IBJNews

NCAA's moves over betting 'ludicrous,' N.J. official says

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The NCAA is "ludicrous and hypocritical" for moving five championship games out of New Jersey next year because the state plans to offer legalized sports betting, a spokesman for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said.

"The NCAA wants to penalize New Jersey for legalizing what occurs illegally every day in every state, and often with the participation of organized crime," the spokesman, Michael Drewniak, told The Associated Press. "But the NCAA looks the other way for that?"

New Jersey plans to license sports betting as soon as Jan. 9. It published regulations governing it on Monday, clearing the way for interested casinos or horse racing tracks to apply for $50,000 "sports pool licenses."

But federal law bars New Jersey from allowing sports betting, and the NCAA and the major professional sports leagues are suing to try to block it.

In the meantime, the Indianapolis-based NCAA announced Monday that it would play no more championship games in the state.

Mark Lewis, the NCAA's executive vice president of championships and alliances, said it has no choice but to find a different place to play the games: The NCAA has a policy prohibiting states with single-game sports wagering from hosting its championships.

"Maintaining the integrity of sports and protecting student-athlete well-being are at the bedrock of the NCAA's mission," he said. "We will work hard in the days ahead to find new suitable host locations which will allow the student-athletes to have the best possible competitive experience."

Drewniak noted that New Jersey's law bans betting on New Jersey college teams and on any college game played in the state.

An NCAA spokesman did not immediately return a message seeking comment Tuesday.

The collegiate association said the five championships it is moving from New Jersey to still-to-be-determined locations next year include Division I swimming and diving (scheduled for Piscataway from March 14-17); regional games in the Division I women's basketball tournament (scheduled for Trenton from March 30-April 2); Division III men's volleyball (scheduled for Hoboken from April 26-28); and Division II and III women's lacrosse (scheduled for Montclair from May 18-19).

State Sen. Raymond Lesniak, one of the biggest proponents of legalized sports betting in New Jersey, said the loss of the NCAA games is no big deal, since the state will be adding "billions of revenues for our state, our casinos and racetracks."

"And when the federal ban on sports betting is declared unconstitutional, other states will follow New Jersey's lead," Lesniak added. "The only place the NCAA will be able to have its championships played will be in Utah."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • http://paylesspriceperhead.com/
    I like this web blog very much so much great info .
  • wagering software
    This is a big help. Thanks for share it here.
  • The NCAA is Kidding - Right?
    Will everyone who truly believes that you cannot place a bet on any college sports event, and do so right here in Indiana, please stand-up. Like it or not, New Jersey sees the revenue that Sports Pool Licenses will create. The NCAA just needed a reason to move Championship Events to better venues than New Jersey. This way, the righteous NCAA can break a contract. Enter the lawyers from Stage Right.
  • rake in cash
    Pretty sure its the other way around. the states smart enough to allow betting will be the ones raking in the cash. I've never understood how states can pretend that gambling on sports should be illegal while they have powerball state lotteries. sooner or later all states will stop ignoring the obvious tax revenues and stop letting off shore countries rake in all the money.
  • Or Sen Lesniak, Indiana. Since we are the fall back location for Final Fours, I would think we should get the Womens Regional game. And if all states want to take sports betting I am sure we would gladly host all of the womens and mens Bball tourneys, NCAA Football bowl and championship games and on and on. While states jump on the betting pool, Indiana will rake in the cash.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT