The meaningless 3-pointer that seals a backdoor cover as a game expires makes for a bad-yet-entertaining beat.

But the meaningless 3-pointer made to cover the spread — a shot that should not have counted to begin with — is just brutal.

Such an occurrence happened not once, but TWICE this week: A player getting up an attempt that would not influence the outcome of the game, the final horn blaring throughout the arena well before the ball leaves that player’s hands, allowing his team to still lose but by a slimmer margin.

Neither shot was reviewed… because the team leading still won. Understand, though, that the NCAA has long opposed legalized sports betting, citing the industry’s potential impact on the “integrity” of college basketball games. Seems like it has its own integrity issues.

And the NCAA is at least (emphasis on “least”) addressing said issue:

During the NCAA tournament, officials "will review all shots made at the buzzer, as necessary, in the interest of accuracy of score and team and player statistics and even if the outcome of the game isn’t riding on the officials’ call."

— David Payne Purdum (@DavidPurdum) February 7, 2019

Post-buzzer shots in question

On Monday, No. 17 Iowa State avoided an upset to visiting Oklahoma, holding on for a 75-74 win.

The Cyclones, though, came in as 3-point favorites at many sportsbooks. And it appeared as if Iowa State would leave the arena as four-point winners. Cyclone covers for the win, right?

Iowa State -2.5 and Under 146.5 bettors we’re here for you💔
Worst #badbeat of all time he didn’t even get the shot off in time!
pic.twitter.com/cIdwHQtpkQ

— BettorIQ (@BettorIQ) February 5, 2019

Yeah, well, that running 3-pointer arguably should not have counted, as video evidence indicated that the shot did not get off before the buzzer.

Then there was Wednesday’s matchup of Big East teams Creighton and Villanova.

Villanova -9 bettors just got HOSED.

WOW pic.twitter.com/lW6VtwCpWv

— B/R Betting (@br_betting) February 7, 2019

With less than 3 seconds to play, Creighton’s Kaleb Joseph crossed midcourt and made his way into the lane. He pulls up for a floater and buries the shot. But even the play-by-play was skeptical:

“Joseph does not get the shot off. That does not count. Does it count? (Referee) Roger Ayers says it’s good.” Then, after a moment of stunned silence. “That’s an interesting call there at the buzzer.”

Villanova entered as a 9-point favorite at many sportsbooks, and the Wildcats led by that margin when Joseph went up for the shot. His “made” attempt gave Creighton the cover with a 66-59 loss.

NCAA officials will review ALL shots

As ESPN’s David Purdum noted, the NCAA will ask referees to “review all shots made at the buzzer.” That includes made field goals that become “One Shining Moment” fodder and, theoretically, those that trim a 27-point loss into a 24-point loss.

This request comes “in the interest of accuracy of score and team and player statistics and even if the outcome of the game isn’t riding on the officials’ call.”

Said shots may result in a buzzer-beating win. Or they might affect the outcome for point spread or over/under total. Perhaps neither. Either way, the NCAA said, officials need to review every single time.

Here is a reading of the NCAA instant replay rule:

“Officials shall use such available equipment in the following situations: a. When there is a reading of zeroes (or should have been zeroes on the clock) on the game clock at the end of any period, after making a call on the playing court, and when necessary to determine the outcome of the game in the following situations: 1. Determine whether a try for field goal entering the basket was released before the reading of zeroes on the game clock. When it is determined that the try for goal was successful, the official is permitted to put the exact time back on the game clock as to when the ball passed through the net.”

So, in theory, these frequent replays should always occur. Although one could argue that determining “the outcome of the game” is up for interpretation.

Funny, though, how an organization so adamantly against legalized sports betting has come around to the ways of the force.

It took just eight months for the repeal of PASPA to affect a league’s behavior. https://t.co/kT1bOXQVdh

— Joe Sheehan (@joe_sheehan) February 7, 2019

NCAA urging should already be happening

Funny enough, the NCAA has at least (emphasis on “least”) embraced the advent of regulated sports betting.

Last summer, the association announced it would explore the ins and outs of the industry while “examining the long-term impact” of sports betting. To do so, the NCAA pieced together an “internal team of subject matter experts” that would explore “how best to protect game integrity, monitor betting activity, manage sports data and expand educational efforts.”

There’s that “integrity” again.

The NCAA specifically said that referees will review ALL shots occurring around the final horn during the NCAA tournament. That’s nice, especially considering how much sports betting action will take place during March Madness.

But even to REACH the Big Dance, teams across the country will have their seasonlong resumes under the microscope of the tournament selection committee. Bubble teams, especially, will have their performances against opponents examined. Who did they play? How did they do? By how much did they win or lose?

Every point matters during the regular season. ESPECIALLY for bubble teams. Maybe the NCAA will discover its own rule and put it to proper use next year.

Another week, another slate of title-odds-altering college football games.

But first, let’s look back at one game last week that I really, really wanted to include, but didn’t.

It’s easy to dislike Ohio State. From the ubiquitous “THE Ohio State University” uttered by ex-alums on every single one of their freaking player intros on TV, to Urban Meyer being a moral-less weasel, the only people that don’t currently viscerally dislike the Buckeyes are Ohio residents and future/current/past students.

I’ve thought THE Ohio State University looked vulnerable all year. Purdue was a team that seemed to right the ship after a shaky start and was performing well, and would surely bring a boisterous home crowd to the game.

Still, it was THE Ohio State University vs. Purdue.

Behold, Purdue was awesome, and the Buckeyes fell. However, despite the throttling, THE Ohio State University only saw their title odds dip from +1000 to +1400. This is, in part, because the Big 10 is still very winnable for them, which would clear their path to the college football playoffs. FiveThirtyEight gives them a 23% chance of making the playoffs (but just a 5% chance of capturing the championship).

The loss though means that their Nov. 24 game against Michigan has massive odds-shifting potential.

BetStars SuperBoost: Bet on Clemson, Georgia and Wisconsin to win (+163)

Looking into the futures

Enough about the past, let’s look into the futures.

The biggest game this weekend is the world’s largest outdoor cocktail party, with Georgia (+1400 at FanDuel to win title)  vs. Florida (+10000). The implications here are simple: if Georgia wins, (with apologies to Kentucky) they likely have smooth sailing to the SEC Championship where a win would put them in the playoffs. A loss by Georgia and their title odds are toast. If Florida wins, while I wouldn’t expect their futures to swing up to the +1000 range, it won’t hang back at +10000 either. You don’t need an air-brushed Florida diploma to figure that out.

After Georgia vs. Florida, the other games are of much less potential impact. Texas (+5000) plays on the road against unranked and eliminated Oklahoma State. Traveling to Stillwater is never easy, and both Vegas and computer models agree, as Texas only opened as a 1.5-point favorite.

According to ESPN’s Eliminator, the only PAC-12 team with a chance of making the playoffs is Washington State (+16000). That being the case, this week’s Washington St. vs. Stanford (#24) has some weight. While the PAC-12 is still a longshot to get a team into the playoffs, a Washington St. win coupled with some higher ranked teams losses would certainly improve their odds.

The first playoff committee rankings are released on Tuesday, Oct. 30. Along with this weekend’s games, those committee rankings (and specifically, what the committee is thinking) will certainly shift some futures as well.

Sports betting in the United States is legal. It has arrived. It’s not going anywhere. It’s only going to grow. It is a glorious thing.

And it shouldn’t be allowed on college athletics.

Colleges are concerned, and they should be

The LA Times ran a story this week covering the growing concern universities have over potential integrity issues around sports betting and college athletes.

The concerns are two-fold and real:

“Officials are worried not just about egregious behavior, such as shaving points or fixing a game. But they also fear that gamblers, including classmates and neighbors, will try to cajole confidential data from insiders — say, about injuries or academic standing — to get an edge.”

Most all recent betting scandals involving athletes come on the fringes of sports. These scandals do not occur at the top tier, where athletes are making so much money they have little to no incentive to shave a few points to enrich some degenerate d-bag or worse, perform at a level that lets their team down. No, betting scandals are more common with athletes who aren’t compensated well and have some financial upside.

In college athletics, the most well-known of those incidents is the 1978-79 Boston College basketball point-shaving scandal (which involved Henry Hill of Goodfellas fame, no relation to William). More recently, this happened at the University of San Diego and in the ‘90’s at Northwestern University.

Regardless…

If you look globally, the same issues persist with professional athletes who are under-compensated.

In Europe, recent scandals include soccer games from lower level leagues or clubs (i.e. not Premier League, Bundesliga, La Liga, Serie A, or Ligue 1). This also occurred in 2015 in Italy. Tennis has been very susceptible, with a “tsunami of corruption” happening with lower level matches.

These are good analogs to college sports. Often, the athletes are easier to manipulate as they may have financial needs to cover. This could become particularly pronounced with college football — where universities are making tens of millions off programs off of athletes who make nothing other than a scholarship. Heck, SEC football teams are basically pro-level and those players don’t make a dime.  Seeing everyone profit from a sport other than you the athlete certainly can open up issues as sports betting propagates to more and more states.

So why isn’t this already an issue today?

It’s easy to play devil’s advocate here.

Betting on college sports, particularly around bowl season and March Madness, has definitely existed at a high-volume and with vigor in Las Vegas with little to no noise around any potential scandals.

However, Las Vegas closely monitors potential fixing activity. A small pattern of significant wagers on insignificant games is going to sound alarm bells. It’s one thing to influence an athlete in Chicago and make the bet in Vegas. It’s another for a college student to have direct access to an athlete and make a wager based on that information (or incentive provided to the athlete) with only a short drive to a local sportsbook.

This is where integrity fees and surveillance technology really matter

The New York Times this week ran an opinion piece on the importance of market surveillance for sports betting. The gist is:

“Many bookmakers have made efforts to limit fraud and manipulation, but more can be done to ensure a level playing field. Regulators and sporting bodies would be wise to learn the lessons of the financial industry and adopt a range of policies and surveillance tools while the market in the United States for sports betting is still nascent.”

Couldn’t agree with this more.

The article notes how costs for other industries to play “catch-up” to bad behavior often outweigh the costs of just getting proper controls established in the first place.

With sports betting, there’s an existing negative stigma attached (for some) that more established and regulated industries like the financial sector don’t face. After years of sports betting being in the Dark Ages in the U.S., the potential public and legislative backlash from poorly monitored betting activity — especially in college sports — could send sports betting back into the Stone Age.

So what’s the solution?

Yes, betting on college sports does currently exist in Las Vegas. No, there’s not an epidemic of point shaving and match fixing. However, as more states legalize and allow sports betting within their borders, the most prudent route would be to at a minimum delay college athletic wagering.

Get the systems and controls in place at the pro level. Ensure proper market surveillance and integrity protocols are in place.

If so, then and only then roll out sports betting on college football and basketball. The lower profile the sport, the more easy it is to manipulate the athlete.

Let’s not mess this up. It took a long time to get this far. It won’t take much to sports betting reeling backwards again.