NBA players sound off on league's gambling partnerships and their impact
It has been almost seven years since the Supreme Court opened the door to legalized sports betting across the country, and the NBA now finds itself deep into this gambling world that comes with massive (financial) perks and problems.
The league partnered with FanDuel and DraftKings as its betting partners in 2021, and several teams have done deals with casinos as well. (The Athletic has a partnership with BetMGM.) With people able to place bets at games or on their phones, and the focus shifting from fandom to financial for so many observers, the athlete experience during games and online has often become toxic along the way. The controversy has extended beyond the court, too.
Advertisement
Last year, then-Toronto Raptors forward Jontay Porter was banned from the league for what the NBA called a 'cardinal sin' of betting on games and sharing inside info. Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier has been under federal investigation as well, though the league has cleared him of any wrongdoing.
For a significant segment of players who are merely trying to do their jobs as best they can, there's another destructive element to all this. Some fans who've lost bets take their frustrations out on players online. In the most extreme cases, players have received death threats. It's part of the dark side of the lucrative cash cow that is sports gambling.
Sports gambling is an important, complex topic. That's why The Athletic included a question about it in this year's Anonymous NBA Player Poll. Nearly one-third of the entire league — 150 of the 158 players with whom we spoke — shared their opinions with our writers.
Responses to this question were so spirited, and so diverse and thoughtful, that we decided to share all of the perspectives here.
'It blurs the line between intentions and purity of the game. And I just think it's, in my opinion, (it's) a little predatory the way they push it. You want to encourage gambling responsibly, and (tell gamblers), 'Oh my God! Look at all this money you can make!' When in reality, the only reason why these things exist is because they make tons of money. Why do you think they can spend that much money on advertising? They're taking your money and throwing it back in your face. And so, I think on that question alone, I think it's dangerous to have such a close partnership. I get that it increases your own money, but it's a little unsettling to me. … I get 10 messages, DMs (direct messages) a game, (saying), 'F— you, I'm gonna f— your family up.''
Advertisement
'The gambling partnerships are horrible for the league because you guys are selling your soul for the worst types of people in your fan base, and they don't see us as human beings anymore, which again, they never did. But you're just going to start seeing more and more of — I hope not — you're going to see more and more people throwing games because of under-the-table deals.'
'It's not great when you're banning players, understandably, for gambling, and then you're promoting it. It would be like telling us not to do cocaine and then giving the players cocaine in the locker room.'
'If you ask the players, the messages and s— that we get after games, it's starting to really, I'm not going to say ruin the game, but gambling is having a massive effect on the fans. It used to be you just come and watch people hoop, but now it's turned into, 'How can we come to the game and win money?' So I think it's bad for the league, but I get it because they make a lot of money from it.'
'There is money in it, but I think it makes things really hard on players.'
'I personally hate gambling. Hate everyone talking about parlays this, parlays that. I hate getting DMs in my Instagram talking about, 'You f—– up my parlay.' I hate people sending me threats because I messed up their parlay.'
'I feel like anytime you click on TV or NBA TV, you always see something about spreads or gambling. As you know, some players have had problems with it. I feel like it's kind of antagonizing players to think about it, and also, I think it's a conflict of interest for the NBA, too. So, I think it's bad.'
'They've turned the fans crazy. Some fans can go crazy with that.'
'Bad, because it's in the players' faces, whether it be at home or in the game or in the stands, it's just thrown in the players' faces. It's taking away from the real fan experience. It's a money drip.'
Advertisement
'People are looking at the game as just bets, and for us players, they cuss us out. It's losing the fun of the game. You should keep it to just betting on which team will win, and that's it.'
'Terrible. I think it's terrible because you can't see everything. There's a lot of inside work going on there that we don't see.'
'I don't think they should be partnered (or) pushing it. People already think it's rigged. I'm in the league, and if I was watching some of these games at home with the way they go, I would think somebody made a call. I just don't think it's a great look.'
'I don't think gambling ever is a good thing in sports. People stop watching us for what we do and only to make money for themselves. It takes a hit on the integrity of what we do out there.'
'That's terrible. I don't know where this league is going with stuff like that.'
'I don't mind if it puts money in our pockets. But it's terrible right now. Terrible. People (are) calling my mom during games (about their bets).'
'It's not good. It benefits money-wise, but for players and everybody in the organization, it's bad.'
'It's bad, but the NBA makes money off of it, so that makes sense. But I don't like it because it brings the fans to not really understand basketball. It just makes it worse.'
'Bad because it just makes people think they can talk to us however they want.'
'Bad because the people who gamble heavy say crazy things, and it's like we're encouraging that.'
'Terrible. I hate the gambling. I hate everything that comes with it. … The way they do it, that's all people talk about now. You've got a bunch of people in my DMs after the game just talking about price points. I just think it's bad. It's a bad look.'
'Terrible. Hate them. Every game, no matter if it's a good game or bad game, you've got motherf—— sending death threats, saying racist s—. Every game. I guarantee you, if I check right now, I'll probably have something from this game. Every game. Everywhere. DMs, Twitter. People be tripping, bro. I hope it doesn't happen, but it's going to come to a point where players are going to be targeted because people have lost so much money on them. That's what I think. But hopefully I'm wrong.'
Advertisement
'Most of these people aren't fans of the game. They're just trying to make money.'
'I get so many DMs, death threats. I don't look at it or take it serious, but I don't like the culture around it.'
'People get caught up in the gambling. They're harassing the players.'
'Bad because it exposes us to people that think they can say anything they want to because they bet their money on us.'
'Terrible. … They're taking away the ethics of the sport. We're getting fans that don't even care about wins or losses. They don't care about a certain team. They just care about a ticket to win money. The fact that we're sponsoring it, to get the money, I guess, helps us in a way. But I think it takes away from the ethics of the sport a little bit.'
'Fans are disrespectful when it comes to it. They hit you after every game in your DMs and stuff like that. I just feel like it takes away from that genuine fan that just appreciates talent. Because you're just looking to see if a guy can cover rebounds or points. You're not really appreciating his team. You're not appreciating all the other stuff that comes with watching the NBA.'
'Good for the money, I guess, but they're bad, I think, for the game because now fans — not all of them, but a good amount of them — all they care for is their parlays. And I personally hate when I'm walking to the court, and all I hear is, 'I need 10 rebounds. I need 15 points. I need this. I need that.' I think it's very disrespectful to the game and to what we do and the work we put in.'
'I just think the gambling is a bad idea. If you've got guys point shaving, it's bad.'
'I'm sure it's making a lot of money, but I think it f—- with the integrity of the game, all this gambling. Everybody's into the gambling but us, but we're the ones that control all of it. I don't think it's good for the league, but it makes the league more money.'
Advertisement
'I hate 'em. I personally hate 'em. There's just too many people just going out of nowhere, saying 'F you' for their parlays and stuff like that. It's just saturated the game to where people aren't just enjoying the game. It's just 'I've got to watch this person to see if I get this parlay, or this one.' It kind of reminds me of the movie 'Casino.' It's all money-oriented. There's nothing pure about it.'
'I just think the fact we promote gambling as a country is just wrong. I think you should be able to gamble, but the way it's promoted, it's super dangerous. You've got people losing money. I don't like it at all. Fans are gonna heckle regardless, but I think it's more about promoting gambling to the youth. Kids watch this. So, when you're promoting FanDuel, I don't think that's good for anybody.'
'It's the dumbest thing ever. Some people just don't really watch the game. They just look at the numbers. If you mess up someone's parlay, they bother you — they say some crazy stuff you've gotta deal with. They say something about your family. If it was none of that happening, we wouldn't hear none of that stuff. If you mess up their money or parlay, that's when they say something to you. So it's the dumbest thing ever.'
'I think it's hurting the soul of the game. I think it's good financially for the short term, but I don't think it's good for the essence of the game over the long term.'
'It's bad, just because you're mixing that world with the integrity of the sport. We talk about teams truly trying to compete and win out there, when there's teams probably tanking to get picks, and it's just not a good look.'
'It's tough, because it's business at the end of the day. If they're going to do that, why be so strict on us? But I get it, point shaving and things of that nature that can go into making the game nasty (are a concern). But at the end of the day, it's just about money.'
'I understand it from a monetization standpoint. But in terms of fans' relationship with the players and vice versa, I think it's bad for the league.'
Advertisement
'From a player's point of view, it's maybe a little bit bad because you get more angry fans coming at you.'
'I think it just ruins the fan aspect of basketball or any sport, to be honest. If you hit someone's parlay, they love you. If you don't, they want to murder you.'
'It's bad for the league. It helps generate income, that's one thing. But you have situations where guys are gambling. If it's everywhere, it's hard not to want to do something if they're promoting it in front of your face.'
'Bad. It just causes a lot of hate.'
'Bad for the league. It undermines the commitment for NBA players and encourages fans to value it over the players.'
'I think it's just another opportunity to make money. This s— is a business.'
'It's great. Gambling is great for the league. More money, more eyes, more fan engagement.'
'I think they're good. It's more money.'
'I think they're fine as long as players don't partake in that. But other than that, I think it's fine. Let the public do what they want.'
'I think it brings more eyes to the game, especially in the regular season. Obviously, you have die-hard fans, but you need more people just watching to watch NBA basketball. If that means that's why they're engaged and watching that, we want that. Obviously, the complaint is people DMing you, whatever, hate mail and all that. At the end of the day, we make more money based on viewership, so I'd rather have more money and people screaming at me than no one screaming at me and less money.'
'I think it's good. It helps the league make money. That's the goal. The more money the league makes, the more money we make.'
'I think it engages the fans. I feel like we earn some fans off that. And I feel like it helps the guys who know the game but don't have money and are trying to get some more money. It doesn't really hurt us. I really don't care. I feel like the guys who care are sensitive.'
Advertisement
'It helps fans engage in a whole different way.'
'I think it brings more eyes to the NBA. I think it brings a little bit of a different fan base and views. And more eyes are always good.'
'It makes the league more money.'
'There's a lot of money to be spent in gambling. So I think at some point, we get a piece of that. It's good for the game. It's good for the fans. Obviously, it's not good if players are doing it. But I think overall, it's good.'
'All publicity is good publicity. It brings in more money, more revenue, more engagement. It is what it is.'
'I don't mind it. It's entertainment for the fans. Some people hate it. I do think it takes away from the true fans, but, s—, (people) got to make (money).'
'Good. It gets the fans more engaged into the games. All you have to do is just worry about a safety hazard for the players. But when you're trying to get fan engagement, that's definitely something that helps.'
'It gets more people involved watching it. Whether it's for the good or bad, people will engage with the league more.'
'However we get more money is good.'
'It's fun. As long as, obviously, players and people involved aren't on it.'
'I think it's good. It gives fans the outlet to gamble on games, have fun with it. Obviously, you have to do it responsibly. But I think it's good.'
'They're good, because it helps promote the league and all the companies. I think it's good, benefits both sides.'
'It's good, but because of it, people don't actually watch the games.'
'I think it's good. I think it makes people watch the game. When people have money on the game, they're invested.'
'It puts more money in the league's pockets. But it also puts your players on the line, in a sense. I'd say it's good. I personally don't like it, but I think it's good for the league.'
'I think it creates an opportunity for our fan base to grow, and I have no problem with it at all.'
'(The) good (part is the partnerships) bring in a lot of money. Bad because I hear about every single shot I miss.'
'Overall, it's good for the money that they bring. But it's annoying dealing with it.'
'Business-wise, and money-wise, it's good. But player-fan relationship (wise), it's horrible.'
'It's OK. Some people take it too serious.'
Advertisement
'It depends. Obviously it's all for money, if you see it for what it is. Obviously a situation (like Porter) is not ideal for the league. It's not impossible to happen again. I don't think it's that good for the league in the long term. But, money.'
'It's good because I'm sure it makes lots of money. But I think gambling is overall a bad thing, so I'm not sure the league should be encouraging people to do it.'
'It's good for making money, I guess. But it's bad for people who take it too far in how they approach people and games and stuff like that. But I'd say I'm 50-50. I think it can be good, (and) it can be bad.'
'It's good and bad. It's raising money. The money's always good. But then, at the same time, you get caught with some jackasses that have a habit of gambling off the court, and you mix that in sometimes. The league is already cracking down on a few guys. But that kind of gave our league a little bit of a black eye.'
'I think bad. But they're in the business of making money. So good. Just being honest!'
'It gives the fans something to look forward to, but they be doing too much. They think it's all about stats. It's 50/50. I'm not against it. Yeah, I'm with it. I ain't mad at it.'
'I mean, it's good from a business perspective. From a moral perspective, probably not. But to grow the business, I would say it's good.'
'Obviously, viewership will go up. They watch more because they've got money on the game. But also, it's kind of bad for the game because now people are showing up calling you out your name when you don't get one more assist. So it's like, yeah, it's good for the viewership. But also, the humanity piece of it kind of f—- with the players.'
'It's tough, because it's business at the end of the day. If they're going to do that, why be so strict on us? But I get it, point shaving and things of that nature that can go into making the game nasty. But at the end of the day, it's just about money.'
Advertisement
'Both. Gambling allows us to make more money. But at the same time, you get less real fans who are just trying to make money, who are really just losing money.'
'It obviously brings more revenue. But it's also bad because people already look at us as entertainers, and then with gambling, they look at us (as) less than a human; more like my money-making market.'
'I mean, it's good from a business perspective. From a moral perspective, probably not. But to grow the business, I would say it's good.'
'It's good because it's more fun for fans. But it can be bad because we, as players, get all the hate.'
'From a business side, I'm sure it's good. I just think the players hate the backlash they receive for not hitting parlays. But I think it's probably good for business.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
17 minutes ago
- New York Times
Crystal Palace: Group including Jimmy Butler expected to make offer for stake in Premier League club
A consortium of sport and entertainment executives, which includes the NBA star Jimmy Butler, is expected to make an offer in excess of $200million to purchase Eagle Football's 43 per cent stake in Premier League soccer club Crystal Palace, sources briefed on the proposed deal have told The Athletic. Advertisement The group is led by former Morgan Stanley sports executive Bejan Esmaili and former Roc Nation attorney Wajid Mir, with the pair having previously agreed in January a period of exclusivity with John Textor — the largest shareholder in Eagle Football and one of Palace's four primary owners — which they allowed to lapse. The Dallas Mavericks head coach Jason Kidd had formed part of that consortium but instead chose to join the ownership group of fellow Premier League side Everton in April. Now Butler, a six-time NBA all-star who has been with the Golden State Warriors since February, has become part of the wider group. Eagle and Butler, via his representatives, have been approached for comment. Previously backed by two Saudi Arabian businessmen, Haider and Mansoor Syed, the original group opted to allow its 30-day period of exclusivity to end and instead sought alternative funding. The new consortium, sources added, is backed by an American group which has experience investing in soccer clubs. Should the group's expected offer be accepted, it would value Palace — which won the English FA Cup, the world's oldest soccer cup competition, for the first time in May — as a whole in excess of $465million (£343m). Other recent investments in Premier League clubs include Sir Jim Racliffe's purchase of a 28.9 per cent stake in Manchester United for $1.6bn in December 2023, the Todd Boehly-Clearlake Capital takeover of Chelsea for $3.02bn in May 2022 and the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund (PIF)-backed takeover of Newcastle United for £305m in October 2021. Sources also added that Woody Johnson, owner of the New York Jets, has also made an offer for Eagle's shares but has yet to meet Textor's valuation. The Athletic has approached Johnson for comment, via the Jets. Sportsbank, a sports investment group advised by the former Everton director and experienced football financier Keith Harris, was granted exclusivity to invest in Eagle in January, but that exclusivity also lapsed and it no longer has an active offer, although remains interested in investing should Eagle complete its initial public offering (IPO). Advertisement The expected offer from the new U.S. consortium comes amid concerns over Palace's eligibility to compete in next season's Europa League despite qualifying as FA Cup winners, due to Eagle's ownership of French side Lyon, where it holds a majority stake, putting them potentially at odds with UEFA's rules around multi-club ownership. Textor had hoped fellow Palace co-owners Josh Harris, who owns the NFL's Washington Commanders, and David Blitzer, the two American businessmen who together make up the other general partners alongside chairman Steve Parish, would purchase Eagle's shares but no deal has been agreed. They have the right of first offer to buy Eagle's stake in the south London soccer club and have been approached by Textor, but according to sources familiar with the situation, their proposal fell short of being accepted. Textor believes it would be the easiest way to remove doubt over Palace's Europa League participation. Textor, the fourth general partner at Palace as a representative of Eagle, is the chairman of the group but after more than a year shifting between being open to selling Eagle's stake and seeking to buy a majority, appears to have settled on selling, especially with Palace's place in Europe in question. UEFA's rules restrict teams from multi-club groups playing in the same competition. While there may still be ways around this, the deadline set by European football's governing body to address any multi-club ownership issues passed on March 1 — the day Palace beat Millwall in the fifth round of the FA Cup. Lyon qualified for the same competition through their league standing and due to finishing higher than Palace in their respective league, they have precedence to be admitted to the competition. All four of Palace's general partners met with UEFA in Nyon, Switzerland, last week to present their case that Textor does not have control or influence at Palace. There is some confidence that they would be able to convey a lack of decisive influence but the decision on whether to admit Palace to Europe remains in the balance before it is communicated to the club, which is expected later this month. The U.S. consortium is expected to now come back to the table. Should it make the offer and it be accepted by Eagle, as their previous offer was in December, then the deal will be subject to Premier League approval. It remains to be seen whether UEFA would be satisfied by a binding agreement for Eagle to sell its stake, or whether any deal can reach that stage before the committee makes its decision. Should the consortium be successful in buying out Eagle, it may subsequently look to carry out a full takeover of Palace in due course in order to have full decision-making power. In May last year, Textor told The Athletic that he was actively looking to sell Eagle's stake in Palace and he had hired investment banking firm Raine to find a suitable investor to purchase the group's share in the club. 'We've reached the point where we have a significant investment in a club we hold in the minority (in Palace),' he said. 'We're having extreme success in Brazil and early on in France, (and) to not have that same level of integration with our partner in the UK… it just becomes more and more clear that that level of collaboration we want and need works.' Advertisement Eagle Football 'is simply not a perfect fit for Crystal Palace,' he added. Textor originally purchased 40 per cent of Palace in 2021 for £87.5m (now $114m), helping to fund a successful transfer window and complete the redevelopment of the academy, before increasing that stake by around five per cent with an additional £30m. Further investment has come from capital calls. There have been failed attempts by Textor to purchase a controlling stake in the club, which is also owned by fellow general partners Parish, Harris and Blitzer, who each have 25 per cent of the voting rights. Over the past four years, Textor has struggled to make headway into purchasing a controlling stake and disagreed with Parish over the direction of the club, in particular with his multi-club model which includes controlling stakes in Lyon, Brazilian top-flight club Botafogo and Belgian club RWD Molenbeek, which he recently renamed Daring Brussels. Now, he appears to have accepted it is time to sell up at Palace. Additional reporting: Anthony Slater (Top photo of Crystal Palace players celebrating their FA Cup win in May:)
Associated Press
27 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Can schools like St. Bonaventure and FIU thrive in college athletics without the big bucks?
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — As schools prepare to begin sharing millions with their athletes, there is no avoiding the reality that if you're not a Power Four school, you're at a disadvantage. With major conferences running the show, St. Bonaventure and Florida International don't even have a seat at the table. FIU and St. Bonaventure aren't necessarily worried about a head-to-head fight over top players with deeper-pocketed schools. The priority has become survival and finding a balance between athletics ambition and financial sustainability. Adrian Wojnarowski spoke candidly about the challenges he faced during his inaugural season as the general manager of the St. Bonaventure men's basketball team. Solidifying a recruiting class that would improve the team and embrace the school culture was not easy. After July 1, when lucrative paychecks will pretty much become mandatory for blue-chip prospects, it's not going to get any easier. With some 2,000 undergraduate students, the Bonnies are outnumbered in resources and revenue when competing even against other Atlantic 10 teams like VCU, Dayton, and Saint Louis. Wojnarowski, ESPN's former lead NBA reporter, thinks he has identified a formula for locating the ideal prospect. To him, St. Bonaventure is a landing spot for international players adjusting to a new culture and college life, transfers who may have fallen short at a high major and need development, or those looking to move up to a mid-major. He admits the school upstate New York could be a pit stop on a player's journey. 'I want them to see that our environment, our coaching staff, our small school, especially for international players coming over, what I really try to sell is your adjustment to American college life,' he said at the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics and Affiliates Convention this week. 'I think for a lot of kids, it's easier in a school with 1,900 students than a school with 19,000. And you'll come to have two great years with us, and then you'll probably end up at schools with 19,000 or 29,000,' he said. 'And so you're selling, for us, we're your first step on the way to somewhere else, or the other one to me is we're the place to come when you've got to get the basketball right.' If the plan goes awry and a recruit slips away, one thing the former NBA insider refuses to do is blame the money. 'Fundraising is hard, creating new revenue streams is hard, but the one thing that I try to stay away from with us is not saying, 'Oh, we didn't get him because they offered more money,' and using that as a crutch all the time. I really examine when we lost a player,' Wojnarowski said. 'Are we being honest with ourselves in saying that we did everything outside the economics to make our case to this person?' FIU has more than 40,000 undergraduates, but the athletic department is using a similar philosophy, pinpointing advantages and opportunities to come from the settlement instead of the negatives. Similar to St. Bonaventure, FIU doesn't expect to come close to the $20.5 million revenue-sharing cap available over the next year. For a competitive edge, unlocking new revenue streams is fundamental. 'To compete, from a revenue standpoint, you have to think outside the box of your conventional fundraising and targeting donors,' senior associate athletic director Joseph Corey said. 'That's why you're looking at concerts being held at different venues, different festivals to generate extra revenue to bring in, different revenue streams, and not just fundraising going after the same donors. You've got to go beyond that in order to be able to compete.' Being based in Miami has its perks. Proximity to celebrities is one of them. In August, FIU secured a 10-year partnership with Pitbull, the singer and rapper who coins himself 'Mr. 305.' 'We did the partnership with Pitbull – Pitbull Stadium. He's on tour, but part of the deal was that he would be collaborating with us and doing events for us from a fundraising standpoint,' Corey said. 'You've got to think outside the box. Especially in a city like Miami, it's about the experience too.' Schools unlocking creative revenue streams is something that can be expected. FIU competes in Conference USA alongside teams like Liberty, Louisiana Tech, UTEP, Kennesaw State and Jacksonville State. The football team went 3-5 in 2024, finishing sixth in the conference. The men's basketball team finished last with a 3-15 conference record. It's hard to sell donors on losing teams. 'Let's call it what it is, FIU's not going to be able to keep up with the Alabama's of the world, the Georgia's, Michigan, or Texas, but what can we do? We can be the best in our conference. That is our goal,' Corey said. 'Let's be the best in our conference and really compete there because once you're at the top of your conference, that means more revenue in other areas. Everyone wants to donate to a winner.' ___ AP college sports:
NBC Sports
42 minutes ago
- NBC Sports
With no players left from last season's team photo, Baylor begins summer practice with new roster
WACO, Texas — Baylor coach Scott Drew had plenty of players for the first practice of the summer Wednesday, about two months after the team photo from last season was widely circulated on social media with an X marked over all 14 of those players since none was returning to the Bears. Only four of those players exhausted their college eligibility. Nine others left in the transfer portal and one-and-done guard VJ Edgecombe could become Baylor's highest pick ever in the NBA draft later this month. 'Guys you didn't want to lose and were valuable, we haven't had many that we've lost. Whenever you do, that just tears at a coach, because you feel like you didn't do your job,' Drew said this week. 'With the portal, I think we've all gotten used to a lot more turnover in a hurry, and not to take things necessarily personal.' The Bears rebuilt their roster with eight transfers and a four-player signing class with a five-star prospect and the son of a NBA champion. Among the 14 players at the first practice was Cameron Carr, the former Tennessee guard who transferred to Baylor in the middle of last season long after that team photo session. One of the former Bears was guard Robert Wright, who averaged 11.5 points and 4.2 assists a game as a freshman last season and had reportedly agreed to a lucrative NIL deal to stay before transferring to BYU for an even bigger package. 'You know people are going to leave. Rob, obviously, was someone we had an agreement with. When you make an agreement, you think you're done,' Drew said, without getting into any specifics. 'Obviously that was a surprise to us, but again, the staff did a great job of putting together a roster and team. That's part of, hopefully, the House settlement, where you get to a point where you know who's on your team and when they're locked in, they're locked in.' The eight incoming transfers have more than 500 of games played combined, including guards Dan Skillings, who played 100 games over three years for Cincinnati, and JJ White, who started 75 of 99 games at Omaha over the same period. Juslin Bodo Bodo is a 7-foot post from Cameroon, started all 71 of his games for NCAA Tournament team High Point the past two seasons. Obi Agbim, a 6-3 guard, was the Mountain West newcomer of the year after averaging 17.6 points and 3.4 assists in 29 games last season for Wyoming. Five-star prospect Tounde Yessoufou, a small forward from St. Joseph High School in California, leads the signing class that also includes Andre Iguodala II, whose father was a four-time champion over 19 NBA seasons with four teams; Italian forward Maikcol Perez and big man May Soyoye. Baylor, Gonzaga and Houston are the only teams to win at least one game in each of the past six NCAA Tournaments, though the Bears have lost in the second round the past four years since their national championship in 2021. Drew and his staff will get an early look at the new squad with Baylor representing the United States at the World University Games next month in Germany. 'Any year you get a foreign tour, it's huge. ... Since we're returning 0.0 (percent of our) scoring, this give us all an opportunity,' Drew said. 'The games will be good for those that can play in it. But the practices will be great for everyone. And then, the one thing everybody leaves out is you do these team-bonding activities. There's nothing better than being overseas, that really brings you together a lot more than when you have all the distractions you do in the United States.'
