7 questions we have about Notre Dame suspending men's swimming amid gambling scandal
Thursday afternoon saw a bombshell report from Sports Illustrated's Pat Forde send shockwaves across the world of collegiate swimming.
Notre Dame is suspending men's swimming for a "minimum" of one year after internal and external investigations into the team discovered a culture "dismissive of Notre Dame’s standards for student-athletes". This reportedly included swimmers gambling on the performance of their teammates.
Head coach Chris Lindauer and his staff were not disciplined, after reviews found that “the staff was not aware of gambling or the scope and extent of other troubling behaviors because team members effectively concealed such behaviors from the coaches and staff through concerted efforts.”
The Notre Dame men’s team effectively created its own sports book for the purpose of wagering on their swimming performances, sources say. A majority of the returning 2024–25 team is believed to have placed bets. “Over/under” lines were established for a swimmer’s times in certain races, with wagers being placed on the outcomes.
...
Some Fighting Irish swimmers also placed wagers on other sports and involving other schools, sources said, such as the NCAA basketball tournaments.
The NCAA rules are pretty straightforward when it comes to gambling: "If you put something at risk (such as cash, entry fee, dinner or other tangible item) on any amateur and/or professional sporting event with a chance to win something in return, you violate NCAA sports wagering rules."
Still, there's a lot we don't know here, and to take a step as drastic as a self-imposed suspension of the program requires plenty of evidence we hope to see soon. In the meantime, we're left with seven questions that immediately stand out.
1. Why did Notre Dame feel the need to take such harsh action before the NCAA could weigh in?
Notre Dame men's swimming just sent Chris Guiliano to the Paris Olympics, where he won gold in the 4x100m freestyle relay for the Americans while Lindauer was an assistant coach for Team USA. The Fighting Irish also completed it's best finish (10th) at the NCAA championships in school history.
If the statement from ND athletic director Pete Bevacqua confirms the investigation cleared Lindauer and a "small number of team members who did not participate in the conduct", why did the school move ahead to effectively shutter the men's program before the NCAA had a chance to rule on the case?
What other punishments were available to Notre Dame why was this the correct route? How would any punishment from the NCAA have differed from Notre Dame's decision?
2. How did the gambling ring actually operate?
If we're talking about swimmers setting over/unders on their teammates' times, this could be anything from one swimmer betting another that they'll break a personal record, or something more nefarious like taking bets on who finishes in which position.
Which begs some follow up questions: How much money was actually being wagered between teammates? Who was acting as the bookie? How were odds set? How were winnings and losses collected?
Wagers of $200 or less incur nothing more than a slap on the wrist from the NCAA (via additional rules and prevention education), whereas anything over $200 begins to incur loss of eligibility. Anything over $800 is subject to potential permanent loss of eligibility.
3. Does the NCAA need to adjust its gambling rules (again)?
The spirit of the NCAA rules are understood in regards to bookies and sportsbooks, but should wagers among teammates be included if there is no impact or influence on the outcome of the event?
Put another way: If the swimmers were betting each other on whether or not a teammate would finish under a certain time, should the NCAA treat them the same as a football player betting on his props with a bookie or sportsbook? What if the swimmer being wagered on was unaware of the bets? What if the swimmer in question knew he was being wagered on by his teammates, but didn't know where the line on his over/under was set?
What exactly is the NCAA attempting to punish with the way its rules are currently set up?
4. What other sports were waged on?
This is crucial. Because while no regulated sportsbook sets lines on collegiate swimming, there are plenty of other sports regulated books will take wagers on. The report from Forde specifically notes the NCAA basketball tournaments. Were those wagers placed among teammates or were they made using the mobile betting apps we've all become familiar with?
5. Was inside information provided to individuals involved in sports betting?
You can consider this an extension of the last question, but the consequences are far more severe. If members of the public were betting on those other sports with the knowledge of inside information, this becomes a much larger deal. Think more along the lines of the Alabama baseball scandal.
6. What conditions must the team meet before the men's team is reinstated?
The fact that this wasn't laid out — especially considering the coaching staff was exonerated — is concerning and leads to our most cynical question...
7. Is this just a convenient way to kill a non-revenue sport?
Yeah, this is pretty harsh and there's no evidence that's what's going on here. But in the absence of more information it's hard not to view Notre Dame's decision in the larger context of college athletics.
Revenue-sharing among colleges and student-athletes is here. Coaches — particularly those in Olympic sports — have already started ringing alarm bells about the future of their programs now that schools won't get to keep every cent brought in by their top sports.
Without knowing more about the full scope of the swimming team's activities, conspiracies will linger about what was actually happening and why Notre Dame took such drastic steps.
We need more information sooner than later to fully judge how the Fighting Irish have handled this.
This article originally appeared on For The Win: 7 questions we have about Notre Dame suspending men's swimming amid gambling scandal
