Student-
athletes
and
Wanna Betldn
mix

BY ROBERT MANKER
11IuRTIN ICYv: CHRIS OPRY CH, EASTERN ILLINOIS U.
$5 BET HERE, A $20 WAGER IHFRE.
Just putting a little money where
your mouth is. That's what col-
lege sports are all about, right?
Not to the NCAA, and definitely
not if you're a student-athlete.
The U. of Maryland athletic department learned
that lesson the hard way this summer when five
Terrapin athletes were suspended for alleged gam-
bling violations. Among them were football quarter-
back Scott Milanovich, a preseason All-American,
and Matt Raydo, a reserve basketball player.
Milanovich, who bet just $200 over a three-year
span and placed no bets on his own team, was original-
ly suspended for the first eight of his team's 11 games.
The suspension was appealed andreducedto four
games. Raydo was disqualified for the first 20 of his
team's 27 contests. His case is currently under appeal.
The suspensions are believed to be the harshest
sanctions for gambling ever doled out by the NCAA
to Division I athletes. And NCAA officials say their
message is clear: Gambling on college sports by stu-
dent-athletes will not be tolerated.
It's everywhere
The Maryland athletes are the 19th group sus-
pended by the NCAA for gambling violations since
January 1990. Most of the cases involved athletes
betting on football or basketball.
"NCAA legislation prohibits college athletes
from gambling on any intercollegiate athletic con-
test," says Dirk Taitt, NCAA enforcement represen-
tative. The sport, the school and the amount of
money don't matter, he says.
Upon joining their teams, athletes sign contracts
promising not to engage in such activity, and yet it
happens- often.
Since 1992, illegal sports-gambling operations
have been uncovered at Michigan State U., U. of
Maine, U. of Rhode Island, U. of Texas, Arizona
State U., Northwestern U. and Bryant College (R.I.).
At least five of these cases involved student-athletes.
"I'd have to say it's campuswide," says Albert,* a
U. of Florida junior and sports gambler. "I know
[campus] organizations that are extremely wrapped
up in it. It's like an everyday thing - like 'What'd
you have for dinner?' 'Who'd you put money on?"
A cause for concern
Student welfare and the integrity of the competitions,
Taitt says, are what the NCAA is trying to protect.
"A student-athlete is particularly vulnerable," he
says. "Once you're sufficiently indebted [with gam-
bling losses] or addicted [to gambling], you're a
prime target for organized gambling."
That is the ultimate fear - that student-athletes
could be at the mercy of gamblers while on the
courts and fields.
Once under the control of gamblers, athletes
could be ordered to throw games or to shave points
to yield a higher payoff for gamblers.

No easy answer
Its beens said many times - lsports are big
business. Not also in college, but especially in
college. The folks at the NCAA know there's a
problem. They just don't know how to fix it.
"With the amount of money bet each year
on the NCAA [men's basketball] tournament,
wed be remsiss not to address those numbers
and notice what's going on out there," Iaitt
[ usays. "A total of $2.5 billion is het on the
NCAA tournament every year, half of which is
ilegal. But there are jurisdictional questions
about what we have the authority to do."
IThe problem is further complicated by
campus environments it which rampant gam-
bling activity among non-athletes often goes
unnoticed and unpunished.
Henry Lesieur is the criminal law chair at
Illinois State U. and one of the few scholars to
research the topic. His study of six schools
private and public - revealed that 23 percent
of students gamble at least once a week and
that about 5.5 percent could be considered
pathological gamblers.
"College students today are growing sup in
an era in which gambling is acceptable," he
says. "It's about as impossible to control as
marijuana consumption or underage drinking."
With student-run gambling operations on
so many campuses, insulating student-ath-
letes from gambling seems impossible. This
leaves the NCAA and school administrators
with a formidable task: drafting and enforc-
ing strict guidelines to preserve the integrity
of the games.
"The NCAA views student-athlete involve-
mert in gambling situations as a serious issue,
says Carrie Doyle, NCAA director of eligibility.
But you must wonder how seriously NCAA
officials view it and how the agency plans to
'tjtcontrol it.
S ''Playing with the big boys
The NCAA says the severity of
Milanovich's original suspension was justified
because he had et with off-campus bookmak-
ers. The suspension was reduced, Doyle says,
because the NCAA discovered he wasn't part
of an organized-gambling operation.
'he NCAA insists on making a distinction
between on- and off-campus betting opera-
tions. The reasoning is that the non-students,
as "professional" bookmakers, pose more of a
threat than students, who are considered ama-
teurs. Student gamblers say such thinking
ignores the scope of the problem.
"It's on campus, and students know what
they're doing," says Donald,* a senior and
sports betor at James Madison U. "And until
people realize that and deal with it, it's not
gonna go away.
*The sports gamblers interviewed for this
Meanwhile, fans may begin to question the story agreed to talk only on the condition that their
honesty of each play. "Was the dropped pass or the identities beprotected.
missed layup a mistake, or was something going
on? The fact that that could enter the fan's RobertManker, AssistantEditor,spendshislonelySaturday
thought process demonstrates part of the prob- nights at the track-- theponies and a stiffdrink his only
lem," Taitt says. companions.

"Was the
drop3ped pass
or the missed
take, or was
something
going on?"
DIRK TAHTT, NCAA
ENFORCEMENT REPRE.SEN-
TA'TIVE

October 1995 U. Magazinie 19