Gambling in College Football Essay

Todays naked as a jaybird generation has accredited sword dissemble more than any previous generation. People argon compete poker and forecastting on bouncys one the internet and even on college campus. harmonise to them it is a social activity and there is nonhing handle in play. This negative attitude has made this problem seep humble to the highest level of human population, its intellect (Oregon part of Human Services, 2005). Gambling is a social problem which not only threatens the academic success of a student but also depletes the pecuniary resources. Risking property in the disposek of winning is called gambol.Gambling includes lottery tickets, online betting games, cards, dice, dominoes etcetera(University of Texas, 2004). In prehistoric round months various football gambling stories have created a madhouse among the coaches and administration of various colleges. Colleges ar invariably trying to find new steerings of finding and punishing the culpr its. The main concern however, is to create such(prenominal) rules which sens prevent students from placing a bet and hence suckting abstruse in this organized crime. In past few years gambling incidents have been recorded from quite known and influential colleges.These include azimuth State University, Boston College, University of Colorado, Columbia University, Fresno State University, and Northwestern University etc. concord to a research done by a student from the University of Michigan, to the highest degree 72% of the students had tryd in one way or the other. Almost 80% of these were male students (Cross & Vollano, n. d). In order to understand the issue of student athletic supporter gambling in more than an anecdotal way, this content was developed to go over the extent and nature of student supporter gambling.According to The subject standoff of Student military group Administration (NAPSA), gambling is a problem not vindicatory in jock students but in all s tudents. They constantly urge college management to develop programs which aware students about the potential hazards of gambling (The National Association of Student Personnel Administration, 2007). In 1874, college pro sports had its premiere s beardal. Louisville college football players were accused of gambling against their own team. According to Arnie Wexler, who was a causation College football gambler, and is now a recognized expert on tyrannical gamblingIts easier to plant a bet on a college campus than it is to buy a notify of beer or a package of cigarettes, you just pick up a telephone and call a bookmaker on campus. You dont even have to leave your room (Kindred, 1996). This is absolutely true. The college administration usually does not care about such things. They burry their heads in the sand and if asked pretend as if nothing is equipment casualty is happening. For past half century the college football and basketball has been full of wagering incidents. Th e National Collegiate athletic Association (NCAA) did a survey in 2003.According to that survey almost one percent of the total college football players accepted money for poor performance. Moreover, half the time they played, they were able to modify the burden of the game by their performance. It was also found that almost 15% of the non athlete students also gambled. It is not just the gambling part, but the players usually rear inside information to the gamblers and help them win (National Collegiate athletic Association, 2003). Students who gamble risk their callings to fulfill their need and obsession to gamble.Such activities do not necessarily occur in the isolation of college but the culprits might get together in a friends place in order to place the bet. Bets put forward be placed in the internet and in near cases via phone also. In 2004, two student bookies were caught. They were convicted of sports bribery. Stevin Hedake Smith owed almost $10,000 to a student boo kie. In order to pay him back he concord with the bookie to play poorly at the game. The FBI became suspicious and later caught him and his friends. afterwards this incident the NCAA changed quite a few rules of the game.Though before gambling was always condemned, but it was never a definite rule. However, after this event, the NCAA has anti gambling rules in black and white (Gabriel, 2004). Sometimes even a simple thing as accepting gift certificate can be termed as gambling too. In a simple event, few women participated in a simple pick a winner game and earned gift certificates of $50. When the college administration found out about this they illegalize those students from playing in the football team. Due to this event, accepting gift certificates was against the rules (National endowment fund for financial education, 2004).According to the NCAA You may not place any bet of any sort on any college or professional sports event. You may not give information to anyone who doe s place bets on college or professional sports (National Endowment for financial education, 2004). Moreover, the NCAA further explains these rules as There can be no betting on any sport, whether it involves your college or not. There can be no wager for any item i. e. cash, shirt, dinner etc. No sports jackpots No internet gambling No fantasy leagues (this federal agency no fee for participation and no prize for winning) No information exchange about your or any other team (including injury, or anyother problems) (NCAA, 2005 NCAA, 2003). Looking at the table below it can be resolute how many students playing college football engage them selves in wagering activities and how many take that the rules above have really made a difference. Figure semblance of proportion of S_As who gamble on college sports versus proportion who says that NCAA Rules discourage sports wagering Source NCAA, 2004 The change in the rules of college football has surely reduces the amount of bets pl aced.Though at some level students are still gambling, but if caught they know that their careers will answer to an end. The amount of shame and humiliation caused by the media coverage also has an blow on the number of bets placed e very(prenominal) year. According to the new rules by NCAA, any student who is caught violating the game rules will not be furnished to play in any of the plays he has formerly registered too. This means his entire career comes to a halt. Such strict rules have helped in the reduction of wagering issues (NCAA parole release, 1999).In August 2007, several students complained that the coaches were using text messages to gamble or place bets. Almost 75% of the people voted in favor of forbidding text messaging. Due to the gambling problem, yet another rule had to be placed. According to the New York Times, the NCAA has now placed a ban on text messaging. The president of NCAA was disappointed so much that he called this an astonishment to all of inter collegiate athletics (Thomas, 2008). The coaches have tried to work around this rule too.According to many coaches as there is no ban for e-mailing they can place bets on the e-mails. Many cell phone companies allow e-mailing also, so coaches are now trying new ways without faulting any rules (Miller, 2008). The administration should always clearly state the rules, as not doing so means leaving a loop hole, with the help of which the students can gamble. Sometimes, the committee can accuse somebody of gambling, but such a person might not have understood the rules properly. In 2004 a former football coach was accused of gambling.He later sued NCAA for objective him and later firing him. According to him he did not understand the way NCAA operates. Hence it is not just about defining rules, but explaining them in such a way that everybody understands them (Yaeger et al, 2004). Gambling in college football has very grave consequences. A student can get expelled from college, get ab ject in word of honor stories, can occasion an embarrassment for himself and his family, get criminalise from all professional sports, become a victim of organized crime, crack his financial resources and sometimes even end up in jail.To summarize, wagering can destroy a persons life. It is not only the obligation of the students themselves, but the responsibility of the college administration to help create awareness among students so that no student get involved in these matters and does not become a victim of bookies. Even though the generation today has certainly got more involved in gambling, poker, wagering etc, but measures can be interpreted in order to help these students. Many organizations are working and are constantly trying to help these students break their habits. It might be catchy but not impossible.The management and the administration of the colleges should also instead of ignoring these things, in order to help prevent scandals and create a bad cook of th eir schools, should help students get over this habit. Rules should be devised which are clear and strict. College students are the most important part of any population, and if they get involved in these things, this means that the human intellect has been affected.References Cross, Michael E. & Vollano, Ann G. (n. d). Gambling Education. University of Michigan. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. umich. edu/mgoblue/compliance/gambling/summary. hypertext markup languageGabriel, Walter (2004). Gambling common at colleges during March Madness Office pool cost coach his job. Louisiana State University. The Daily Reveille. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//media. www. lsureveille. com/media/storage/paper868/news/2004/03/11/Sports/Gambling. Common. At. Colleges. During. March. Madness-2048935. shtml Kindred, David. (1996). Ignoring gambling wont make it go out-of-door gambling at college campuses Column. The Sporting News. November 18. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//fi ndarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n47_v220/ai_18869994 Miller, Phil (2008). Like Water nearly A dam.Retrieved January 2, 2008 from http//marketpower. typepad. com/market_power/college_football/index. html National Collegiate athletic Association (2003). Sports wagering study on collegiate sports wagering and associated behaviors. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. ncaa. org/library/research/sports_wagering/2003/2003_sports_wagering_study. pdf National Endowment for financial education (2004). Dont bet on it put your money on a real winner, yourself. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. ncaa. org/gambling/dontbetonit/2004. pdf NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association). (2005).NCAA rules and regulations. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. iupui. edu/athlete/handbook/rules. html NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association). (2003). Protect Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. ncaa. org/library/ ecumenic/general_brochure/2003/2003_gen_info. pdf NCA A (National Collegiate Athletic Association). (2004). Comparison of proportion of S_As who gamble on college sports versus proportion who say that NCAA Rules discourage sports wagering. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. ncaa. org/gambling/2003NationalStudy/slideShow/sld028. htm NCAA News release (1999).Report Of the NCAA contribution I Working Group to Study Basketball Issues. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. ncaa. org/releases/basketballissues/1999082001bi. htm Oregon Department of Human Services (2005). Gambling and College Students Literature Review. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. oregon. gov/DHS/addiction/gambling/collegestudents-gambling. pdf Thomas, Katie. (2008). N. C. A. A. exile on Text-Messaging as Recruiting Tool Will Remain. The New York Times. 13th Jan. Retrieved January 3,2008 from http//www. nytimes. com/2008/01/13/sports/13ncaa. html? _r=3&ref=ncaafootball&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=sloginThe National Association of Student Personnel A dministration. NAPSA. (2007). Students affairs administrators in higher education. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. naspa. org/pubs/index. cfm University of Texas (2004). Gambling You bet your life. The councelling and mental health centre. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//www. utexas. edu/student/cmhc/booklets/gambling/gamb. html Yaeger, Thomas, E. Benjamin A. Converse, Doug Ulrich, David Codron, Ryan Restivo (2004). Your turn. Retrieved January 3, 2008 from http//findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_46_228/ai_n6362465