Other NFL News

[I-10east]

I guess it makes sense anyway - not only has hockey expanded in popularity, but a lot of northerners move to the sunbelt (especially at retirement).

Fair point.

[Adam White]

NFL talking points say that there's no ban on a team in Vegas, or anywhere. Although according to PFT, it would be 'very very unlikely' that 24 owners would vote for a Vegas team. "The NFL has long tried to keep gambling at arm's length, and it's hard to keep gambling at arm's length when you're in the world's gambling Mecca" say Michael David Smith. Take that FWIW.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/30/nfl-talking-points-say-no-ban-on-a-team-in-vegas-or-anywhere/

I guess that goes back to what Wacca Pilatka was talking about. It makes sense, really. I think the right kind of pro sports team would be a good thing for tourism in Vegas. Maybe. A lot of people travel there from abroad - a nice way to tap into the growing international interest.

[Tacachale]

There's no way the NFL ever consents to a team in Vegas, although of course the Raiders and the Davis family are notorious for doing things the rest of the league doesn't like. I really think the NFL would drop the hammer on Vegas, though. The problem of gambling is worse when it's legal only in Nevada. It multiplies the risk of corruption for any team based there, and Vegas isn't so attractive a market that the benefits outweigh the risks.

[JaxJersey-licious]

^^^^ Yeah, the NFL has a very prissy/hypocritical about gambling. A good example of this was Tomy Romo and the NFLPA were organizing this big fan fest for fantasy football last year in Vegas. It would have been before pre-season, attracted a lot of NFL players and celebrities, plus a good chunk of the money would have gone to charities. The league does not normally interfere with activities done through the Player's Association but when they got word of this event their opposition to this event caused a lot of people not to participate and it was cancelled last-minute causing organizer's millions even though the event wasn't sponsored by a casino and it was to be held at a non-casino hotel!

Compare this to the NBA's attitude toward gambling: They held the All-Star game one year in Vegas, had active talks about bringing a franchise to the area, and the commisioner himself hinted that the idea of being able to place bets on NBA games in all 50 states was "inevitable".

It's very obvious why the prevailing attitudes toward gambling are different between the two leagues. Although gambling on NFL games is allowed overseas, besides Canada the next big market for betting NFL is the United Kingdom but it doesn't do as much business as say gambling on soccer or rugby. The NBA, however, has a much more global reach and their fans are more familiar with the teams and the league so you got NBA bettors in areas not too familiar with the NFL like Spain, China, South America, etc. Add to the fact that there are almost five times the volume of NBA games compared to the NFL, overseas gambling not only becomes a much greater part of the NBA's revenue stream but also increases their acceptance of betting NBA games here.

In other words, the NFL may well feel their strong stance against Americans anywhere gambling on football teams (as opposed to individual players) is to protect the integrity of the game, the NBA has now realized that a hard-line stance against NBA gambling in the US doesn't necessarily protect shit.

[Tacachale]

^The gambling stance is really two things. On the one hand, there seems to be this philosophical objection to gambling in general on the part of the NFL, and Vegas troubles them for that reason, but the threat of corruption is another element that's a black mark against the city. The presence of well established, big money gambling there (and only there) increases the chances that gaming interests will be able to influence the team or its staff and players. It's happened before in major league sports, even with gambling being illegal in most of the country. None of the other major leagues have put teams in Vegas either.

[FlaBoy]

^^^It worked for Phoenix. Although IMO all of these new Sunbelt NHL teams aren't necessarily good for the long haul; They should expand/relocate to their roots up in the Northern US/Midwest/Canada.   

Technology is a wonderful thing. I guess it makes sense anyway - not only has hockey expanded in popularity, but a lot of northerners move to the sunbelt (especially at retirement).

Without a doubt. Tampa is infatuated with the Lightning. It is so exciting to bring people to. More corporations in Tampa hold tickets to the Lightning than the Bucs or Rays.

[JaxJersey-licious]

^The gambling stance is really two things. On the one hand, there seems to be this philosophical objection to gambling in general on the part of the NFL, and Vegas troubles them for that reason, but the threat of corruption is another element that's a black mark against the city. The presence of well established, big money gambling there (and only there) increases the chances that gaming interests will be able to influence the team or its staff and players. It's happened before in major league sports, even with gambling being illegal in most of the country. None of the other major leagues have put teams in Vegas either.

Yes, there has always been that traditional Wild Wild West image of Las Vegas and how it is more susceptible to corrupting influences so at the time it was the perfect, corruption-free location for sports gambling but given are shrinking world due to transportation and technological advances (plus the fact of over 2 million people living in the Vegas area now) shouldn't these leagues rethink the effect expanding gambling would ultimately have on their respective sports? Look at the English Premiere League where gambling is encouraged. It's arguably one of the most succesful pro sports leagues in the world and currently there is hardly any talk of fixed matches, corrupt officiating (well...), or purposefully tanking for regulation due to the scourge of legal gambling. Now it's true that there will have to be new regulations and oversights in place when sports gambling is expanded, but just as it's done with point shaving, Pete Rose, and Tim Donaghy - be weary of irregularities in wagering and enforce existing rules and laws.

Plus I wouldn't count out Las Vegas getting a pro basketball or hockey team in the future. They just build a new 300 million dollar arena sponsored by T-Mobile and have been actively searching for pro team tenants despite having corrupt-old sport betting in town.

[spuwho]

The casinos are all owned and run by corporate interests now. The idea that a "Good Fella" is going to try to lean on a player who owes is unlikely now that you have collection firms, courts and a favorable tax code to gambling losses.

The NFL had a player gambling problem in the 60's when crime families still ran Vegas and that set the tone going forward. Baseball had its gambling scandals, its one reason Pete Rose wont make the HOF. He bet on his own team.

Now? Its a non issue.

Mark Cuban uncovered more corruption with NBA refs with his laptop than Stern could in his entire career. That tells you just how bad the NBA used to be.

TV Sports now tracks every pitch in baseball to the micrometer, so if an ump is having a "bad day" cuz he owes a gambling debt, you can assure yourself someone will be on it.

Even Johnny Manziel cant go to Vegas in disguise and fool anyone.

[tufsu1]

There's no way the NFL ever consents to a team in Vegas

I don't know...something tells me if there's enough cash involved and they agree to build a stadium without NFL assistance, that Vegas can happen.

[I-10east]

Without a doubt. Tampa is infatuated with the Lightning. It is so exciting to bring people to. More corporations in Tampa hold tickets to the Lightning than the Bucs or Rays.

Yeah, I talked about Tampa hockey before; They have one of the best, if not the best fanbase in the Sunbelt. I'm still critical with many (not all) Sunbelt NHL teams; You have big boy hockey cities like LA, Dallas, and Tampa, then the polar opposites (with low home percentage attendance averages) are Arizona, Florida, and Carolina (even though not in the Sun Belt, but close enough). Carolina (a team that won the cup before) had a home percentage of only 61.9, dreadfully dismal. Winnipeg nearly had a 100 percent home percentage (with a sub .500 team) that's a real hockey city. 

[copperfiend]

^^^It worked for Phoenix. Although IMO all of these new Sunbelt NHL teams aren't necessarily good for the long haul; They should expand/relocate to their roots up in the Northern US/Midwest/Canada.   

Technology is a wonderful thing. I guess it makes sense anyway - not only has hockey expanded in popularity, but a lot of northerners move to the sunbelt (especially at retirement).

Without a doubt. Tampa is infatuated with the Lightning. It is so exciting to bring people to. More corporations in Tampa hold tickets to the Lightning than the Bucs or Rays.

The Lightning also have terrific ownership with Vinik. The Glazers are horrible.

[Tacachale]

The NHL's problem was moving out of "Hockey Country" too much and too fast. The league got it in their head that they should be able to go wherever the other leagues went. But hockey was just taking off in the Southeast when they placed 6 teams there within 7 or 8 years (plus the teams in Colorado, Phoenix, and Anaheim). Several of them were relocations from what turned out to be comparatively viable markets in the north, and a lot of expense has gone into returning to Minneapolis and Winnipeg, and now they're looking back at Quebec City.

[Wacca Pilatka]

^ Wasn't there also an issue with the weakness of the Canadian dollar making the Canadian teams comparatively less financially competitive, and free agents/draft picks less likely to sign with the Canadian teams?  Same principle that led to the Vancouver Grizzlies' relocation to Memphis in the NBA, I thought.

My recollection was that this was more of a driver toward the southward relocations than local revenue issues, arena issues, or perceived massive growth in hockey interest in the South.  Although I know there was an arena size issue in Hartford. 

[Tacachale]

^ Wasn't there also an issue with the weakness of the Canadian dollar making the Canadian teams comparatively less financially competitive, and free agents/draft picks less likely to sign with the Canadian teams?  Same principle that led to the Vancouver Grizzlies' relocation to Memphis in the NBA, I thought.

My recollection was that this was more of a driver toward the southward relocations than local revenue issues, arena issues, or perceived massive growth in hockey interest in the South.  Although I know there was an arena size issue in Hartford.

Yes, the exchange rate and taxes were a problem, but it was made worse by the continued expansion into the U.S. At one point I think NHL teams could even pay salaries in Canadian dollars. That was gone by the 1990s, and after the strike the salary cap was removed (hitting the small markets the hardest), and there wasn't revenue sharing until a few years ago. But the dollar and tax issues only affected Winnipeg and Quebec (and other Canadian teams that didn't move), not, for instance, Hartford or Minnesota. The Lightning, Panthers, Predators, and erswhile Thrashers were all expansion teams. One could also throw the (Mighty) Ducks and Sharks into that group.

[ProjectMaximus]

LOL, breaking news that is quite appropriate to our Vegas discussion:

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dallas-cowboys/cowboys/2016/02/01/exclusive-sports-gambling-contributed-ex-cowboys-rb-joseph-randles-release

Joseph Randle may have been gambling on NFL games. There's no evidence of that yet, but the NFL is investigating.