The NCAA’s membership — the huge number of colleges and universities with athletic programs — will weigh this year on whether to loosen up a bit when it comes to legal sports betting by student-athletes and coaches.
While it’s unlikely the NCAA will start letting college quarterbacks smash their Overs and Unders at various sports betting sites, the sanctioning body and its members are having a “discussion” about whether their wagering guidelines are right, an official said on Wednesday.
The NCAA rule on sports betting is that student-athletes, coaches, and other staff are forbidden from wagering or providing any inside information for sports the NCAA sponsors at any level. That could mean a college athlete could run afoul of the regulations by wagering on an NFL game.
Time for change?
NCAA Managing Director Mark Hicks says the group and its members are talking over whether the framework is properly calibrated. The first step is deciding if they should have a similar rule for all three of the association’s divisions, which tend to have different regulations for everything but gambling.
The second step this year is to discuss whether the rules should be “liberalized,” Hicks said, such as by allowing student-athletes and staffers to bet on college and professional sports.
“Whatever it is, that conversation will take place through the rest of this year and we’ll see where it goes,” Hicks said during a panel at the SBC Summit North America conference in New Jersey.
With sports betting on the rise, the NCAA is acting to protect student-athletes from harassment and working to protect the integrity of the game – this week shows why it’s so important to act. pic.twitter.com/krATwpS4hZ
— NCAA News (@NCAA_PR) March 27, 2024
The conversation is happening as the NCAA and professional leagues have wrestled with several integrity-related controversies that have prompted them to discipline athletes and take other measures to try to adapt to the world of widespread legal sports betting.
One initiative of NCAA President Charlie Baker has been to push state regulators to ban college player prop wagering as a way of protecting student-athletes from abuse and harassment by bettors. Several states have done so, although at least one, Montana, has pushed back against the request.
“That decision, to advocate for prohibition of player prop bets, really was generated by the idea of trying to take that target off specific student-athletes’ backs,” Hicks said.
Here's the bulletin announcing the incoming ban on college player prop betting in Louisiana: pic.twitter.com/esXdsIbrhc
— Geoff Zochodne (@GeoffZochodne) April 3, 2024
The NCAA is also continuing to see instances of student-athletes betting on themselves (although these are not always made public), Hicks said, which is another reason for the push to ban college player props.
Still, the NCAA understands the risks that college player prop betting could just move to the unregulated market if it’s banned in the regulated one. So while the organization is pulling levers in legal markets, it sees a need to go after illegal operators.
“That has to happen as well,” Hicks said. “It’s not just one or the other.”
Jon Steinbrecher, commissioner of the Mid-American Conference (MAC), was also on the SBC panel and said there are “levels” of harm related to gambling. However, he said ensuring the integrity of games is his primary focus.
“That is preeminent,” he told the audience.
The problem with prohibition
Like Hicks, Steinbrecher acknowledged the risk of bettors just migrating to offshore books and wagering on college player props anyway, and told the audience he is “not a big prohibition guy.”
“My concern is let’s not push it underground,” the commissioner said. “And how do we make sure we keep things above board because that’s where we’re able to regulate it or able to discern if there are problems involved.”
Seeking a ban on college player prop betting is not the only step the NCAA has taken. Hicks noted that the NCAA has revised its student-athlete eligibility rules related to gambling, trying to separate more technical violations from ones that create integrity issues, such as a player betting on themselves. That conversation could continue, Hicks suggested.
Furthermore, in addition to the concerns about student-athlete well-being in connection with sports betting done by others, the NCAA has had to deal with players, coaches, and staff engaging in wagering themselves.
Hicks said he recently looked at a file regarding a coach at a Division I school who placed 9,500 bets over the past eight months or so, including 600 involving college athletics and around 60 involving his institution, albeit not on the sport they coach.
“That individual is absolutely educated on the rules,” Hicks said. “So what goes into that choice to put themselves at risk and probably their career and their institution?”
