A soccer match-fixing scandal that spreads from Europe to Asia to Africa. An oral argument in New Jersey to determine whether sports betting should be legal in the United States. A record haul in the state of Nevada for Super Bowl betting. Three moments, two of them (match fixing and the Super Bowl) that have already happened, and one (the oral arguments) that will happen Feb. 14. At first glance they are separated by distance and time and varying degrees of perception. But look a little harder and the web of connection is there; potentially unfolding like a jigsaw Quentin Tarantino film from the early '90s. Let's start with the Super Bowl. In the days leading up to the game, bookmakers around the country began predicting that it would be the most-bet NFL title game ever. As economic fortune-tellers, Nevada bookies can't be beat. When the economy is on the verge of turning they are the first to notice, as more and more money starts crossing the counter. Ed Salmons of the Las Vegas Hotel told me he could sense all through the NFL playoffs that the cash was coming, that the action felt different and livelier than the year before. And the bookies were right. The record for the Nevada handle on the Super Bowl had been a little more than $94 million, set in 2006 when the Pittsburgh Steelers played the Seattle Seahawks. But on Sunday, bettors poured more than $98 million into the state's sports books, easily a new record. This is good news in a lot of ways to a lot of people. Nevada's coffers get a little heavier. And forget housing starts or unemployment numbers or the stock market; the fact that people are willing to fly to Vegas, pay for a hotel and part with their money in a sports book for the privilege is a sure sign that economic uncertainty is waning. (Cue the Tarantino-esque quick-cut connection!) This is why New Jersey is fighting to have the federal sports betting ban, known as the Professional Amateur Sports Protection Act, overturned. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is making a much-needed money run. In defiance of federal law, he has told folks in his state he will grant sports betting licenses. And he's doing it the only way he knows how: daring anyone who gets in his way to stop him. The NFL, the NBA, MLB, the NHL, the NCAA and now the Department of Justice (which, when PASPA was passed in 1992, wrote a position paper for Congress claiming the law was unconstitutional) are doing just that. In oral arguments in federal court in Trenton next week, the leagues' lawyers will no doubt make the claim that legalized sports betting is a legitimate threat to the integrity of their sports. In fact, in a deposition this past December, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, boss of the sport that just pulled in a record betting haul on its championship game, told opposing attorneys that he considered gambling the No. 1 threat to the integrity of his sport. Bigger than Bountygate. Bigger than steroids. (And cut! Now go back to the scandal that opened our story. Bring it all together, Quentin!) A favorite argument of proponents of legalization is that more regulation would not just bring in much-needed revenue, but it would reduce the chances that games would be tampered with. Too much would be at stake. But, no doubt, when the leagues' lawyers make their case countering this argument on Valentine's Day, in the back of their minds will be the match-fixing scandals that Europol, the FBI of the European Union, announced on Monday. It revealed that, during a two-year investigation, more than 425 soccer officials had fixed 680 matches worldwide, resulting in more than $10 million in profits and several million dollars in illegal payoffs. We've known this was coming. This past May in ESPN The Magazine, Brett Forrest investigated the biggest fixer in the world, Wilson Perumal, who had recently been arrested. Cops had been anonymously tipped off to Perumal's nefarious ways by associates of his old boss in the world's largest match-fixing syndicate, Dan Tan, who was angry that Perumal had gone rogue on a couple of missions. Once in jail, Perumal promised that he held "the key to Pandora's box." And that he would not be afraid to unlock it. Well, he has. While we all think of the EPL or La Liga or Serie A when it comes to professional soccer, there are thousands of teams of varying age groups in more than 200 countries that play under the FIFA umbrella. The players make a pittance, and the refs make even less. From Asia to Africa, they fly under the radar of everyone except the most loyal local fans and the most opportunistic bettors. As Forrest pointed out in his story, these are the matches Tan and Perumal took advantage of. This is the nuance of the debate. At the highest levels, it is difficult to fix a game, and those are the games most often considered when people talk about regulation being a safety net. In the United States, we don't offer lines on Division III college hoops or OHL hockey games. The avenue through which most people gamble, the Internet, does not provide opportunities for in-game props like "How many field goals will there be in the first half of a football game?". But those are distinct to Europe and Asia, where the number of betting websites outstrips those available to U.S. customers and the options for betting are wider and, often, more local. During my podcast on Wednesday, Joe Brennan Jr., who runs the lobbying group IMEGA, which was instrumental in developing the lawsuit to overturn PASPA, made an interesting point: "Bettors mostly believe NFL games are on the level because of the quality of it. That is not the case when you are betting on an under-16 Albanian soccer league. In Europe and Asia there is such a passion for soccer there is too much available that is deemed professional soccer and too many opportunities for tampering. It would be as if Vegas bookmakers had to follow every world soccer league and create lines and action for that. You shouldn't be betting on semi-professional athlete teams. And it would be legit criticism if someone proposed it here in the U.S. Once you go beyond Division I, the resources do not exist to protect the integrity of the game. You cannot make markets on those games." Brennan is right, of course. But given the appetite of Americans for sports betting (as evidenced by the ever-increasing Super Bowl handle), someone will try. As soon as it becomes legal. (And scene) Despite losing the Super Bowl last night to the Baltimore Ravens, the San Francisco 49ers ended the season as the top-ranked team in the Vegas NFL Bettors' poll. And that poll also acts as a look-ahead to the 2013-14 season. The rankings, compiled from the power ratings of professional handicappers Teddy "Covers" Sevransky of sportsmemo.com, Sal Selvaggio of madduxsports.com and yours truly, Dave Tuley, are mostly just a minor adjustment from our numbers at the end of the regular season, but they're pretty much in line with the Super Bowl XLVIII futures at the Las Vegas Hotel SuperBook that have been up for several weeks already. The odds in the accompanying chart below are the adjusted LVH futures after Sunday night's game. The New England Patriots are currently the 6-1 favorite with the 49ers right behind them at 7-1 and the Denver Broncos, who were the AFC's No. 1 seed but lost in the divisional playoffs to the eventual champion Ravens, are the only other team with single-digit odds at 8-1. Our rankings have the 49ers as the top team with the Patriots, Seattle Seahawks and Green Bay Packerstied for the second spot, followed by the Broncos and then the Ravens, who are sixth in our rankings and tied for seventh-best choice in the LVH futures at 14-1. Now, keep in mind that most pros don't see value in betting at these current prices with so much that can happen in the coming months. And that's before the fact that you're basically tying up your money for a full year (with no interest!). In fact, Selvaggio said nothing looks playable to him at this time. Sevransky offers up a suggestion below and also mentioned the New York Giants (20-1 with a nucleus of a team that is just a year removed from winning it all and can play with anyone on their best day) and Washington Redskins (30-1 and who should only get better with Robert Griffin III) as possible fliers. Seattle Seahawks (12-1) Tuley: Among the top teams with relatively low odds, this looks like the value play to me. Seattle is a team that doesn't do anything poorly: great defense, balanced offense and solid special teams. The big obstacle is being in the same division as the 49ers, but imagine if the 49ers regress a little and the Seahawks are able to get home-field advantage in the playoffs with their 12th man. This 12-1 bet could look like a bargain. Chicago Bears (30-1) Sevransky: The Bears had one major weakness this past season -- their downfield passing game was ineffective for extended stretches, in large part thanks to the weakness of their offensive line and the lack of creativity from Mike Tice. This is a fixable problem. New head coach Mark Trestman has a reputation as an offensive innovator, and new coordinator Aaron Kromer has been a successful offensive line coach in multiple spots, including his most recent stint with New Orleans. Chicago won 10 games last year and had a plus-98 point differential, the type of numbers you don't often see from teams at 30-1. Indianapolis Colts (40-1) Tuley: With rookie Andrew Luck, the Colts challenged the heavily favored Houston Texans for the AFC South title, coming up just short. But obviously they showed that the rebuilding process from the end of the Peyton Manning era will be (and already has been) a short one. The run defense is still a concern, but if they can improve that through free agency and/or the draft, you should see their odds plummet by the start of the season.
