, approving certain forms of gambling. Of course the policy is written to only punish the student athletes at 3 schools, and oddly enough the most hurt by all of this is probably little ol Wesley, who as a DIII school will most likely lose money every year during the playoffs now and they don't have the deep pockets or the ability to reclassify like the Hens do and probably will.

Gotta hand it to the NCAA, they have the ability to turn a blind eye to the biggest transgressors in sports but can really stamp the little guy when they want to. Take that Wesley!!!!! xrotatehx

If this has been said sorry, I must have missed it.

Would/couldn't they become an NAIA school? Would that get them out of the frying pan so to speak?

[GannonFan]

If this has been said sorry, I must have missed it.

Would/couldn't they become an NAIA school? Would that get them out of the frying pan so to speak?


I'm sure they could, not sure they would though. Not a lot of NAIA schools in the East, as far as I can recall - NAIA tends to be more of a Mid-West and West thing, whereas the East is more DIII and DII. So scheduling and travel would become an issue, as obviously DIII schools aren't equipped for that.

[Grizzaholic]

I'm sure they could, not sure they would though. Not a lot of NAIA schools in the East, as far as I can recall - NAIA tends to be more of a Mid-West and West thing, whereas the East is more DIII and DII. So scheduling and travel would become an issue, as obviously DIII schools aren't equipped for that.

No, I hear you on that. I figured that NAIA schools would be kind of few and far between on the EC(B). I just didn't know if NAIA would get them around the NCAA BS?

[henfan]

Simply put, I don't want Biden to be part of my google search cache. He's that reprehensible. Let's let this die.

But not reprehensible enough for you to introduce his name for the third time on this thread alone? xchinscratchx xliarx

Agreed about letting it die. I'll turn my attention to someone who has something to say on the topic of "No Playoffs in Delaware."

[henfan]

Of course the policy is written to only punish the student athletes at 3 schools, and oddly enough the most hurt by all of this is probably little ol Wesley, who as a DIII school will most likely lose money every year during the playoffs now and they don't have the deep pockets or the ability to reclassify like the Hens do and probably will.

That's exactly right. I wonder how the D-III reps on the Executive Committee from Christopher Newport and Widener voted? Wesley's loss could be a gain for their schools... unless, of course, federal regs someday permit VA & PA to enact single game sports betting legislation.

[Green26]

While I don't purport to know what the ncaa was thinking, or precisely what their prior policy meant or covered, I'm not so sure that the prior ncaa policy opposed all forms of gambling.

The stated policy did not say it opposed all forms of gambling. It said that ncaa championship events would not be held in metropolitan areas where gambling based on the outcome of a game was permitted.

The ncaa had and has different, and more expansion and comprehensive, anti-gambling rules for student-athletes and athletic department personnel. However, these were never linked to the championship event policy.

The ncaa policy appears to have shifted, now specifically saying that pools, parlays, etc. won't trigger the event prohibition, but I suppose one could argue that the new policy is still consistent with the prior policy, but with clarification. I believe the new policy will be harder to attack, because it's a more rationale policy which focuses more clearly on the outcome of a particular event. And yes, I recall the (stupid) initial statements of the ncaa woman, lumping Montana into the policy. However, I doubt that she knew much about the Montana situation and laws, at the time of her statement(s).

If the policy still includes the metropolitan area limitation, is there an angle for Delaware to not allow its new gambling in the "metopolitan area" where the stadium is located, so the gambling is only allowed elsewhere? Or, is that not practical or feasible?

Cooler heads, i.e. the ncaa members as opposed to the ncaa staff, have prevailed in this matter.

Like most of you, I agree that the ncaa, especially the staff, are truly stupid much of the time. Also, total hypocrites.

I hope Delaware finds a way out of this.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Seven pages, and nowhere has it been said that the NCAA has been remarkably consistent in their public comments on this issue.

They have a zero-tolerance policy on gambling.

They said that if Delaware legalizes NFL betting, they would ban the schools from and NCAA playoff events.

And they did.

Every move that the NFL made on this matter, the NCAA moved in lockstep. You can argue if it's right or wrong, or that it might be hypocritical, but the NCAA pretty much upheld what they said they were going to do in May.

And - also unsurprisingly - the defense 'well, they play a bowl in Las Vegas' was not an effective counterargument. Frankly, sometimes it seems like the only counterargument.

So I wouldn't call this a 'retaliatory' or 'spiteful' move. It is simply the NCAA doing what they said they were going to do. Hypocritical? Maybe. But not surprising.

*****

While I acknowledge that the NCAA has some hypocrisy here, I can't escape the moral indifference of all the members of Delaware's government in this, from the state Supreme Court to Mr. Markell. Rather than try to do what is really necessary (raise taxes and perhaps, shudder the thought, cut their own salaries) they want to open the floodgates to the gambling industry instead to balance their books. The sad truth is also that sports gambling most likely will not plug the hole in the state's budget, while allowing everyone to keep their salaries - temporarily.

I struggle with the same things at home. The Sands just opened in Bethlehem, and I think that it's a blight on the town. Already within walking distance from campus, I shudder to think what might happen if there was sports gambling there. And I of course have Gov. Rendell to thank for that - too bad I don't have the pleasure of voting against him in the next election.

I bring this up because: how come the NCAA gets all the blame, but the feckless Delaware legislature/governor/Supreme Court gets none? Shouldn't someone from UD have told them 'Look, we might lose a good FCS thing if we have this here - it's not worth it?' I mean, it's not like this should have come to any surprise to anybody that the NCAA has a policy against sports wagering, and the NCAA has the control here - they can choose to have your school participate, or not. But UD has a lot more say in the goings-on in the Delaware state house than with the NCAA.

*****

Overall, it's really just a sad, predictable situation. I harken back to this:

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php/2009/06/03/the-csn-way-hail-mary-passes-in-delaware?blog=5


It seems inconceivable to have the FCS playoffs without Delaware, Montana or Montana State hosting playoff games – you have to go all the way back to 1990 to find a year when one of these three schools didn’t host a home playoff game. (Ironically, in that year Nevada, based in another gambling state, reached the national championship game.)

But the NCAA can choose the rules to determine its championship, and unless the NCAA, Montana, Montana State, Delaware, and Delaware Sate officials complete a hail-mary pass of their own FCS fans may very well see Delaware, Delaware State, Montana, or Montana State on the road throughout the playoffs.

That would be a real tragedy for FCS football fans everywhere. But it’s hard to see how it might be prevented.

It’s unfair to tell the state of Delaware that they can’t use revenue that’s available to them, even if it has little hope of balancing the state budget. Yet it’s also unfair to require the NCAA overlook gambling when they’re in the business of amateur athletics and absolutely must have a zero-tolerance policy on gambling for their athletes – even if they’re not always consistent on their readings of these rules.

In this discussion on sports gambling, it could very well be that nobody emerges as a winner.

xsmhx

[henfan]

The ncaa policy appears to have shifted, now specifically saying that pools, parlays, etc. won't trigger the event prohibition, but I suppose one could argue that the new policy is still consistent with the prior policy, but with clarification. I believe the new policy will be harder to attack, because it's a more rationale policy which focuses more clearly on the outcome of a particular event.

Parlays, pools, single game betting, lotteries all depend on the outcome of events. What difference does it make if it's the result of single or multiple games?

I don't know about harder to attack; it just might be easier. The NCAA has yet to explain the rationale of how one form of sports betting is acceptable compared with another under their new/clarified policy. That's something they may have to do in a court of law.

[Bull Fan]

But not reprehensible enough for you to introduce his name for the third time on this thread alone? xchinscratchx xliarx

Agreed about letting it die. I'll turn my attention to someone who has something to say on the topic of "No Playoffs in Delaware."

Considering the VP is supposed to be such a UD backer, you'd figure he'd put his worthless two cents into the ring and pine for what's in the best interest of the institution he supports. I mean, he has time to sit for a photo op in chugging a beer with a cop and a professor, he should have time for his local constituents as well. At least that's the way I'd feel if he was one of my guys....

[GannonFan]

Seven pages, and nowhere has it been said that the NCAA has been remarkably consistent in their public comments on this issue.

They have a zero-tolerance policy on gambling.

They said that if Delaware legalizes NFL betting, they would ban the schools from and NCAA playoff events.

And they did.

Every move that the NFL made on this matter, the NCAA moved in lockstep. You can argue if it's right or wrong, or that it might be hypocritical, but the NCAA pretty much upheld what they said they were going to do in May.

And - also unsurprisingly - the defense 'well, they play a bowl in Las Vegas' was not an effective counterargument. Frankly, sometimes it seems like the only counterargument.

So I wouldn't call this a 'retaliatory' or 'spiteful' move. It is simply the NCAA doing what they said they were going to do. Hypocritical? Maybe. But not surprising.


Well, actually, the NCAA has not been consistent with their public statement on the matter. When they threatened the state with the ban back in March, that was when the state was considering parlay-only betting. That was when the NCAA had, as you say, a "zero tolerance" on gambling. Now however, the NCAA has retracted that zero tolerance and has drawn a line between the gambling they allow and the gambling they don't allow - parlays good, single game betting bad. I don't see how you think the NCAA has been consistent with that apparent change in policy.

[henfan]

Seven pages, and nowhere has it been said that the NCAA has been remarkably consistent in their public comments on this issue.

Except when they weren't being consistent. In attempting to define a policy that was not at all clear or consistent, the NCAA's own Championship Committee recommend last month that post-season home games awarded on merit be excluded from consideration. Oddly, that recommendation was consistent with the organization's policy for schools affected by the post-season ban in SC. Further addressing the point of their inconsistency, the NCAA has indeed permitted a post-season NCAA tournament event- and recently- in a state with a long record of single game betting.

This is clearly a retaliatory act coming, as no coincidence, a day after a failed court decision. Because the NCAA has no jurisdiction over the State of Delaware, they have choosen to attempt intimidation by sanctioning the same student-athletes and universities they are supposed to be protecting.

This certainly is not the end of this issue.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I don't see how you think the NCAA has been consistent with that apparent change in policy.

They have been consistent insofar as saying "The type of gambling that the State of Delaware wants will result in a postseason ban".

[State Line Liquors]

They have been consistent insofar as saying "The type of gambling that the State of Delaware wants will result in a postseason ban".

The first time around, parlay betting only was the proposed form.

[GannonFan]

While I acknowledge that the NCAA has some hypocrisy here, I can't escape the moral indifference of all the members of Delaware's government in this, from the state Supreme Court to Mr. Markell. Rather than try to do what is really necessary (raise taxes and perhaps, shudder the thought, cut their own salaries) they want to open the floodgates to the gambling industry instead to balance their books. The sad truth is also that sports gambling most likely will not plug the hole in the state's budget, while allowing everyone to keep their salaries - temporarily.

I struggle with the same things at home. The Sands just opened in Bethlehem, and I think that it's a blight on the town. Already within walking distance from campus, I shudder to think what might happen if there was sports gambling there. And I of course have Gov. Rendell to thank for that - too bad I don't have the pleasure of voting against him in the next election.

I bring this up because: how come the NCAA gets all the blame, but the feckless Delaware legislature/governor/Supreme Court gets none? Shouldn't someone from UD have told them 'Look, we might lose a good FCS thing if we have this here - it's not worth it?' I mean, it's not like this should have come to any surprise to anybody that the NCAA has a policy against sports wagering, and the NCAA has the control here - they can choose to have your school participate, or not. But UD has a lot more say in the goings-on in the Delaware state house than with the NCAA.


Well, first of all, I'm not sure the State Supreme Court should really be weighing the moral fortitude of gambling - they should be more in the business of whether gambling is legal or not. But that's a different discussion I'm sure.

As for the state being concerned about UD and it's "good FCS thing", let's be honest, UD brings in a pittance when it comes to playoff money. Sure they make something and outside of Montana and Appy St they might be the only ones to make any money on the playoffs, but it's a very small amount, even a small amount to what UD makes on football during the regular season. The state has a $800 million dollar deficit and hopes that gambling can provide $70M a year to help with that - UD makes, max, $2M on football per year. When it comes down to jobs, services, and everything else, versus FCS football, it's not hard to see why they state wouldn't blink over this matter, and I don't blame them for that. I'm against sports gambling as an institution, but it is legal in many places and even where it's illegal it's widespread. With that reality, I can't blame the state for wanting to get a piece of that pie, considering gambling will be widespread regardless if it's legal or not.

And again, what's sad about all of this is the punishment to the student athlete. I know it's the case at both UD and DSU, where upwards to 2/3 of the students don't even come from the state of Delaware. So basically they are being punished by the NCAA because of the actions of a state legislature and governor that they have absolutely no involvement in at all. Like I said, the NCAA has adopted a "Take That Wesley!!!" approach. How noble. xsmhx

[GannonFan]

They have been consistent insofar as saying "The type of gambling that the State of Delaware wants will result in a postseason ban".


Come on, be serious - you think consistency is "we'll have a postseason ban for whatever gambling you come up with, even if you change it during the process"? Now you're just being argumentative to be argumentative.

[griz8791]

If it means anything to you guys, I believe this diminishes the playoffs.

[henfan]

Like I said, the NCAA has adopted a "Take That Wesley!!!" approach. How noble. xsmhx

Let's not forget D-II schools Wilmington University & Goldey Beacom.

[GannonFan]

If it means anything to you guys, I believe this diminishes the playoffs.

Well, if Delaware gets screwed by it (get a seed, or at least deserving of a seed, and they don't get home games they clearly would've/should've) then yes, in that year the playoffs will be diminished. If Delaware never would've gotten a home game in the playoffs (and despite urban myths out there, UD has never gotten home games they didn't deserve based on their regular season results - you might be able to use '04 as an example when UD got an opening round game, but that's as close as you can come to a "bought" home game and even that case isn't clear) then it won't matter as Delaware would've/should've been on the road anyway.

What this does do, sadly, is make the playoffs politicized. Rather than being about the student athletes and rewarding their performances, it says that the NCAA is more interested in using them to score political points. That doesn't leave you with a warm and fuzzy feeling at all. xsmhx

[ASU_MBA]

This is so so so stupid. Sorry to the teams, this is not your fault and you should not be punished.

[Bull Fan]

Like I said, this is where some of the more prominent officials must step in and throw some of their weight around for the good of the larger picture.

[Green26]

Does anyone have a link or quote from the ncaa saying they have (or had) a zero tolerance policy regarding gambling as it relates to hosting an ncaa championship event in that state (or metopolitan area)?

[Green26]

HenFan, while I can understand your argument, I generally don't agree that parlays, pools, lotteries or fantasy sports are gambling based on the outcome of a sporting event. Take fantasy football. It isn't based on the outcome of the event. It's based on individual statistics that occur during the event--not the outcome and certainly not the final score. Take buying squares on a Super Bowl board. The buyer doesn't bet on the outcome of the game, i.e. the score, the buyer gets squares that are randomly selected and assigned numbers.

I don't understand the intricacies of pools, parlays and lotteries. Perhaps you could make your argument more specifically to educate some of us.

I think the ncaa is most concerned about situations in which it would be possible for gamblers to pay off individual players to influence the outcome of a game. In addition, the ncaa doesn't want any players or athletic dept personnel to engage in any type of gambling (or virtually any type) or be associated with gambling.

[crossfire07]

I think the ncaa is most concerned about situations in which it would be possible for gamblers to pay off individual players to influence the outcome of a game. In addition, the ncaa doesn't want any players or athletic dept personnel to engage in any type of gambling (or virtually any type) or be associated with gambling.

EXACTLY. Montana's situation is totally different than Delewares and I am totally for the ban. When a bookie can pick up the phone and change the outcome of a game, something has to be done and before you say it won't or can't happen I will remind you of a certain NBA official that did just that. Deleware legislators chose 50 mil over football so people should not be mad at the NCAA but those that put them in this situation, Deleware Legislators.

[GannonFan]

HenFan, while I can understand your argument, I generally don't agree that parlays, pools, lotteries or fantasy sports are gambling based on the outcome of a sporting event. Take fantasy football. It isn't based on the outcome of the event. It's based on individual statistics that occur during the event--not the outcome and certainly not the final score. Take buying squares on a Super Bowl board. The buyer doesn't bet on the outcome of the game, i.e. the score, the buyer gets squares that are randomly selected and assigned numbers.

I don't understand the intricacies of pools, parlays and lotteries. Perhaps you could make your argument more specifically to educate some of us.

I think the ncaa is most concerned about situations in which it would be possible for gamblers to pay off individual players to influence the outcome of a game. In addition, the ncaa doesn't want any players or athletic dept personnel to engage in any type of gambling (or virtually any type) or be associated with gambling.


Parlays are bets on more than one single event, but still rely on the outcome of those events. Basically, a parlay is tying together 2 single bets, but it's most certainly a bet on the outcome of the games.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parlay_(gambling)

[GannonFan]

EXACTLY. Montana's situation is totally different than Delewares and I am totally for the ban. When a bookie can pick up the phone and change the outcome of a game, something has to be done and before you say it won't or can't happen I will remind you of a certain NBA official that did just that. Deleware legislators chose 50 mil over football so people should not be mad at the NCAA but those that put them in this situation, Deleware Legislators.

Uh, you do realize that NCAA ban or not, what you said can and does go on right now? Gambling is not going to be affected in anyway if Delaware legalizes it or not. All it does is put some of the moneys that are going into the illegal gambling world right now into the state coffers. To think that gambling isn't widespread and beyond the control of the NCAA is absurd.

Oh, here's a copy of the story of the Toledo men's basketball point shaving scandal, from this year, that happened even though Ohio nor Delaware, at the time, had sports gambling.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4146980

[henfan]

I don't understand the intricacies of pools, parlays and lotteries. Perhaps you could make your argument more specifically to educate some of us...

I think the ncaa is most concerned about situations in which it would be possible for gamblers to pay off individual players to influence the outcome of a game. In addition, the ncaa doesn't want any players or athletic dept personnel to engage in any type of gambling (or virtually any type) or be associated with gambling.

Green, football pools, parlays & some lotteries do indeed depend on the outcomes of combined games to determine winners & losers. Scratch tickets and fantasy games, while not necessarily depending on game outcomes, rely on individual performances in competitive events. The possibility of tampering or unduly influence exists in any form of gambling. You're free to argue the gradients of how much could occur with one form of gambling vs. another.

I actually agree that the NCAA is right to take a cautious stance of gambling of any sort but that's not what they've done here. I disagree with the NCAA's seemingly uneven and inconsistent application of its philosophy, especially when it adopts rules against its membership in retaliation to measures enacted by state governments. NCAA Championship Committee offered a common sense proposal that would have upheld the NCAA's anti-gambling stance, while, at the same time, not punishing student-athletes & schools for something completely outside of their control. In their infinite wisdom, the Executive Committee, which features representation from a single school with FCS FB, decided to ignore the obvious.

[93henfan]

Just to reiterate a few points so people who have gone off on a tangent can refocus:

1. Under Delaware's sports betting law YOU CANNOT GAMBLE ON GAMES INVOLVING DELAWARE TEAMS. So, a bookie can't change the impact of any of the games of teams who are now being banned from hosting postseason football games in Delaware via a Delaware casino.

2. Delaware passed table gaming the same time they passed the sports betting legislation. Someone said they weren't sure, but yes table games are now legal.

3. Someone asked for a link on the NCAA having a zero tolerance policy on gaming. Well, they did have that policy until yesterday. Now they no longer have a zero tolerance policy, so any link would be outdated.

Lastly, a question: Does this ban mean that Delaware teams can or cannot "host" a "home" playoff game outside the state?

[GannonFan]

To make a silly point here, the NCAA has basically said that betting on single game outcomes will result in a ban. So the state of Delaware's current policy of allowing single game bets, although not allowing any bets to be taken on games involving teams from the state of Delaware, is ban-worthy.

What wouldn't be ban-worthy, however, would be if the state lifted the exclusion of Delaware teams and went with only parlay bets. Under that system, I could make a bet on the outcome of a UD game and a DSU game, and if I picked the winners in both games, I would win. And under the NCAA's current revised gambling policy, this would be perfectly legal and post season games could be held in Delaware (of course, taking LFN's suggestion that the NCAA has always been consistent, I'm sure they would then revise their policy to be whatever it had to be to prevent whatever gambling Delaware tried to implement). Now tell me how that makes any sense.

[Green26]

Thanks for starting my education, guys. In looking parlays on the Internet, I found various sites saying parlays were "sucker" bets and the following:

"Professional sports bettors never bet parlays -- there's too much juice in it for the sportsbook."

This is not intended as support for the ncaa position.

[KAUMASS]

Wasn't "parlay" a pirate code for amnesty?

How did Montana get out of that one and UD did not? Makes no sense. BS ruling.

Things are going to get interesting in the next few years with regards to conferences on the East Coast.

[aust42]

This whole thing is so assnine I cannot imagine that the NCAA will uphold banning post season games at Delaware whether it be common sense prevailing or a court of law over turning the NCAA's outrageous ruling.

[GannonFan]

Thanks for starting my education, guys. In looking parlays on the Internet, I found various sites saying parlays were "sucker" bets and the following:

"Professional sports bettors never bet parlays -- there's too much juice in it for the sportsbook."

This is not intended as support for the ncaa position.

Well, parlays are harder to win on as you need to win more than one single event. Of course, the payouts on parlays are also greater due to the increased difficulty in winning the bet.

But like I said, the idiocy of the NCAA's position (one which, as others have said, went against the advice of the NCAA's own Championship Committee) would actually allow parlay betting on Delaware teams in the state of Delaware. Just imagine people lining up to bet UD to win over Towson and Michigan to beat DSU!!! xlolx

[aust42]

EXACTLY. Montana's situation is totally different than Delewares and I am totally for the ban. When a bookie can pick up the phone and change the outcome of a game, something has to be done and before you say it won't or can't happen I will remind you of a certain NBA official that did just that. Deleware legislators chose 50 mil over football so people should not be mad at the NCAA but those that put them in this situation, Deleware Legislators.

it's spelled D-E-L-A-W-A-R-E.

[henfan]

Montana's situation is totally different than Delewares and I am totally for the ban.[/COLOR]

We'll see how much you support the ban when UD's hosting Montana in Annapolis, MD.;)

http://z.hubpages.com/u/910484_f496.jpg

[darell1976]

There won't be any football playoffs in North Dakota and it has nothing to do with betting.xlolx

[GaSouthern]

IT IS FBS TIME FELLAS!

This is the biggest reason to make the jump for schools that can if there was ever one.

[asu3peat]

So why is the NCAA penalizing the universities for something lawmakers passed???

Good luck with your move after the moratorium is lifted!

[State Line Liquors]

EXACTLY. Montana's situation is totally different than Delewares and I am totally for the ban. When a bookie can pick up the phone and change the outcome of a game, something has to be done and before you say it won't or can't happen I will remind you of a certain NBA official that did just that. Deleware legislators chose 50 mil over football so people should not be mad at the NCAA but those that put them in this situation, Deleware Legislators.

Ha.

[McNeeserocket]

I think that is BS too. I guess Montana got lucky due to different gambling rules and regulations in Montana verses Delaware.

So please explain how Montana can host playoff games and Delaware cannot.

[93henfan]

So please explain how Montana can host playoff games and Delaware cannot.

Because the NCAA made up a new rule yesterday, a day after a judge told them to F-off in their suit against Delaware. What a coincidence?

To answer your question, there is no explanation. In neither Delaware nor Montana can you bet on any college teams from those states.

This is simply a spiteful, arbitrary, and capricious act by the NCAA.

[pitpen]

Am I the only one that thinks the NCAA's argument regarding the Las Vegas Bowl is weak? Sure, the bowl is administered by the BCS, but the teams are from the NCAA. If the NCAA were so concerned with the well being of its student athletes, couldn't they sanction any team accepting an invitation to a bowl game in a state that sponsors single game sports betting? Am I to believe that the NCAA has no recourse here?

[ngineer]

Now that UD won't be hosting playoff games, maybe we'll see the Blue Hens up in Bethlehem in December.

What, Lehigh making the playoffs and hosting a game you say?! Mark it down!

Would love to see UD fans up in Bethlehem for the first time since '97 (I think or is it longer?)

You are correct. 1997 was a great game at Goodman, with the Hens pulling out a 24-19 win. Lehigh had a ton of close losses that year, going 4-7. Then followed up with the amazing string of 12-1, 10-2, 12-1, and 11-1.

Back to the point, though, as much as I razz UD people, I have tremendous respect for their program and hate it when I see bs like this thrown at them.

[ASU]

For goodness sake, UD doesn't deserve this crap. Let's all go on strike. Form a new football association.....one in competition with the BCS also, not just the NCAA.

Pick up the phone and call Joe Biden. If nothing else, get conference calls made to other FCS schools and have their presidents start getting a FBS conference ready.....need to have paperwork in by June 2010.....timing is in advance of the end of the moratorium.

[eaglesrthe1]

I doubt that the FBS is the answer for UD, because the REAL moneymaker for the NCAA in the Basketball tourney. The NCAA chose to make an example of Delaware not because they are FCS, but because the state doesn't have any FBS teams at this time. Thus they can make a stand here, without rocking the boat for any major FBS conferences that host BB regionals.

The NCAA is saying to the OTHER states "if you adopt gambling in the future, you will not host any BB tourneys for the NCAA".

Also, while there isn't a IA playoff at this time, the public is clamoring for it... to the point that there has been some talk of the legislative branch getting involved... and a playoff system for the BCS in the future is not out of the question and would come under the same rules.

[89Hen]

There is always succession....Delaware Nation, First In, and Last Out.
xlolx xthumbsupx

[89Hen]

If it means anything to you guys, I believe this diminishes the playoffs.
Yes and no. Delaware, Montana, AppSt, GSU.... have always gotten an advantage of playing home games because of facilities, and more important, attendance. That's really not fair when thinking about it from a pure athletic standpoint. So it probably doesn't deminish the playoffs any more it used to when it came to UD. xpeacex

[89Hen]

Lastly, a question: Does this ban mean that Delaware teams can or cannot "host" a "home" playoff game outside the state?
I can't remember if somebody else mentioned this, but what if UD goes 10-1 this year and gets one of the four seeds?
xeyebrowx xrotatehx xnutsx

[Cocky]

I doubt that the FBS is the answer for UD, because the REAL moneymaker for the NCAA in the Basketball tourney. The NCAA chose to make an example of Delaware not because they are FCS, but because the state doesn't have any FBS teams at this time. Thus they can make a stand here, without rocking the boat for any major FBS conferences that host BB regionals.

The NCAA is saying to the OTHER states "if you adopt gambling in the future, you will not host any BB tourneys for the NCAA".

Also, while there isn't a IA playoff at this time, the public is clamoring for it... to the point that there has been some talk of the legislative branch getting involved... and a playoff system for the BCS in the future is not out of the question and would come under the same rules.
Don't forget the BCS is not the NCAA.

[Ivytalk]

And there is no joy in Henville... mighty Markell has struck out!xmadx:p

[Go...gate]

[/U][/I][/B]

You are correct. 1997 was a great game at Goodman, with the Hens pulling out a 24-19 win. Lehigh had a ton of close losses that year, going 4-7. Then followed up with the amazing string of 12-1, 10-2, 12-1, and 11-1.

Back to the point, though, as much as I razz UD people, I have tremendous respect for their program and hate it when I see bs like this thrown at them.

Same here. You guys are getting it without so much as a kiss. xsmhx

[93henfan]

Someone jokingly mentioned it on GoHens.net, but I'm wondering if it has any merit. Delaware Stadium is about two miles from the Maryland border. There are several large fields just west of Elkton Rd and north of I-95 within a half-mile of a large interchange on I-95.

Would the NCAA ban us from playing home playoff games at a stadium three miles from the heart of our campus that is in a state that doesn't allow sports betting? xconfusedx

[crossfire07]

the NCAA will say their rule states "no home playoff game" and won't care what state it is in.I would not expect anything less from them.you would have an easier time getting the legislators to change the law than getting the NCAA to change their mind.

[EmeryZach]

This is nuts. It's not even good sports betting in Del., it's only parlays.

[GannonFan]

This is nuts. It's not even good sports betting in Del., it's only parlays.


No, they are planning single game bets. Oddly, though, the NCAA has declared in their "make sure to punish Delaware and not anyone else" missive that they are perfectly fine with parlay bets, on NCAA sports nonetheless. Apparently their noble pursuit of their anti-gambling crusade they decided to turn a blind eye to a whole swath of gambling that they've now basically said okay to.

[EmeryZach]

Ohhhhh. Now single game bets would get me very interested in visiting Delaware. I might have to look into that.

Let me know when that happens Gannon.

[GannonFan]

Ohhhhh. Now single game bets would get me very interested in visiting Delaware. I might have to look into that.

Let me know when that happens Gannon.


Apparently this September. But don't you just have a local bookie like everyone else in America already does??? xlolx

[mcveyrl]

I can't remember if somebody else mentioned this, but what if UD goes 10-1 this year and gets one of the four seeds?
xeyebrowx xrotatehx xnutsx


the NCAA will say their rule states "no home playoff game" and won't care what state it is in.I would not expect anything less from them.you would have an easier time getting the legislators to change the law than getting the NCAA to change their mind.

I think CF07 is right. As much as it pains me to admit it, this just proves that the NCAA has us by the short and curlys.

In relation to Hen's question, does this keep Delaware from seed eligibility? That could really F up the whole process. For instance, if they deserved the 2 seed, but didn't get seeded because of this and they were the closest team to another seed, would they have to play them? OR do they get a seed, but no home game (which really just means they avoid a seeded team until the semis)?

Practically speaking, they aren't that close to other possible seeds for this to make much of a difference the first round, but could matter in the second.

[OL FU]

Apparently this September. But don't you just have a local bookie like everyone else in America already does??? xlolx

Damn good point, it isn't legal in South Carolina but just go to the local neighborhood bar, get to know the regulars and finding a place to make a bet is pretty darn easy.

[GannonFan]

Damn good point, it isn't legal in South Carolina but just go to the local neighborhood bar, get to know the regulars and finding a place to make a bet is pretty darn easy.

According to the NCAA, they would be shocked, simply shocked to find out that is the case. xlolx

[Catsfan2]

Well, a Federal appeals court ruled today that Delaware IS NOT exempt from the Federal ban. So no betting in Delaware, looks like playoffs can return.

[Catsfan2]

Here's the wire service report


A federal appeals court ruled Monday that Delaware's plan to offer sports betting would violate a 1992 federal ban on sports wagering.

The court in Philadelphia ruled after hearing almost two hours of arguments from attorneys for Delaware and for professional sports leagues and the NCAA, who opposed the plan.

Delaware claimed it was exempt from the federal ban because it ran a sports lottery in 1976. The leagues claim the exemption does not allow Delaware to offer bets on single games or on sports other than professional football, but attorneys for the state argued otherwise.

The leagues were challenging the denial of an injunction that would have prevented the betting from beginning next month. Attorneys for Delaware argued that the leagues had not met the requirements for an injunction.

But instead of ruling on the injunction, the appeals court turned directly to the league's claim that the sports betting would violate federal law.

During Monday's arguments, Judge Theodore McKee questioned what would happen if the state was allowed to begin sports betting in September, then have it declared illegal by several months later. Individual bettors will have lost hundreds or thousands of dollars on what essentially was an illegal state scheme, he noted.

''What happens if you're wrong?'' McKee asked Andre Bouchard, an attorney representing the state.

''Caveat emptor,'' Bouchard replied, citing the Latin admonition of ''buyer beware.''

[89Hen]

HOORAY (for now).

[93henfan]

The State of Delaware has appealed: http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090914/NEWS/90914052


Contending that a three-judge federal panel erred in restricting Delaware's sports betting plans to multigame wagers on the National Football League, the state has appealed to the full 12-judge court.

In seeking an “en banc'' hearing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, lawyers for Delaware are hoping to resurrect plans to offer bets on other pro and college sports, as well as lucrative single-game bets.

The three-judge panel dashed those plans in late August, just days before Delaware's three racetrack casinos were to begin taking bets. Instead, Delaware's casinos could only offer parlay bets on at least three NFL games when sports betting started Thursday after a 33-year absence.

“The panel's ruling is inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent, contradicted by legislative history, factually ungrounded, and an improper exercise of appellate review,'' lawyers for the state wrote in a 15-page motion filed this afternoon in Philadelphia.

Lawyers for America's major sports leagues, spearheaded by the NFL, had sued Delaware in July, arguing that the state's plans violated the 1992 Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. That law, which banned sports betting nationwide, exempted Delaware and three other states, but only “to the extent'' it was “conducted'' previously.

Delaware briefly had sports betting on at least three NFL games in 1976. The Third Circuit panel ruled Aug. 31 that single-game bets and wagers on other sports were out, and said Delaware's plans so clearly violated the 1992 law that no trial was needed.

Lawyers for the leagues could not immediately be reached on the state's appeal.

Gov. Jack Markell said the state should “have its day in court. We hope we get that opportunity. We believe there are important legal and factual questions that should be heard by the entire court.”

[Ivytalk]

Stupid decision, IMHO. The decision to appeal, that is.

And the parlay betting is attracting early interest from curiosity-seekers but will soon fade away, just like '76.xcoolx

[GO BLUE HENS]

I thought the playoffs were banned only if single betting went through. Which was denied by circuit court in Philly.

[GO BLUE HENS]

based upon single-game betting (high school, college or professional) in a sport in which the NCAA conducts a championship,” xcoffeex

[GannonFan]

I thought the playoffs were banned only if single betting went through. Which was denied by circuit court in Philly.


based upon single-game betting (high school, college or professional) in a sport in which the NCAA conducts a championship,” xcoffeex


You're correct, and as it stands today, per the NCAA's wording, UD could host playoff games this year, assuming they make the playoffs. Only the single game betting is banned, and the parlay betting is explicity allowed per the NCAA (maybe one of the first times the NCAA actually approved a gambling scheme). Unless something changes, Delaware can and would host playoff games, assuming they make the playoffs.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

You're correct, and as it stands today, per the NCAA's wording, UD could host playoff games this year, assuming they make the playoffs...

Unless UD surprises me and sweeps the remaining three Top 7 CAA South teams on their schedule, this is becoming a largely academic exercise.

[GannonFan]

Unless UD surprises me and sweeps the remaining three Top 7 CAA South teams on their schedule, this is becoming a largely academic exercise.

Eh, we'll see. UMass and JMU are at home so those games are certainly winnable, and we'll see soon enough when they play W&M in two weeks. UD wins down in Williamsburg and everything becomes possible.

[henfan]

Unless UD surprises me and sweeps the remaining three Top 7 CAA South teams on their schedule, this is becoming a largely academic exercise.

At this early date, with most CAA teams having played less than 1 conference game, don't you think it's all "largely academic"? xnodx

The football is a funny shape and sometimes takes funny bounces. You never who is going to lose key players, which team will emerge, etc. Today's stud might be tomorrow's goat.

We'll see how it shakes out one week at a time. While maybe fun to project & speculate, it's way too early to consider schools sweeping the conference, winning titles, etc.

In the meantime, the courts will handle the gambling situation.

[JDC325]

So says the NCAA:


http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090806/SPORTS/90806067/NCAA+ruling++No+playoffs+at+Del.+schools


What's the stadium size/attendance requirement for FBS/I-A again?

I agree with the FBS thought, I could not imagine never having playoff games at Paulson again.....or atleast the chance to...xsmhx

[93henfan]

I agree with the FBS thought, I could not imagine never having playoff games at Paulson again.....or atleast the chance to...xsmhx

Just to clarify the sequence of key events, since this thread spans a fairly large date range:

1. Delaware announced it would reinstate sports wagering, as allowed by law, but would also be including single game wagering. Delaware did not include single game wagering in the 1976 sports lottery under which it was grandfathered to be the only state east of the Mississippi allowed to offer sorts wagering.

2. NCAA and all major sports leagues file suit against Delaware to stop single game wagers.

3. Leagues do not get an injunction and case moves to 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals.

4. NCAA says it will ban playoffs in states with single game wagering.

5. Three judge panel at 3rd Circuit Court rules that Delaware's proposed single game wagering is not in compliance with PASPA and squashes Delaware's plans for single game betting.

6. Delaware begins taking parlay wagers on Sep 10.

7. Delaware filed the appeal of the 3rd Circuit Court's ruling yesterday.


As it stands now, playoffs are still allowed in Delaware, as there is no single game wagering allowed here, pending the appeal.

[LacesOut]

I'm late to this thread, so sorry if this has already been asked, but did any of you locals place any 'legal' bets this past weekend in DE?

[93henfan]

I'm late to this thread, so sorry if this has already been asked, but did any of you locals place any 'legal' bets this past weekend in DE?

I have not... yet. From what I heard, the payout on a successful $20 3-for-3 parlay is $120. Not too shabby. :D

http://www.delawarepark.com/race_sportsguide.php xrulesx

[tribe_pride]

Unless UD surprises me and sweeps the remaining three Top 7 CAA South teams on their schedule, this is becoming a largely academic exercise.


Eh, we'll see. UMass and JMU are at home so those games are certainly winnable, and we'll see soon enough when they play W&M in two weeks. UD wins down in Williamsburg and everything becomes possible.

LFN - Don't be giving Delaware bulletin board material

As Talley said about his own squad, W&M is overrated. We will be lucky to win another game.

[93henfan]

W&M is overrated. We will be lucky to win another game.

Nice try. xnonox

You guys are a juggernaut. Certainly the surprise team in the CAA South. xnodx