Will you be able to gamble on UConn sports in CT? Don’t bet on it
If you could bet on college sports here in Connecticut, would you have cashed in on the UConn women’s crushing 83-47 victory Tuesday over Syracuse? How about when the men’s team crashed out of the NCAA basketball tournament to Maryland in the first round Saturday?
As sports betting and online casino gambling move toward likely approval in the General Assembly, UConn, Yale, the University of Hartford and other universities strongly oppose allowing people to wager for — or against — their teams.
Gov. Ned Lamont is inclined to agree, he said in an interview Wednesday. And, while many lawmakers have yet to stake out a position on the question, some key senators and representatives said they just want to get a bill passed — with or without an in-state college betting prohibition.
Numerous states ban betting on in-state college teams, among them New Jersey, the flagship sports gambling state; New York; New Hampshire; and Rhode Island. The Massachusetts bill
under consideration would ban bets on any college contest.
So it’s a good bet that if the state’s sports-gambling system starts up this fall, as expected, University of Connecticut fans and foes may have to go over the border in Massachusetts and Rhode Island to lay down a wager.
“UConn doesn’t like the idea, and my instinct is to follow their lead, but then I’ve got to talk to the pros who say whether we can reasonably manage that, or does everybody just drive to Rhode Island or something?” Lamont said Wednesday during a brief interview after an event in Waterbury. “My instinct is UConn’s right. That’s still up in the air. Legislators may have a good feeling about that. Their insights are good there.”
On Wednesday, the legislature’s Public Safety and Security Committee, which oversees gaming, advanced a series of bills that would create a new entertainment landscape for sports and onlinecasino
gambling. The key bill passed 21-3.
The bills are currently silent on the college issue, but the subject will become a focal point as final negotiations on the legislation continue in coming weeks.
“The introduction of legalized wagering on intercollegiate sports will add undue pressure and influence on our student athletes,” Jennifer Widness, president of The Connecticut College of Independent Colleges, wrote in written testimony. “It will cause further stress on our students’ mental health — for those who bet and for those who participate by potentially providing illegal information.”
During a two-hour discussion on the future of sports and online casino gambling in the committee, state Rep. Craig Fishbein, R-Wallingford, noted that the current legislation does not include bans on betting games that involve Connecticut teams. “In the bill that is presently before us, you can have sports betting on any college sport whether it happens in Connecticut or not?” Fishbein asked.
State Rep. Maria Horn, DSalisbury,
co-chairwoman of the committee said that details like that will be subject to further negotiations. “There are many consumer protections in the bill,” Horn said in a late-afternoon interview. “I do expect further conversations about ones that aren’t in there.”
Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, vice chairwoman of the committee said the ban on UConn wagering appeared in earlier drafts of the legislation and whether or not the prohibition gets inserted later, UConn fans will have easy access to betting platforms elsewhere.
“They are going to wager on UConn, in Springfield or Rhode Island, so that is always going to be a bone of contention,” said Osten, who told the committee that the gentle “Go Fish” card game is about the extent of her gambling prowess. “Whatever the decision is, I can live with it,” Osten said Wednesday afternoon. “I don’t think it will make any difference.”
“If they are able to bet on Pitt or some other college, FSU, say, I don’t see why they can’t bet on UConn,” Fishbein said in an interview
Wednesday afternoon. “If there is going to be a level of cheating that is going to happen, it’s going to happen.”
During a recent public hearing on the issue, Neal Eskin, senior associate athletic director at UConn, opposed allowing wagering on UConn games. “Intercollegiate athletic competitions are conceivably the easiest to influence given the vulnerability of the 18-to-22 year old student athlete population,” Eskin said. “Unlike professional athletes, who are highly-compensated, student athletes are especially susceptible to attempts by individuals seeking non-public information or to influence competition outcomes.”
Wednesday marked the halfway point in the 23-week legislative session. Horn, in an interview, said the current goal is to get something in place for bettors to pick teams, and provide the state additional revenue, by the time football season rolls around.
“What we want is a nice clean bill to get through with some regulatory structure and then we can have a more nuanced bill at some point,” Horn said. “The big economic drivers that we want is to get this up for the NFL season.” Horn acknowledged that state borders are porous, and stressed sensitivity to college athletes.
“We understand and respect UConn’s position regarding betting on university sports in Connecticut and remain open to controlling that within the legislation, if necessary,” said Rodney Butler, chairman of the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation, which along with the Mohegan Tribal Nation and the Connecticut Lottery Corp. would have the lock on sports betting, under the pending legislation.
According to the PlayUSA website, 21 states allow sports wagering, 13 of which prohibit in-state gamblers from placing bets on state teams. For example, New Jersey, which reaped $49.4 million in sports-betting revenue in the 2020 calendar year, prohibits bets on college games played in the state, or on games involving New Jersey teams playing out-ofstate.