NEW YORK - It doesn’t always take a group of organized criminals or a big pile of money to create gambling-related integrity issues for college sports — more and more, student-athletes can create those concerns by betting on themselves.
That’s according to Mark Hicks, managing director of enforcement for the NCAA, who spoke Wednesday at the NEXT sports betting and iGaming conference in New York City.
“I think we’re starting to see that it’s pretty commonplace for people to bet on themselves,” Hicks said during a panel on athlete harassment.
Mark Hicks, Managing Director of Enforcement for the NCAA, noted on a panel at NEXT NYC that research done by Signify Group found 12% of social media abuse hurled at student-athletes, coaches, and officials participating in college championships was tied to sports betting.
— Geoff Zochodne (@GeoffZochodne) March 12, 2025
The NCAA and its president, former Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, lobbied state and federal lawmakers to restrict college player prop wagering, with harassment by gamblers a big reason why.
But, as Hicks highlighted Wednesday, there's also an integrity concern with college player props that deals with players betting on themselves. Those bets don’t necessarily have to be nefarious, either; a confident college player could wager on their Over for any given stat.
Nevertheless, the NCAA forbids student-athletes, coaches, and athletic staff members from betting on any sport the organization sponsors. Offenders could lose eligibility, even just for dabbling in fantasy contests or March Madness brackets.
Kids these days
While integrity concerns have historically involved organized crime and large amounts of money trying to fix games in their favor, Hicks said it can be much simpler.
“I think what we’re starting to see is it doesn’t have to be that way,” he said. “These young people are pretty savvy, you know, ‘I can bet on my own prop bet.’”
The comments from an NCAA director come as professional and college sports continue to grapple with the integrity concerns legal and illegal wagering pose. They also come ahead of a hugely popular college sporting event, March Madness, one of the busiest times of the year for bettors and bookmakers.
Moreover, the remarks follow ESPN's recent reporting that Fresno State and the NCAA are probing allegations of basketball players participating in daily fantasy contests involving their own performances. One Fresno State player even told ESPN he bet $50 on himself to score more than 11 points per game via a DFS site, which he did.
Hicks noted the issue of players betting on themselves isn’t always happening in a regulated sports betting market. It could happen via DFS, he suggested.
“It just becomes really easy for a kid to go ‘Oh … you know, I don’t feel good today, I’m not going to hit three three-pointers in the first half,’” Hicks said. “And that’s just becoming more and more commonplace and that goes to the integrity concerns that we raised.”
Who ya gonna call?
Participants also noted the fragmented nature of U.S. regulation during the panel discussion (which was mostly about addressing and helping athletes facing abuse), as sports betting and daily fantasy contests are subject to different degrees of oversight in various states.
In California, for example, where Fresno State is located, there's no legalized sports betting but there is paid DFS.
“I think it’s so hard to have a consistent approach because we don’t have a consistent approach to gambling period,” said Keith Whyte, a responsible gambling consultant and the former executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling.
The NCAA has pushed for a blanket ban on college player prop wagering to ease concerns about harassment and integrity. Those efforts were successful in states such as Ohio and Vermont, where bans went into effect last year. However, college player prop wagering is still legally available in some form in more than 20 states.
Hicks said a lack of cohesion and data-sharing make it a challenge for the NCAA to investigate potential concerns.
“Who am I going to pick up and call when we’ve identified an issue that we’ve got to get to the bottom of, and that’s also multi-jurisdictional?” Hicks said. “Or it’s daily fantasy in a state where you don’t have a regulatory body to go to.”
