News

Indiana regulator rejects NCAA request to ban pregame college player prop bets

The Indiana Gaming Commission unanimously denied the NCAA's request after a review lasting nearly seven months, with commissioners pointing to the state legislature as the appropriate forum for broader restrictions.

· 2 min read
Share this article
Follow us on Google
AI Summary
Sign in to listen
indiana-reject
Key Points
Indiana will continue to permit pregame proposition wagers on individual college athletes 
In-game college player props remain prohibited under restrictions in place since sports betting launched in 2019
The NCAA has argued that individual player markets increase integrity risks and expose student-athletes to betting-related harassment

The Indiana Gaming Commission (IGC) has unanimously rejected an NCAA request to prohibit pregame proposition betting on individual college athletes, leaving the markets available through licensed sportsbooks in the state.

The decision concludes a process that began when the NCAA submitted its petition on March 3. Commissioners considered the request in June but unanimously tabled a decision to allow additional research before returning to the issue at its September meeting. 

Indiana already prohibits in-game proposition wagers involving individual college athletes. The NCAA sought to extend that restriction to pregame markets, such as wagers on a quarterback's passing yards or a basketball player's points total. 

The NCAA has pursued similar restrictions nationally. In January, NCAA President Charlie Baker called on state regulators to eliminate individual player props and other markets it considers higher risk. 

At the time, the NCAA said more than half of the 39 states with legalized sports betting, alongside Washington, D.C., permitted individual college props in some form.

During the Indiana proceedings, the NCAA presented concerns over competition integrity and harassment directed at student-athletes. It also received support for the proposed restriction from Butler University, Indiana University and Purdue University.

NCAA Managing Director of Enforcement Mark Hicks said: "Bottom line, from an integrity perspective, it's easy to manipulate and it's hard to monitor."

The Sports Betting Alliance, which represents operators including bet365, BetMGM, DraftKings, Fanatics and FanDuel, opposed the proposal. It argued that the NCAA had not demonstrated the "good cause" required for the IGC to alter permitted wagering and said restrictions could move activity toward unregulated operators.

Commissioners ultimately concluded that broader concerns around harassment were more appropriately considered by lawmakers. The IGC's B.R. Lane said discussions with regulators in Missouri, Louisiana and Ohio since June had reinforced her view that the issue extended beyond wagering regulation.

Indiana's decision comes during a wider reassessment of online gaming regulation in the state. Earlier this year, lawmakers advanced HB 1052, legislation targeting dual-currency and multi-currency sweepstakes casinos with civil penalties of up to $100,000. The prohibition subsequently took effect on July 1.

Good to know

The NCAA said in January that Louisiana, Maryland, Ohio and Vermont had prohibited individual college athlete proposition bets through regulatory action since 2024

Reaction Board

News Analysis

View All
macauq3big6

What Q3 financials from the 'big six' tell us about Macau's future

Following years of consistent post-Covid financial recovery, Macau's monthly revenue has declined five months running. With results from the big six now on the table, Global Gaming Insider investigates the growing disconnect between revenue, profitability and those who bucked the trend.

7 min read • • By Will Underwood
DraftKings Sportsbook

DraftKings stock down 27%: Why CEO is defending high predictions spend

During DraftKings' quarterly earnings call, Jason Robins emphasized "discipline and efficiency," coupled with a quick return on the operator's predictions investment with the operator #3 in the market. All with a July 2028 Supreme Court date in mind...

7 min read • • By Tim Poole
GammaSweep Interview: Compliance 2

GammaSweep: Why operators need a more proactive approach to compliance

Gaming firms need to incorporate compliance into their foundation, rather than responding to regulatory changes when they arise.

9 min read • • By Patrick Fasolis

In The News

View All