A Sea Of Red

Fascinating read from Deadspin released today. Also interesting to see how quickly ESPN responded to this story blowing up the internet.

http://deadspin.com/5906658/is-an-es...people-on-the-

Is Sarah Phillips for real? Thirteen months ago, she was an unknown message-board participant at Covers.com, a gambling website. Then Covers plucked her from the boards and gave her a weekly column, sight unseen. Five months after that, she was tapped by Lynn Hoppes, an editor for ESPN.com, to write a weekly column for ESPN's Page 2—once the home of writers like David Halberstam, Ralph Wiley, and Hunter S. Thompson, and which has now been rebranded as ESPN's Playbook. The swiftness of her ascent gave her that weird sort of internet half-celebrity whereby she became moderately famous before anyone really knew who she was.

Or before anyone was sure that she existed at all. In message boards over at Covers and websites like Beyond the Bets, you'll still see questions about things that should be elementary: Is she actually in her 20s? A college student? Does she actually gamble as much as she's claimed? Why doesn't she ever appear on videos or podcasts? Has she harassed people? Is she actually a scammer? Is she really who she says she is?

And the spoiler

Update, 6 p.m.: Sarah Phillips has been let go by ESPN. An ESPN spokesman just told me: "We've ended our freelance relationship with her." Phillips tweets:

Yes, released at 6 pm today. Deadspin published the story at 4:37. Didn't even take 1.5 hours for ESPN to release "her".

That's funny, I just happened to go over there and read the entire article. Sketch for sure. I have the feeling nobody knows the truth behind this one yet...her Twitter is crazy right now. I cant help but to think its some dude sitting in India right now.

Maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think it's disconcerting how far ESPN has jumped in bed with Vegas? Again, it may just be me being stupid, but something just doesn't feel right about it.

twitter is blwoing up over this. it's amazing how many people have proof on twitter and email of how "she" scammed and conned them out of money or their lucrative parody twitter accounts. not sure how a parody twitter account can be lucrative but apparently it can be. seems like every single person that's been scammed or conned has hard proof to back up their claims against her.

I was reading about this last night. Crazy story.

ALUmnus wrote:Maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think it's disconcerting how far ESPN has jumped in bed with Vegas? Again, it may just be me being stupid, but something just doesn't feel right about it.

Every other major sports country features betting info in their broadcasts and there are no more scandals than there are here. We need to move way beyond the sports betting stigma and treat it like a fun leisurely thing to do just like fantasy sports and other things that people pay to do.

NotAJerry wrote:

ALUmnus wrote:Maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think it's disconcerting how far ESPN has jumped in bed with Vegas? Again, it may just be me being stupid, but something just doesn't feel right about it.

Every other major sports country features betting info in their broadcasts and there are no more scandals than there are here. We need to move way beyond the sports betting stigma and treat it like a fun leisurely thing to do just like fantasy sports and other things that people pay to do.

I could really care less what other countries do. As we've learned over and over, their models don't work here. And there's a reason for that stigma on sports betting. Fun and leisurely....

It will be really great on that day where we actually agree on something.

NotAJerry wrote:

ALUmnus wrote:Maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think it's disconcerting how far ESPN has jumped in bed with Vegas? Again, it may just be me being stupid, but something just doesn't feel right about it.

Every other major sports country features betting info in their broadcasts and there are no more scandals than there are here. We need to move way beyond the sports betting stigma and treat it like a fun leisurely thing to do just like fantasy sports and other things that people pay to do.

Tell this to the IOC and other governing bodies of non US sports leagues. Corruption is huge deal.

Or better yet, if you want to gamble, go to West Virginia. Duh.

It needs to be legalized anyway. Keeping betting on the black market just causes more problems. And no, I don't gamble.

a friend of mine (Pete Michaels) plays basketball professionally in europe and says that game fixing there in basketball and other sports has run rampant because of gambling.

Yes, because we are saints here in the USA for "fixing" games to get better draft picks (2011-12 Bobcats, 2011 Colts) or even to get a better matchup in the playoffs (2010-11 Grizzlies, 2011-12 76ers)! Purposefully losing is purposefully losing regardless of what the reasons are behind it, and one doesn't need gambling for it to be an issue...

lynchburgwildcats wrote:Yes, because we are saints here in the USA for "fixing" games to get better draft picks (2011-12 Bobcats, 2011 Colts) or even to get a better matchup in the playoffs (2010-11 Grizzlies, 2011-12 76ers)! Purposefully losing is purposefully losing regardless of what the reasons are behind it, and one doesn't need gambling for it to be an issue...

So you're saying it's a problem already and you want to improve the situation by encouraging gambling

From the class of 09 wrote:

lynchburgwildcats wrote:Yes, because we are saints here in the USA for "fixing" games to get better draft picks (2011-12 Bobcats, 2011 Colts) or even to get a better matchup in the playoffs (2010-11 Grizzlies, 2011-12 76ers)! Purposefully losing is purposefully losing regardless of what the reasons are behind it, and one doesn't need gambling for it to be an issue...

So you're saying it's a problem already and you want to improve the situation by encouraging gambling

People are already gambling, whether it be in Vegas, online, through a bookie or just amongst friends. I don't see what the big deal is. I'm all for making friendly wagers as long as it isn't causing damage to your personal life. Heck, what other reason do I have to sit and watch meaningless games where my team isn't involved. Throw a few dollars on a game and watch it with your buddies, that makes it interesting.

From the class of 09 wrote:

lynchburgwildcats wrote:Yes, because we are saints here in the USA for "fixing" games to get better draft picks (2011-12 Bobcats, 2011 Colts) or even to get a better matchup in the playoffs (2010-11 Grizzlies, 2011-12 76ers)! Purposefully losing is purposefully losing regardless of what the reasons are behind it, and one doesn't need gambling for it to be an issue...

So you're saying it's a problem already and you want to improve the situation by encouraging gambling

And where did I encourage gambling on this thread? I'd like to know because I can't find it.

lynchburgwildcats wrote:

From the class of 09 wrote:

lynchburgwildcats wrote:Yes, because we are saints here in the USA for "fixing" games to get better draft picks (2011-12 Bobcats, 2011 Colts) or even to get a better matchup in the playoffs (2010-11 Grizzlies, 2011-12 76ers)! Purposefully losing is purposefully losing regardless of what the reasons are behind it, and one doesn't need gambling for it to be an issue...

So you're saying it's a problem already and you want to improve the situation by encouraging gambling

And where did I encourage gambling on this thread? I'd like to know because I can't find it.

I'm just missing what you're trying to say. Or did you just want to state the obvious?

lynchburgwildcats wrote:Yes, because we are saints here in the USA for "fixing" games to get better draft picks (2011-12 Bobcats, 2011 Colts) or even to get a better matchup in the playoffs (2010-11 Grizzlies, 2011-12 76ers)! Purposefully losing is purposefully losing regardless of what the reasons are behind it, and one doesn't need gambling for it to be an issue...

just stating that "no more scandals than there are here" isn't correct. your examples have nothing to do with gambling's hold on the sport.

RubberMallet wrote:your examples have nothing to do with gambling's hold on the sport.

That wasn't the point. Gambling doesn't need to exist for games to be fixed. It's going to happen rather gambling exists or not or if it is legal or illegal.

lynchburgwildcats wrote:

RubberMallet wrote:your examples have nothing to do with gambling's hold on the sport.

That wasn't the point. Gambling doesn't need to exist for games to be fixed. It's going to happen rather gambling exists or not or if it is legal or illegal.

your point then is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with the topic on hand. is there a correlation between legalized gambling and the amount of "fixing" going on in athletics? that is the question. i believe there is. look at europe. look at vegas. notice there is no top tier professional sports in vegas. legalized gambling has killed the sport of boxing because of "fixing".

organizational positioning has nothing to do with the conversation.

RubberMallet wrote:

lynchburgwildcats wrote:

RubberMallet wrote:your examples have nothing to do with gambling's hold on the sport.

That wasn't the point. Gambling doesn't need to exist for games to be fixed. It's going to happen rather gambling exists or not or if it is legal or illegal.

your point then is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with the topic on hand. is there a correlation between legalized gambling and the amount of "fixing" going on in athletics? that is the question. i believe there is. look at europe. look at vegas. notice there is no top tier professional sports in vegas. legalized gambling has killed the sport of boxing because of "fixing".

organizational positioning has nothing to do with the conversation.

So how is losing games on purpose for a draft pick any different than losing games on purpose for money? Only difference is one is illegal and the other isn't, but the means to the end is the same - losing games, on purpose, to receive a benefit. Fixing games is going to occur rather there is gambling or not...

apparently you aren't getting this even though its pretty simple.

RubberMallet wrote:apparently you aren't getting this even though its pretty simple.

Apparently you are getting the point that losing games on purpose is fixing games even though it's pretty simple...

lynchburgwildcats wrote:

RubberMallet wrote:apparently you aren't getting this even though its pretty simple.

Apparently you are getting the point that losing games on purpose is fixing games even though it's pretty simple...

True but I'd think you could see the difference between the bobcats throwing their last few games and teams in the playoffs throwing games.

Neither are good but one will be frowned on while one will kill the sport.

he probably can't. remember, its the same except its not

how is losing games on purpose for a draft pick any different than losing games on purpose for money? .... one is illegal and the other isn't

From the class of 09 wrote:

lynchburgwildcats wrote:

RubberMallet wrote:apparently you aren't getting this even though its pretty simple.

Apparently you are getting the point that losing games on purpose is fixing games even though it's pretty simple...

True but I'd think you could see the difference between the bobcats throwing their last few games and teams in the playoffs throwing games.

Neither are good but one will be frowned on while one will kill the sport.

Yes, because all the problems with game fixing in the NCAA in the 50s through the 70s, particularly in the 50s with Kentucky and seven CCNY schools, sure did kill the sport

Only thing that will kill a sport is if people won't participate, and for the big money sports, if people won't watch on tv or pay to attend games.