Cover alert

cyptomcat

cyptomcat

Hibernating
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
69,982
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...gambling-wagering-odds-tv-broadcast/71897470/

In the fourth quarter of a blowout college football game last Friday night, the announcers threw the broadcast back to the ESPN studios for an important development, accompanied by a highlight. Western Michigan’s touchdown only pulled the Broncos within three scores of Michigan State, so it wasn’t exactly a game-changing play — unless, that is, someone was playing a different sort of game.

As theme music played and a small graphic appeared — “COVER ALERT” — here was anchor Adnan Virk’s report:

“That’s right, a ‘cover alert’! Eighteen and a half was the point spread in favor of the Spartans, but that’s Zach Terrell to Corey Davis, so now that’s making things interesting with regards to the line, 34-17.”
Click to expand...

It was perhaps the first real evidence of what appears to be a fairly significant shift by ESPN. Along with “cover alerts,” the network’s coverage of college football’s first weekend included increased discussion of point spreads and even the “over-under,” or the total points expected to be scored in a game, as well as specific segments on various shows focused directly on betting. One of College GameDay's most popular moments is its pick segment. This season some picks are made against the spread.

College athletic administrators noticed. Several told USA TODAY Sports the shift is concerning.
Click to expand...
 
Now that you mention it, I did notice that too. I remember it because it was super awkward on Gameday. Desmond Howard apparently didn't know how they even worked and kept having to ask if he was using the term "cover" correctly. They did the first half of the picks with the spread and made a point picking margins of victory then switched over to game winners.
 
They started letting it creep in during 2014 more. Fowler always did it in a non-obvious way prior to 2014, but last year and even more so this year, they've quit the subtle "if you're into that sort of thing" charade and just acknowledged that several people play the game within the game
 
Ha! It would be awesome if we got one of those for the Tulane game.

Maybe I'm naive but I think it has as much to do with predicting as betting. People like to make predictions with sports: March Madness brackets, Pick 'Em contests, etc. Using the spread is a way to make picks where the winner/loser pick is obvious more interesting. A team that covers has also exceeded expectations.

Hopefully too though this is a sign sports betting is becoming more normalized. I don't believe legalized gambling would ruin college football.
 
Pretty obvious ESPN was trending that way when they introduced Phil Steele as a regular guest the past couple seasons.
 
Bear was putting fake hundred dollar bills on the board and Phil Steele did an awful segment called Steeleing Money. It ain't about predicting.
 
SVP's monday night Sports Center is gambling heavy, including the "Bad Beats" segment he pulled over from his old radio show. I like it personally, but I'm into that sort of thing
 
I don't think this is too big of a deal. It's not like ESPN sticking their heads in the sand about college football betting was preventing people from doing it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G850A using Tapatalk
 
Fox Sports has been doing betting segments for a couple of years now. Their Saturday morning show is pretty good.
 
I'm concerned and I'm not a college official. There have been allegations in the past of a player here or there being "paid off", but this is just a Pandora's box IMO.
 
What's the concern? If games are being fixed, we know who is fixing them, and it ain't ESPN.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
What's the concern? If games are being fixed, we know who is fixing them, and it ain't ESPN.
Click to expand...

I think it's more a conflict of interest. Disney, parent company of ESPN, invested $250MM into DraftKings (which acquired FanDuel) in 2014. That might explain why they had so much ad time during the OSUvVT game. By drumming up interest in gambling, they stand to steer people towards DraftKings over other more conventional gambling sites.
 
Enuratique said:
I think it's more a conflict of interest. Disney, parent company of ESPN, invested $250MM into DraftKings (which acquired FanDuel) in 2014. That might explain why they had so much ad time during the OSUvVT game. By drumming up interest in gambling, they stand to steer people towards DraftKings over other more conventional gambling sites.
Click to expand...

Is this conflict of interest or good business? No one should expect ESPN and its parent company to serve any interest but their own.
 
Buzz4Him said:
I'm concerned and I'm not a college official. There have been allegations in the past of a player here or there being "paid off", but this is just a Pandora's box IMO.
Click to expand...

It's not that easy to get away with it. Football is a team sport, so you can't fix a game by one guy taking a dive like boxing. There's also already a ton of money in college football betting, and it hasn't wrecked the game.
 
I kind of find it irritating when sports coverage starts to move away from discussion of the real, on-the-field stuff and into meta, fan-driven stuff. To the extent that I'm interested at all, I'm a lot more interested in expert analysis about who will win the game rather than whether a team will cover or not. Similarly, I'm interested in discussion of actual, on-the-field, game-outcome-relevant discussion of player performances, and not their fantasy football stats.

Keep the gambling stuff on gambling shows and the fantasy stuff on fantasy shows, and keep the main analysis about the on-the-field stuff.

JRjr
 
vapspwi said:
I kind of find it irritating when sports coverage starts to move away from discussion of the real, on-the-field stuff and into meta, fan-driven stuff. To the extent that I'm interested at all, I'm a lot more interested in expert analysis about who will win the game rather than whether a team will cover or not. Similarly, I'm interested in discussion of actual, on-the-field, game-outcome-relevant discussion of player performances, and not their fantasy football stats.

Keep the gambling stuff on gambling shows and the fantasy stuff on fantasy shows, and keep the main analysis about the on-the-field stuff.

JRjr
Click to expand...


+1

Nay, +2


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top