Nevada sports books recorded record wagers on Super Bowl LI on February 5, taking in 8.48 million in bets and winning .93 million from bettors. The American Gaming Association used the record wagering as an opportunity to highlight the need to repeal the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992, or PASPA.
Sara Rayme, AGA’s senior vice president of public affairs, compared the record $138.48 million to an estimated $4.5 billion bet illegally on the Super Bowl throughout the U.S. “Even as Nevada sports books break records, the amount wagered legally pales in comparison to the thriving illegal market, in which fans just bet $4.5 billion on the big game,” Rayme said. “After 25 years of a failing federal ban, it’s time for Congress to take a common-sense approach to sports betting that generates revenue, protects consumers and helps fans engage with the games they enjoy.”
The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering hearing New Jersey’s challenge to PASPA. The case is an appeal to lower court rulings that stopped the state from implementing its own sports-betting program at Atlantic City casinos. Governor Chris Christie signed a bill into law that would implement a state-regulated sports-betting program. Other states have joined the case on New Jersey’s side.
Meanwhile, a new report from a top media expert calls for legalized sports betting to boost ratings across network and cable TV. The study from MoffettNathanson Research details how the NFL could boost its ratings and advertising revenue if Congress were to lift the ban on sports betting.
The report, titled “NFL Season Recap—It’s All Over But the Crying,” was released by Michael Nathanson, a leading U.S. media analyst at MoffettNathanson. It echoes recently released research by the AGA showing that NFL fans who wager on a game are more likely to watch those games.
In a press release, the AGA urged NFL officials—one of the main forces behind the New Jersey lawsuit—to adopt views supporting the re-examination of the ban that have been expressed by the heads of other professional sports leagues. “One potential change in the direction of viewership and ad dollars would be an evolution in the NFL’s view of legalized national sports gambling,” said the AGA. “Up to this point, the NFL has been reluctant to embrace (NBA Commissioner Adam) Silver’s point of view. Perhaps that would change if broader business decisions—and the health of the NFL’s TV partners—were taken more into account.”
Silver’s support of a PASPA repeal was echoed last week by Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred, who said the league is monitoring the issue in comments at the Yahoo Finance All Markets Summit in New York.
“There is this buzz out there in terms of people feeling that there may be an opportunity here for additional legalized sports betting,” Manfred said. “We are reexamining our stance on gambling. It’s a conversation that’s ongoing with the owners.
“Sports betting happens,” Manfred said. “Whether it’s legalized here or not, it’s happening out there. So I think the question for sports is really, ‘Are we better off in a world where we have a nice, strong, uniform, federal regulation of gambling that protects the integrity of sports, provides sports with the tools to ensure that there is integrity in the competition … Or are we better off closing our eyes to that and letting it go on as illegal gambling? And that’s a debatable point.”
The AGA’s statement said better ratings and more revenue would result from lifting the sports-betting ban. NFL Network and ESPN are more likely to be viewed by sports bettors than the average viewer, the AGA said. “On a network-by-network business, the NFL Network and ESPN were more likely to be viewed by sports bettors versus the average viewer. These trends would be further inflated if gambling were to be legalized, according to Nielsen research. If gambling were allowed, a majority of NFL Network viewers would be sports bettors, followed closely by 47 percent on ESPN. The broadcast networks would all be closer to the 40 percent range.
“In 2015, Nielsen estimated that the NFL took in only $40 million, excluding the $125 million from daily fantasy sports, in advertising and sponsorship from traditional gaming institutions. The league’s monetization of national (non-daily fantasy) gambling advertising is purposely low and held back by limitations on national sports betting. However, it is clear that they have a built-in market that casinos and legalized sports books target.”
“This report from the leading media analyst on Wall Street shows TV partners why legalizing sports betting would boost viewership and grow advertising revenue,” said Rayme. “We invite broadcasters and advertisers to join our growing coalition to advocate for Congress to lift the failing federal ban on sports betting.”
Finally, President Donald Trump, who has supported legalizing sports betting in the past, made his first comments on the issue since becoming president, in an interview with Jim Gray on Westwood One Radio on Super Bowl Sunday.
Trump stopped short of outright support of a PASPA repeal, but did indicate a willingness to re-examine the issue, advising a cautious approach that takes in all sides.
“What I’d do is sit down with the commissioners,” Trump said. “I would be talking to them, and we’ll see how they feel about it. Some would not want it, and… I’ve read others maybe do. But I would certainly want to get their input and get the input from the various leagues, and we’ll see how they feel about it. I’d also get the input from lots of law enforcement officials, because, obviously, that’s a big step.
“So we wouldn’t do it lightly, I can tell you. It will be studied very carefully. But I would want to have a lot of input from a lot of different people.”
In Nevada, the Super Bowl many consider the greatest in history delivered mixed results for state’s sports books.
The book lost on an array of popular proposition bets?the overtime in particular, which paid 7-1?but most reported making money overall.
“In-play was the killer. That was, by far, the worst thing that ever happened,” William Hill Sports Book Director Nick Bogdanovich said. “Everybody was taking the big plus price on New England when they were down 28-3.”
Hill suffered a six-figure loss on the day, according to news reports, most of it on in-play wagers on a game that saw Tom Brady and the Patriots erase a 25-point deficit to win 34-28 on a touchdown in the first overtime ever played in the NFL championship game.
It turns out that Atlanta’s huge lead halfway through the third quarter didn’t deter bettors, who mostly trusted the Patriots and loaded up on them on in-game wagers?and, ultimately, Brady would throw for 466 yards and two touchdowns as the Patriots scored 31 unanswered points.
“Any time a real good team gets down in any sport, it’s always bad. And you magnify it on the Patriots in the Super Bowl,” Bogdanovich said. “They had infinite opportunities to take them on the money line, to take a little to make a lot.”
New England was favored by 3 and the total was 59 for most of the two weeks before the game before dropping as low as 56½ on game day. But it turned out well for the books because of the touchdown New England scored to win instead of a field goal, which would have resulted in a 31-28 final.
“A field goal would’ve been a disaster. It would’ve landed on 3 and 59 and there would’ve been a lot of refunds,” Golden Nugget Sports Book Director Tony Miller said. “The New England touchdown made it a banner day for us.”
Miller, who took multiple $100,000 money-line bets on the Falcons, said the Golden Nugget won six figures on the game.
“It was one of the best Super Bowls we’ve had in my 11 years at the Nugget,” he said.
CG Technology, Caesars Palace, Harrah’s, the Rio, Boyd Gaming and Station Casinos all reported winning days as well.
“We did OK but not as good as we would’ve had the Falcons won,” Caesars Palace Sports Book Director Frank Kunovic said.
Nevada sports books made $13.3 million on last year’s game, which drew a record handle.
