For several years, the National Football League (NFL) boldly fought against legalized sports betting. However, this was not because it hated pro sports betting, but because league officials and owners argued that giving up control to states could harm public trust, game integrity, and regulatory consistency. However, everything changed when the Supreme Court struck down the guiding legislation at the time, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), in 2018, as we will see shortly.
At NXTbets, we believe that sports lovers should engage fully with their favorite sport, including its history. We empower NFL fans, bettors, and DFS players with comprehensive data, expert insights, and tailored guides. Let’s find out why the NFL viciously fought against the looming sports betting in the 2010s and its change of tune after PASPA was overturned.
Why the NFL Fought Legalization
The NFL’s position as one of the biggest opponents of state-by-state sports betting regulation was informed by several issues. Its most significant concerns were fair play, public trust, and fragmented regulation. For context, below are some of the league’s arguments.
Integrity & Fan Trust
The league heavily argued that mainstream betting would undermine fan confidence by creating opportunities for match-fixing or improperly influencing players and officials. It framed the discussion as protecting the perception of fairness as much as the facts, arguing that viewership and trust would erode if fans suspected any manipulation. Goodell, the then and current commissioner, cited integrity as the main reason behind the NFL’s push back against the expansion of legal betting.
Legal/Federal Landscape
The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) barred states from dictating sports betting. Several professional leagues used the statute’s provisions to shoot down any state-level expansion efforts. Therefore, when New Jersey tried to modify its laws, the NFL and other leagues sued, seeking to enforce and maintain the status quo.
Uniform Rules vs Patchwork
The league further argued that if the US were to legalize betting, it should be done under uniform national standards. It called for consistent age limits, integrity monitoring, and consumer protections, arguing that fragmented rules and standards could create loopholes and enforcement issues. As we will later discuss, Goodell publicly asked Congress to develop a national framework after the Supreme Court specifically overturned PASPA.
The Legal Backdrop - PASPA, New Jersey & the 2018 Pivot
To defend its strong position, the National Football League relied on the laws that were in place at the time. As earlier mentioned, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) fully shielded leagues from state-level gambling efforts, acting as a powerful barrier to jurisdictional betting. However, New Jersey pushed back, setting the stage for one of the most significant legal battles in the United States.
What PASPA Did
Contrary to most people’s understanding, PASPA did not bar individuals from betting. However, it outlawed states from enacting or running legal sports betting schemes or frameworks. This was the basis upon which professional leagues limited expansion efforts. The Act was passed in 1992 and overturned in 2018, after a 26-year run.
New Jersey’s Challenge
Despite PASPA being in place, New Jersey, through a referendum, permitted betting in specific venues. To prevent this approval from becoming law, the NFL and other major nationwide leagues moved to court, relying on the provisions of PASPA. This transcended into a protracted legal fight that finally ended at the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Decision
On May 14, 2018, the Supreme Court rendered a landmark decision in Murphy v. NCAA. It overturned PASPA’s anti-authorization provision, ruling that the Act unlawfully prohibited states from amending their own laws. With this decision, states were free to come up with their own sports betting laws and regulatory frameworks. Pro leagues like the NFL, therefore, had to change from blocking legalization efforts to helping shape the regulatory framework.
The NFL’s Stated Pre-2018 Concerns
To understand why the National Football League opposed the proposed legislation, we have to examine the reasons it gave. Its concerns ranged from protecting game integrity to preventing betting-related scandals and keeping young fans safe. Here is an in-depth exploration:
Game Integrity & Perception
Through league officials like Commissioner Roger Goodell, the National Football League argued that giving states autonomy over sports betting could embolden or create more opportunities for actors with negative motives. Additionally, an inaccurate perception of impropriety could cause regrettable brand damage. It viewed its opposition as a means of protecting the competitive legitimacy of pro sports.
Players/Officials & Gambling Risks
The NFL relied on its own precedents, as we will later see. Having repeatedly sanctioned players for gambling, it feared that empowering states to enact individual sports betting laws without strong safeguards could be disastrous. Besides derailing careers, it could shake sports integrity.
Inside Information & Market Abuse
The league shared its concerns regarding potential widespread leakage of insider information, which could be monetized. Such concerns were understandable given that illegal markets were already exploiting injury intel, staff/referee influence, and play-calling tendencies at the time. To reduce abuse, the NFL proposed mechanisms like official feeds, data controls, and monitoring.
Youth Exposure & Problem Gaming
The league’s officials also pointed out that widespread sports betting could harm younger fans and result in public health implications. They highlighted addiction, problem gambling, and the social costs of mainstream sports betting advertisements. Such issues were repeatedly mentioned when backing the NFL’s preference for strong, uniform, and federal consumer protections instead of rapid state regulations.
Power, Policy & Control: What the NFL Wanted if Betting Happened
The NFL was seemingly prepared for both outcomes. Even as it fought against the impending legalization, it made its demands clear if the betting proposal sailed. This helps explain why, after the Supreme Court ruling, the league quickly shifted its focus to championing better regulations and began partnering with sportsbooks. Here is what the NFL suggested:
A Federal Framework
The league recommended a national regulatory system instead of varying state rules. Although the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, its initial efforts and those of other stakeholders continue to influence consumer safeguards, integrity monitoring, and age verification.
Official Data & Integrity Systems
Roger Goodell, the current Commissioner of the National Football League, outlined four core principles in the case of legalization. These included:
Substantial consumer protection mechanisms
Protection of NFL content and intellectual property from theft or misuse by sports leagues
Access to official, reliable league data for fans
Protection of fans and penalizing of bad actors by law enforcement
The above principles were to help the league maintain its oversight as legal betting expanded.
Why the Stance Shifted After 2018
The National Football League did not suddenly shift its stance after 2018. It had no choice but to adapt to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Besides that, it was soon accepted that a regulated market was safer than the black market. Below are some of the reasons behind the NFL’s move to wholly embrace state-controlled legal betting.
Regulated Markets> Black Markets
Legal betting allowed for transparency and monitoring as regulators could work with league operators to identify and counter suspicious activities. Black markets did not offer or allow any level of monitoring or transparency.
Commercial Reality
The legalization of sports betting created several commercial opportunities through partnerships with sportsbooks and reputable vendors. A few years after the Supreme Court decision, the NFL announced its partnership with popular betting platforms such as DraftKings and Caesars.
Fan Engagement & Education
Legalized betting made educating fans and improving their experiences possible. Currently, the National Football League balances providing betting markets for its users and spearheading responsible gaming campaigns. It has significantly invested in educating fans, staff, and players. This not only helps minimize risks but also promotes transparency.
Case Files the NFL Pointed to: Why “Integrity” Wasn’t Abstract
To prove that legalizing gambling was a practical threat, the National Football League often relied on real cases. Some were related to the league, while others happened in other sports. Here were a few historic NFL cases and non-NFL scandals that reinforced the league’s position:
Historic NFL Cases
The league suspended Alex Karras and Paul Hornung for gambling, which was prohibited in its internal rules. Later, Art Schlichter was suspended by Rozelle when he admitted to betting on 10 NFL games. The latter reportedly stole from and conned both strangers and friends whenever he lacked money to support his gambling.
Non-NFL Scandals
Besides the league’s betting scandals, it also highlighted similar cases in other sports to show that extreme gambling expansion would perpetuate public mistrust in professional competition. Among the controversies it pointed to were referee scandals and point-shaving.
Takeaway
The above real-life incidents explain why the League viewed full-fledged sports betting as a lethal risk to its integrity and brand. Fortunately, the regulations that came with the state-by-state legalization provided safer alternatives.
What “Fighting Legalization” Looked Like in Practice
The National Football League fronted a serious fight in defending its pre-2018 stance. It did not just oppose the proposed legislation through words and publications, but invested in lawsuits, strict anti-gambling policies, and lobbying. Below is a brief discussion.
Litigation & Injunctions
The NFL teamed up with other leagues to repeatedly sue New Jersey under the now-overturned anti-gambling Act (PASPA), challenging its sports betting laws. It also sought injunctions to prohibit states from authorizing sports betting. It’s these lawsuits that led to the final Supreme Court decision in Murphy v. NCAA.
Lobbying for Uniform Rules
The NFL did not stop even after the courts repealed the Act on which it premised its stance. Instead, it shifted to lobbying regulators and Congress for national standards. The league even put out official public statements asking for federal safeguards to ensure nationwide consistency. This was the genesis of Goodell’s renowned “core principles”.
Internal Policy
While the NFL fully embraced regulated state-sanctioned sportsbooks and vendors, it maintains its strict internal betting rules. The league prohibits players and most staff members from betting on NFL games. It also continues to roll out education programs and enforce its internal guidelines.
Clearing Up Common Misconceptions
For several years, most people have misunderstood the NFL’s history with sports betting, mainly due to its strong position when PASPA was still active. While there are several misconceptions, we feel the need to clarify that the NFL did not hate sports betting or endorse illegal markets before 2018.
The NFL Hated Betting, Then Flipped Overnight
The National Football League did not hate sports betting. It was against the proposed state-by-state legalization. However, when the proposal passed, its rallying call shifted to uniform, regulated markets. The league had to adapt, one way or another.
“Illegal Markets Were Fine”
By opposing the intended legalization, the league neither supported nor endorsed illegal betting. It mainly relied on the now-repealed Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) of 1992 to lock out states until the Supreme Court ruled otherwise.
What This History Means for Bettors Today
The National Football League’s pre-betting stance and efforts still shape both league and betting policies to date. Below are a few takeaways for today’s fans and bettors.
Practical Takeaways
Most of Goodell’s proposals before state-controlled betting became legal came to life. For example, legal sportsbooks now depend on official league data, ensure integrity monitoring, and provide bettors with responsible gaming tools. Insiders are strictly banned from betting, with harsh penalties, including suspensions, enforced for breaches.
Reading League Signals The
The NFL’s partnerships with various sportsbooks have not eliminated integrity concerns. Football fans and bettors should expect continued enforcement, emphasis on betting responsibly, and education campaigns.
From Court Fights to Clarity with NXTbets
It is clear that the NFL opposed betting legalization to safeguard public perception, integrity, and regulatory consistency. However, it had to change its position when the Supreme Court pronounced itself in Murphy v. NCAA. Thanks to this decision, you can now bet freely on NFL games, players, or events if your state permits gambling.
PASPA, a federal law passed in 1992, prohibited states from controlling sports betting. It also empowered leagues to sue against any violations. However, it was later struck down in 2018 by the Supreme Court.
Did the NFL really sue to block state betting laws?
Yes. Alongside other leagues, the NFL moved to court to stop New Jersey from invoking its sports betting laws. This led to several court fights, which ended with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v NCAA, where it overturned PASPA.
Who are the NFL’s official sportsbook partners?
The league unveiled several “Official Sports Betting Partners” in 2021, including DraftKings, Caesars, BetMGM, and FanDuel. It also announced its “Approved Sportsbook Operators,” which included select media/advertising companies.
Is legal betting better for integrity?
Whether legal betting is better for integrity or not is arguable. However, evidence points towards positive results when markets are well-regulated. In such setups, sportbooks can share data and fund integrity monitoring easily, liaising with regulatory bodies to detect and address threats. However, even with strong regulatory frameworks and safeguards in place, persisting illegal markets would still create integrity risks.
How does legal betting affect fans?
Legal betting is usually associated with improved engagement and league revenues, due to media, merchandise, and sponsorships. However, it can also lead to gambling problems, especially among the younger population.
Where can I read the actual Supreme Court decision?
The NFL kicking points evaluate a placekicker’s actual scores in a game. They include both extra points and field goals. Typically, an extra point counts one, while a field goal counts three points. Most sportsbooks price star receivers and quarterbacks first before layering kicker markets on top. This attention gap allows some edges for bettors …
Football is a game of preparation, skill, and strategy, but the weather can still change the script. The NFL is usually played outdoors since only about ten NFL stadiums have retractable or fixed roofs. Since it is played during fall and winter, no two Sundays come with the same weather conditions. Extreme heat, rain, and …
Il Lombardia is famously known as the ‘Race of the Falling Leaves’ because it occurs amid autumn’s golden backdrop. It is the last one-day cycling monument in the pro cycling season. The Tour of Lombardy (unofficial name) offers a rare betting opportunity because of its timing and terrain. Think about the exhausted Tour de France …
Have you ever felt like you are watching a video game and a professional sport at the same time? That is the magic of the UCI Cycling Esports World Championships. The last big combined UCI Cycling World Championships pulled in over 80 million viewers in Europe alone. That is a massive audience, and a huge chunk of …
Why Did the NFL Originally Fight the Legalization of Sports Betting?
Table of Contents
For several years, the National Football League (NFL) boldly fought against legalized sports betting. However, this was not because it hated pro sports betting, but because league officials and owners argued that giving up control to states could harm public trust, game integrity, and regulatory consistency. However, everything changed when the Supreme Court struck down the guiding legislation at the time, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), in 2018, as we will see shortly.
At NXTbets, we believe that sports lovers should engage fully with their favorite sport, including its history. We empower NFL fans, bettors, and DFS players with comprehensive data, expert insights, and tailored guides. Let’s find out why the NFL viciously fought against the looming sports betting in the 2010s and its change of tune after PASPA was overturned.
Why the NFL Fought Legalization
The NFL’s position as one of the biggest opponents of state-by-state sports betting regulation was informed by several issues. Its most significant concerns were fair play, public trust, and fragmented regulation. For context, below are some of the league’s arguments.
Integrity & Fan Trust
The league heavily argued that mainstream betting would undermine fan confidence by creating opportunities for match-fixing or improperly influencing players and officials. It framed the discussion as protecting the perception of fairness as much as the facts, arguing that viewership and trust would erode if fans suspected any manipulation. Goodell, the then and current commissioner, cited integrity as the main reason behind the NFL’s push back against the expansion of legal betting.
Legal/Federal Landscape
The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) barred states from dictating sports betting. Several professional leagues used the statute’s provisions to shoot down any state-level expansion efforts. Therefore, when New Jersey tried to modify its laws, the NFL and other leagues sued, seeking to enforce and maintain the status quo.
Uniform Rules vs Patchwork
The league further argued that if the US were to legalize betting, it should be done under uniform national standards. It called for consistent age limits, integrity monitoring, and consumer protections, arguing that fragmented rules and standards could create loopholes and enforcement issues. As we will later discuss, Goodell publicly asked Congress to develop a national framework after the Supreme Court specifically overturned PASPA.
The Legal Backdrop - PASPA, New Jersey & the 2018 Pivot
To defend its strong position, the National Football League relied on the laws that were in place at the time. As earlier mentioned, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) fully shielded leagues from state-level gambling efforts, acting as a powerful barrier to jurisdictional betting. However, New Jersey pushed back, setting the stage for one of the most significant legal battles in the United States.
What PASPA Did
Contrary to most people’s understanding, PASPA did not bar individuals from betting. However, it outlawed states from enacting or running legal sports betting schemes or frameworks. This was the basis upon which professional leagues limited expansion efforts. The Act was passed in 1992 and overturned in 2018, after a 26-year run.
New Jersey’s Challenge
Despite PASPA being in place, New Jersey, through a referendum, permitted betting in specific venues. To prevent this approval from becoming law, the NFL and other major nationwide leagues moved to court, relying on the provisions of PASPA. This transcended into a protracted legal fight that finally ended at the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Decision
On May 14, 2018, the Supreme Court rendered a landmark decision in Murphy v. NCAA. It overturned PASPA’s anti-authorization provision, ruling that the Act unlawfully prohibited states from amending their own laws. With this decision, states were free to come up with their own sports betting laws and regulatory frameworks. Pro leagues like the NFL, therefore, had to change from blocking legalization efforts to helping shape the regulatory framework.
The NFL’s Stated Pre-2018 Concerns
To understand why the National Football League opposed the proposed legislation, we have to examine the reasons it gave. Its concerns ranged from protecting game integrity to preventing betting-related scandals and keeping young fans safe. Here is an in-depth exploration:
Game Integrity & Perception
Through league officials like Commissioner Roger Goodell, the National Football League argued that giving states autonomy over sports betting could embolden or create more opportunities for actors with negative motives. Additionally, an inaccurate perception of impropriety could cause regrettable brand damage. It viewed its opposition as a means of protecting the competitive legitimacy of pro sports.
Players/Officials & Gambling Risks
The NFL relied on its own precedents, as we will later see. Having repeatedly sanctioned players for gambling, it feared that empowering states to enact individual sports betting laws without strong safeguards could be disastrous. Besides derailing careers, it could shake sports integrity.
Inside Information & Market Abuse
The league shared its concerns regarding potential widespread leakage of insider information, which could be monetized. Such concerns were understandable given that illegal markets were already exploiting injury intel, staff/referee influence, and play-calling tendencies at the time. To reduce abuse, the NFL proposed mechanisms like official feeds, data controls, and monitoring.
Youth Exposure & Problem Gaming
The league’s officials also pointed out that widespread sports betting could harm younger fans and result in public health implications. They highlighted addiction, problem gambling, and the social costs of mainstream sports betting advertisements. Such issues were repeatedly mentioned when backing the NFL’s preference for strong, uniform, and federal consumer protections instead of rapid state regulations.
Power, Policy & Control: What the NFL Wanted if Betting Happened
The NFL was seemingly prepared for both outcomes. Even as it fought against the impending legalization, it made its demands clear if the betting proposal sailed. This helps explain why, after the Supreme Court ruling, the league quickly shifted its focus to championing better regulations and began partnering with sportsbooks. Here is what the NFL suggested:
A Federal Framework
The league recommended a national regulatory system instead of varying state rules. Although the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, its initial efforts and those of other stakeholders continue to influence consumer safeguards, integrity monitoring, and age verification.
Official Data & Integrity Systems
Roger Goodell, the current Commissioner of the National Football League, outlined four core principles in the case of legalization. These included:
The above principles were to help the league maintain its oversight as legal betting expanded.
Why the Stance Shifted After 2018
The National Football League did not suddenly shift its stance after 2018. It had no choice but to adapt to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Besides that, it was soon accepted that a regulated market was safer than the black market. Below are some of the reasons behind the NFL’s move to wholly embrace state-controlled legal betting.
Regulated Markets> Black Markets
Legal betting allowed for transparency and monitoring as regulators could work with league operators to identify and counter suspicious activities. Black markets did not offer or allow any level of monitoring or transparency.
Commercial Reality
The legalization of sports betting created several commercial opportunities through partnerships with sportsbooks and reputable vendors. A few years after the Supreme Court decision, the NFL announced its partnership with popular betting platforms such as DraftKings and Caesars.
Fan Engagement & Education
Legalized betting made educating fans and improving their experiences possible. Currently, the National Football League balances providing betting markets for its users and spearheading responsible gaming campaigns. It has significantly invested in educating fans, staff, and players. This not only helps minimize risks but also promotes transparency.
Case Files the NFL Pointed to: Why “Integrity” Wasn’t Abstract
To prove that legalizing gambling was a practical threat, the National Football League often relied on real cases. Some were related to the league, while others happened in other sports. Here were a few historic NFL cases and non-NFL scandals that reinforced the league’s position:
Historic NFL Cases
The league suspended Alex Karras and Paul Hornung for gambling, which was prohibited in its internal rules. Later, Art Schlichter was suspended by Rozelle when he admitted to betting on 10 NFL games. The latter reportedly stole from and conned both strangers and friends whenever he lacked money to support his gambling.
Non-NFL Scandals
Besides the league’s betting scandals, it also highlighted similar cases in other sports to show that extreme gambling expansion would perpetuate public mistrust in professional competition. Among the controversies it pointed to were referee scandals and point-shaving.
Takeaway
The above real-life incidents explain why the League viewed full-fledged sports betting as a lethal risk to its integrity and brand. Fortunately, the regulations that came with the state-by-state legalization provided safer alternatives.
What “Fighting Legalization” Looked Like in Practice
The National Football League fronted a serious fight in defending its pre-2018 stance. It did not just oppose the proposed legislation through words and publications, but invested in lawsuits, strict anti-gambling policies, and lobbying. Below is a brief discussion.
Litigation & Injunctions
The NFL teamed up with other leagues to repeatedly sue New Jersey under the now-overturned anti-gambling Act (PASPA), challenging its sports betting laws. It also sought injunctions to prohibit states from authorizing sports betting. It’s these lawsuits that led to the final Supreme Court decision in Murphy v. NCAA.
Lobbying for Uniform Rules
The NFL did not stop even after the courts repealed the Act on which it premised its stance. Instead, it shifted to lobbying regulators and Congress for national standards. The league even put out official public statements asking for federal safeguards to ensure nationwide consistency. This was the genesis of Goodell’s renowned “core principles”.
Internal Policy
While the NFL fully embraced regulated state-sanctioned sportsbooks and vendors, it maintains its strict internal betting rules. The league prohibits players and most staff members from betting on NFL games. It also continues to roll out education programs and enforce its internal guidelines.
Clearing Up Common Misconceptions
For several years, most people have misunderstood the NFL’s history with sports betting, mainly due to its strong position when PASPA was still active. While there are several misconceptions, we feel the need to clarify that the NFL did not hate sports betting or endorse illegal markets before 2018.
The NFL Hated Betting, Then Flipped Overnight
The National Football League did not hate sports betting. It was against the proposed state-by-state legalization. However, when the proposal passed, its rallying call shifted to uniform, regulated markets. The league had to adapt, one way or another.
“Illegal Markets Were Fine”
By opposing the intended legalization, the league neither supported nor endorsed illegal betting. It mainly relied on the now-repealed Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) of 1992 to lock out states until the Supreme Court ruled otherwise.
What This History Means for Bettors Today
The National Football League’s pre-betting stance and efforts still shape both league and betting policies to date. Below are a few takeaways for today’s fans and bettors.
Practical Takeaways
Most of Goodell’s proposals before state-controlled betting became legal came to life. For example, legal sportsbooks now depend on official league data, ensure integrity monitoring, and provide bettors with responsible gaming tools. Insiders are strictly banned from betting, with harsh penalties, including suspensions, enforced for breaches.
Reading League Signals The
The NFL’s partnerships with various sportsbooks have not eliminated integrity concerns. Football fans and bettors should expect continued enforcement, emphasis on betting responsibly, and education campaigns.
From Court Fights to Clarity with NXTbets
It is clear that the NFL opposed betting legalization to safeguard public perception, integrity, and regulatory consistency. However, it had to change its position when the Supreme Court pronounced itself in Murphy v. NCAA. Thanks to this decision, you can now bet freely on NFL games, players, or events if your state permits gambling.
For more information, expert insights, and prompt updates on NFL betting or DFS, subscribe to our NXTbets newsletter.
Offer Score
Offer Score
Offer Score
Offer Score
Offer Score
Offer Score
Offer Score
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
PASPA, a federal law passed in 1992, prohibited states from controlling sports betting. It also empowered leagues to sue against any violations. However, it was later struck down in 2018 by the Supreme Court.
Yes. Alongside other leagues, the NFL moved to court to stop New Jersey from invoking its sports betting laws. This led to several court fights, which ended with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v NCAA, where it overturned PASPA.
The league unveiled several “Official Sports Betting Partners” in 2021, including DraftKings, Caesars, BetMGM, and FanDuel. It also announced its “Approved Sportsbook Operators,” which included select media/advertising companies.
Whether legal betting is better for integrity or not is arguable. However, evidence points towards positive results when markets are well-regulated. In such setups, sportbooks can share data and fund integrity monitoring easily, liaising with regulatory bodies to detect and address threats. However, even with strong regulatory frameworks and safeguards in place, persisting illegal markets would still create integrity risks.
Legal betting is usually associated with improved engagement and league revenues, due to media, merchandise, and sponsorships. However, it can also lead to gambling problems, especially among the younger population.
Check out the Supreme Court’s website for Murphy v. NCAA.
Please refer to Affiliated Operators’ T&C. Void where prohibited. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER.
Related Posts
The Complete Guide to NFL Kicking Points Betting
The NFL kicking points evaluate a placekicker’s actual scores in a game. They include both extra points and field goals. Typically, an extra point counts one, while a field goal counts three points. Most sportsbooks price star receivers and quarterbacks first before layering kicker markets on top. This attention gap allows some edges for bettors …
How Weather Impacts NFL Games and Betting Outcomes
Football is a game of preparation, skill, and strategy, but the weather can still change the script. The NFL is usually played outdoors since only about ten NFL stadiums have retractable or fixed roofs. Since it is played during fall and winter, no two Sundays come with the same weather conditions. Extreme heat, rain, and …
Ultimate Guide to Betting on Il Lombardia
Il Lombardia is famously known as the ‘Race of the Falling Leaves’ because it occurs amid autumn’s golden backdrop. It is the last one-day cycling monument in the pro cycling season. The Tour of Lombardy (unofficial name) offers a rare betting opportunity because of its timing and terrain. Think about the exhausted Tour de France …
Ultimate Guide to Bet on UCI Cycling Esports World Championships
Have you ever felt like you are watching a video game and a professional sport at the same time? That is the magic of the UCI Cycling Esports World Championships. The last big combined UCI Cycling World Championships pulled in over 80 million viewers in Europe alone. That is a massive audience, and a huge chunk of …