Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

NFL Random Thought of the Day

Commanders offered but Seahawks declined. Looks like Texans could be in play if “you know who” gets his legal troubles straightened out.

 
How did the NFL find that out?

According to Mike Garafolo of NFL Media, Hard Rock recognized Ridley’s name and contacted Genius Sports Group, which oversees betting integrity for the NFL. The compliance company notified the NFL, which then began an investigation.

Falcons receiver Calvin Ridley was due to make $11 million in 2022. He’ll lose all of it (or at least wait a minimum of a year to earn it) over $1,500.
 
This is only the beginning.

*****************************************************************************

Atlanta Falcons’ Calvin Ridley suspended indefinitely for gambling on NFL games
By Kevin Dotson, CNN
4:59 PM EST, Mon March 7, 2022


Atlanta Falcons wide receiver Calvin Ridley has been suspended indefinitely for gambling on NFL games during the 2021 season, the league announced Monday.

The suspension will last at least through the conclusion of the 2022 season, the NFL said. Ridley, 27, may petition for reinstatement on or after February 15, 2023.

In a letter to Ridley notifying him of his suspension, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell wrote, “Your actions put the integrity of the game at risk, threatened to damage public confidence in professional football, and potentially undermined the reputations of your fellow players throughout the NFL.

“For decades, gambling on NFL games has been considered among the most significant violations of league policy warranting the most substantial sanction. In your case, I acknowledge and commend you for your promptly reporting for an interview, and for admitting your actions.”

The NFL’s investigation found no evidence that any game was compromised in any way by Ridley’s actions. The league did not specify which games Ridley gambled on.

CNN has reached out to the NFL Players Association and Ridley’s agents for comment.

Ridley had stepped away from football for personal reasons

After the NFL announced Ridley’s suspension, the former Alabama standout tweeted, “I bet 1500 total I don’t have a gambling problem.”

THE REST OF THE STORY

**********************************************

A source who reviewed the findings of the investigation told The Athletic: Ridley placed the bets via a mobile app in Florida, and officials there noticed unusual activity and reported it to Genius Sports, the firm that handles data and sports betting information for the NFL. Per the source, Ridley placed three parlays, a three-team, five-team and eight-team, and bet on the Falcons to win in each of them. The bets were all made between Nov. 23-28. The Falcons beat the Jaguars on Nov. 28.

Wonder when they start mining the phone app for zebras....................
 
Houston NFL, we have a problem!!!

****************************************************************************************


NFL Won't Be Able to Push Flores, Gruden Cases Into Goodell-Led Arbitration Since League Is A Party
By Daniel Wallach

In the realm of adjudicating player discipline cases under Article 46, Roger Goodell has been famously described--not inaccurately---as 'the judge, jury and executioner.' And even the appellate judge too.

This is because the collective bargaining agreement between the players and the league gave the NFL Commissioner broad disciplinary authority to impose discipline in the first instance and then to review the correctness of his own decision in the event an appeal was filed by the accused player through the NFLPA.

But where the league itself is a defendant and its own conduct is directly at issue--such as in the case of the recent lawsuits filed by Brian Flores and Jon Gruden--can the NFL similarly bank on language in the two coaches' employment agreements with their former teams to force these recently filed lawsuits into private arbitration before Commissioner Goodell, who for all intents and purposes is the league's CEO?

In a word, no.

Are we really that brainwashed from 'Deflategate' to believe such a scenario is plausible, much less likely?

Unlike the player discipline cases, such as those involving Tom Brady, Adrian Peterson and Ezekiel Elliott, there is no CBA in effect here. (Nor has there even been any completed arbitration--a highly significant fact given the longstanding reluctance of federal courts to interfere with already-completed arbitration proceedings).

Rather, the hook on which the NFL will be seeking to have its own chief executive performing the role of 'neutral' arbitrator to decide the fate of serious accusations against the league--and potentially subjecting the league to millions of dollars in damages and industry-shifting injunctive relief--is standardized language in most NFL coaches' contracts acknowledging that the agreement "shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the Constitution, Bylaws, rules, and regulations of the National Football League." To that end, section 8.3(E) of the NFL Constitution and Bylaws provides that "[t]he Commissioner shall have the full, complete and final jurisdiction and authority to arbitrate . . . [a]ny dispute involving a member or members in the League or any players or employees of the members of the League or any combination thereof that in the opinion of the Commissioner constitutes conduct detrimental to the best interests of the League or professional football."
THE REST OF THE STORY
 
Since 2000 there have been 13 QBs who have won a SB. This is how it breaks down.

QB------------------Wins
Tom Brady-----------7
Ben Roethlisberger--2
Eli Manning----------2
Peyton Manning-----2
Aaron Rodgers------1
Brad Johnson--------1
Drew Brees----------1
Joe Flacco------------1
Matthew Stafford----1
Nick Foles------------1
Patrick Mahomes----1
Russell Wilson-------1
Trent Dilfer----------1
 
Carson Wentz, Colts traded to Washington Commanders for (2) 3rd RD picks.

a little more than that

According to ESPN’s Adam Schefter, the Colts will receive Washington’s 2022 second-round pick, its 2022 third-round pick, and a 2023 third-round pick that will convert to a second-round pick if Wentz is on the field for 70 percent of the offensive plays.
 
This is why minority HC hires are so low in the NFL. If you're an owner, why would you want to put yourself in a position to be sued?

Well if you are the Texans you get sued either way even if you first hired a minority head coach, then fire that coach and then hire a different minority head coach with a better resume than the guy who happens to be a minority and is the guy suing you.
 
Well if you are the Texans you get sued either way even if you first hired a minority head coach, then fire that coach and then hire a different minority head coach with a better resume than the guy who happens to be a minority and is the guy suing you.

Agreed and this is part of the reason the Texans are where they are today. This cycle really goes back to RS and the drafting of Derrick, although some dont want to admit this. Where this stops nobody knows, ownership is weak. I'm hoping the foolishness stops with adults like Caserio/Lovie in the room. But I doubt this happens.
 
I don't get the hate for Wentz. Even with the bad year his last year in Philly he has 124 TD and 43 INT the last 5 years. 24.8 TD, 8.6 INT per year. People would be over the moon if Mills ended up with similar numbers.
When he's good he's very very good but when he is bad, he is hateful, spiteful, awful, horrible, terrible bad.
 
Makes you wonder why he can’t hold down a job.

I don't know. Haven't heard any stories about him being a cancer or anything like that. It appears he's getting the blame for not beating Jacksonville the last game and getting them to the playoffs, despite being sacked 6 times and the team having under 100 yards rushing.
 
So with the trade of Wentz, where do the Colts look for their next QB?

……couldn’t we just sabotage the Colts by giving them Watson and paying half his salary in 2022 so the Texans could count on at least 2 in division wins next season? I mean, how could the Colts ever get beyond 4 wins with Watson under center?
 
I don't get that. Wentz and Trubisky seem like almost the same QB, with Teubisky being more mobile and Wentz being more careful with the ball.

View attachment 9824

I think Wentz is perceived to be not the best teammate. Maybe a variety of factors contributing to that. Such as all the drama in Philly, then the not vaxing in Indy. Plus I think Wentz has had more injuries.

Stats never tell the entire story.
 
I think there's enough to say that neither guy is going to solve anyone's QB problems.

I didn’t see in your original post that you were trying to make that point.

Depends on your QB problem you are trying to solve. Both could be bridge QBs. Tribusky should get a second chance to see if Chicago was the problem and not just him.
 
I didn’t see in your original post that you were trying to make that point.
That's exactly the point I was making. Why would the Colts trade Wentz just to bring in a QB of the same caliber (at best)? At least make a move that has some possible upside (Jordan Love, rookie QB).
 
If I was colts I would gamble on trubisky. A prove it deal of course.

Maybe Wentz wasn't a culture fit

Not many options out there
 
Interesting exactly how they caught Ridley, even though he didn't use his name. But if you read this article, it should make it very clear that sports betting is a can of worms which cannot effectively monitor the whole sports betting world for rule breaking professional players, coaches, owners, etc.

****************************************************************************
FAQ: Calvin Ridley exemplifies challenge of stopping players from betting

What did Ridley do?

Ridley violated the league's gambling policy by placing three multi-leg parlay bets that included at least one NFL game in November 2021.

The bets were made online with the Hard Rock sportsbook.

He placed a three-team, five-team and eight-team parlay, risking $500 on each. His parlays included the Falcons "to win," according to sources. The Falcons were small road favorites over the Jacksonville Jaguars on Nov. 28. Atlanta covered the spread in a 21-14 win. It has not been revealed to ESPN if Ridley bet on the Falcons on the money line (to win straight up) or with the point spread.

Ridley bet on multiple sports, including the NBA, for much larger stakes than his $500 parlays, upwards of $10,000, according to sources. The NFL gambling policy allows players to bet on other sports besides football with legal operators.

How did Ridley get caught?

According to multiple sources familiar with the event, Ridley placed the bets on his cellphone but used a betting account not registered in his name with Hard Rock's Florida sportsbook. Ridley was outside of Florida when he placed the bets, triggering a geolocation violation and leading the sportsbook to investigate further, according to the sources.

Online sportsbooks use geolocation services to track where bets are being placed. The geolocation service collects data, such as IP addresses, from the device being used to place the wager.

After receiving the geolocation notice, the Hard Rock sportsbook notified Genius Sports, an NFL partner that monitors the betting market for the league, prompting the investigation that ultimately led to Ridley's suspension. Genius Sports is a London-based company that distributes data from leagues, including the NFL, to sportsbooks around the world, while also looking for unusual betting patterns.

What can sportsbooks do to prevent players and other prohibited personnel from betting on their
leagues?


Sportsbooks face a significant challenge in preventing a player, coach or referee from placing bets on their leagues. The professional sports leagues successfully lobbied many states to include regulations prohibiting players, coaches, trainers and other personnel from betting on their sports. New York's sports betting rules, for example, prohibit wagering by "any person whose participation may undermine the integrity of wagering on a sports event or the conduct of such sports event itself." Sports agents, players unions personnel, team owners and employees of sports governing bodies are among those prohibited from betting on events they are associated with in New York.

Jeff Ifrah, a prominent gaming attorney in Washington, D.C., said it is difficult for sportsbooks to identify prohibited bettors, especially if a sports league hasn't provided a comprehensive list of personnel and identifying data.

"It may be the case, for example, that a football player is betting, but if the NFL hasn't given their database and integrated it with [a sportsbook] then the sportsbook isn't going to be able to identify the player," Ifrah told ESPN. "And they're not going to just blacklist someone because their name matches a football player somewhere. It's difficult to do that if the league isn't providing that list."

Conscious Gaming, a Nevada-based company, believes it has technology that can assist in identifying prohibited bettors. The company's "PlayPause" platform, which creates a multi-state self-exclusion and impermissible bettor list, is in the early stages of launching with state regulators and operators, according to Anna Sainsbury, trustee of Conscious Gaming and CEO of GeoComply, a company that provides geolocation services to most U.S. sportsbook operators.

Adding impermissible bettors, like athletes and coaches, to a shared database would allow sportsbooks to cross-reference with their customer list, similar to what they do with problem gamblers who have self-excluded.
"With the significant growth of sports betting across the U.S. market, we see the opportunity to leverage more innovative and reliable methods to mitigate problem gambling and ensure impermissible bettors are indeed restricted from wagering based on league policies and regulatory requirements," Sainsbury told ESPN in a statement. "Any individual whose participation may undermine the integrity of the wagering or the sports event could have significant consequences. Only with player safeguards, fraud detection and effective age and identity verification are we able to create a regulated market we're proud of. This means whether a player has self-excluded or if they are prohibited from betting due to regulatory restrictions, operators have confidence that they are compliant."

Sportsbooks also use "know your customer" or KYC protocols, which vary by state and often are defined broadly with terms like best practices or measures and risk assessment. KYC is designed to combat money laundering, but it also is a tool for identifying prohibited bettors. Typically, the amount wagered triggers enhanced procedures, including random auditing of deposits, asking for personal identification data and running background and credit checks through services like LexisNexis and Experian.

In New York, licensees are instructed to identify customers and types of play that "potentially possess the greatest risk of money laundering." Gaming operators are required to file currency reports with the appropriate federal agency on any transactions of more than $10,000. Bets totaling at least $5,000 also could receive additional scrutiny in New York.

What is the NFL's policy in regards to players betting on sports?

Players and all league personnel -- owners, coaches, trainers, officials, league office employees, security personnel, consultants, club employees and game-day personnel -- are prohibited from betting, whether directly or indirectly through a third-party, on NFL games and events, like the draft, for example.

What can the NFL do to prevent players and other prohibited personnel from betting on the league?

The NFL provides gambling education to players and personnel. Signage warning of the consequences of betting can be found in team facilities, and the league distributes educational videos, some featuring Shaw, that teams are required to watch.

In addition, the NFL has partnerships within the sports betting industry with established lines of communication between sportsbook operators and the league.

Ultimately, though, there is no definitive way to stop players or prohibited personnel from placing bets on the league. If a player or personnel chooses to violate league policy and bet on the NFL, it is difficult to stop them. The use of proxy bettors -- having another person place a bet for you -- is against many states' regulations but is a common practice within the sports betting community.

Deterrence may be the league's biggest weapon and, in Ridley's and Shaw's cases, it didn't stop them. Shaw, who bet on NFL games while on injured reserve for the Cardinals, also received a suspension of at least one year. He was reinstated March 20, 2021, but has not been acquired.

Is a one-year suspension for betting on a player's team to win when the player is inactive too harsh?

It's up for debate. Some pundits have tried to compare the penalty to other off-field violations, but gambling is unique and can damage the integrity of the entire sport. And, again, deterrence may be the NFL's biggest tool in trying to discourage players and personnel from betting on the league.

EPIC Risk Management, an international company with a U.S. headquarters in Delaware, works with athletes and leagues to educate on the dangers of gambling. John Millington, director of sports partnerships for EPIC Risk Management, said he saw Ridley post on social media that he only wagered $1,500 and that he does not have a gambling problem.

"It might be a different story if we look at the situation through the lens of gambling-related harm," Millington told ESPN on Wednesday. "Research in Australia has found that up to 85% of the harms caused by gambling came from those who were not categorized as problem gamblers, and it could be considered that a sports wager that could potentially cost Calvin the best part of $10 million and a prime year of his NFL career, could and should be viewed as harmful gambling activity."

Millington disagrees with the arguments that Ridley's one-year suspension is too harsh.

"Sanctions are an essential and necessary deterrent," Millington said. "But if a 12-month sanction is not already enough to deter a player from betting on their own sport, then I fear simply increasing those sanctions would likely be futile.

"Equally, the idea that a 12-month sanction for gambling on your own sport is too harsh, whilst I understand the disproportionate nature in comparison to some truly condemnable actions, has the potential to severely challenge the integrity of the sport whilst also presenting greater potential for harm for any athlete who might be struggling with problematic gambling," he added. "For a player whose gambling is becoming problematic or harmful, placing money on an event where they can directly influence the outcome is unfortunately inevitable if the sanctions don't act as a significant deterrent."

LINK
 
tlfMVI6.png
 
Back
Top