Beyond the Scoreboard: Commentary on College Sports Betting Law
College sports no longer operate in the insulated, amateur world that the NCAA once claimed to protect. In recent years, student athletes have gained the right to earn money through NIL deals, and states have legalized sports betting in many parts of the country. At the same time, the NCAA still prohibits athletes and staff from betting on college sports in an attempt to protect competition integrity. Although the NCAA strongly monitors integrity and advocates for stronger betting protections, regulation is split between NCAA rules, state law, and emerging federal concerns. New betting products, like prediction markets, may not fit neatly into any existing system. The NCAA’s authority over athlete conduct and compensation has been weakened by antitrust challenges, leaving gaps in how exactly college sports can be governed. Because college athletic regulation is divided across decentralized NCAA policies, evolving betting products, and state gambling laws, there exists real gaps in how the law protects competitive integrity and student athletes.
The NCAA imposes strict limits on staff and athlete sports betting to protect the integrity of the competition. Sports betting could lead to spot-fixing, in which a player deliberately takes a pre-arranged action in an attempt to limit the chance of victory of the favoured team. This is primarily driven by gambling interests to exploit specific betting markets. College sports betting could also lead to harassment of student athletes and elevated risks to their mental health. Due to their young age and accessibility to the public, they become easier targets of harassment and manipulation. In fact, a 2026 survey reported that 36% of Division 1 men’s basketball athletes reported harassment from those with betting interests. As such, the NCAA opposes betting on college sports. As of early 2026, the NCAA is attempting to aggressively strengthen its restrictions on college sports betting. Athletes who bet on their games or attempt to influence the game’s outcomes will likely be banned from eligibility to play their respective sport.
The NCAA continues to maintain rules prohibiting student athletes and staff from wagering on sports it sponsors, including both games involving their own teams and other college competitions. It also operates education programs designed to raise awareness of the risks of gambling and to prevent violations, offering guidance on integrity, compliance, and reporting procedures. Despite these efforts, the NCAA’s authority is limited in several key ways. Courts have increasingly constrained its ability to regulate athlete compensation, particularly following antitrust challenges. If a final ruling in Tennessee v. NCAA favors the plaintiffs, the consequences will extend beyond compensation. The decision would further limit the NCAA’s ability to impose restrictions on student athletes in general. The NCAA’s remaining authority, manifested in its ability to regulate sports wagering, becomes vulnerable.
This vulnerability is exacerbated by proponents of college sports betting. College sports betting is supported because of its ability to generate significant revenue for colleges and athletes. Legal betting would aid with sport-related expenses and overall athletic department funding as well. Legalization could increase fan engagement and viewership, meaning that more merchandise and tickets could be sold. Regulated markets would also allow for more effective monitoring of sports betting. This would go towards protecting game integrity and reducing the risks of black markets and harassment. However, some colleges and universities have attempted to incorporate sports betting with varying degrees of success. The University of Colorado arranged a deal with PointsBet in 2020 in which it would become its first official sports betting partner. Through this deal, the University of Colorado would gain funds to construct a new sports medicine facility. However, this deal was terminated in 2023 due to strong backlash over its ethical concerns.
The failure of the University of Colorado shows a larger problem in college athletics. While betting revenue is appealing, direct partnership between universities and sportsbooks raise serious ethical concerns. When a school financially benefits from betting on its own teams, it becomes harder to enforce neutrality. Public backlash suggests that even though sports betting is legal, there is strong discomfort with fully blending gambling and college sports. These concerns are made worse by the lack of consistency in state gambling laws. Since the Supreme Court struck down PASPA in Murphy v. NCAA, a federal law that made sports betting illegal in the United States, states have taken different approaches to regulating sports betting. Some states ban betting on in-state college teams while others prohibit prop bets between individual athletes. Student athletes often compete across state lines, so the exact level of protection they receive depends on the location the game takes place. The NCAA does not possess authority over sportsbooks as state regulators. So, it cannot control what types of bets are offered or how betting data is used. Its enforcement tools lie mostly in executing eligibility penalties and educational programs. These tools were created for an earlier version of college sports, one where athletes were largely unpaid and gambling markets were illegal. The expansion of NIL rights has changed the economic reality for college athletes. Student athletes earn income through endorsements, partnerships, and sponsorships, ones that are tied to their public image and on-field performance.
College sports now exist at the intersection of commercialization, legalized sports betting, and scattered regulation. As NIL rights continue to expand and courts limit the NCAA’s authority under antitrust law, the association’s ability to widely regulate athlete conduct and protect competitive integrity has become increasingly uncertain. At the same time, state by state legalization of sports betting has created an uneven regulatory gap that can garner significant backlash from the public over ethical concerns. Student athletes become at risk to harassment, manipulation, and integrity risks without consistent protections. While the NCAA continues to prohibit athlete and staff betting, its enforcement tools may not necessarily be adapted to the modern gambling market. New developments, such as prediction markets and direct relationships between universities and sportsbooks, further complicate this environment. Without clear coordination between the NCAA, states, and federal lawmakers, the existing legal framework falls short of what it needs to be. To protect both student athletes and the integrity of college competition, a more unified approach to college sports betting should be at the utmost priority.
Bibliography
Desk, HCS News. “How Will College Sports Benefit from Sports Betting? Heartland College Sports - an Independent Big 12 Today Blog: College Football News: Big 12 Today" ".” Heartland College Sports - An Independent Big 12 Today Blog | College Football News | Big 12 Today, February 25, 2023. https://www.heartlandcollegesports.com/2023/02/25/how-will-college-sports-benefit-from-sports-betting/.
Fincher, Izzy. “CU Boulder Ends Sports Betting Partnership with Pointsbet.” CU Independent, April 1, 2023. https://www.cuindependent.com/2023/03/31/cu-boulder-ends-sports-betting-partnership-with-pointsbet/.
NCAA.org. “Di Schools Rescind Betting Rules Change; Ban on pro Sports Betting Remains in Place.” NCAA.org, November 21, 2025. https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/11/21/media-center-di-schools-rescind-betting-rules-change-ban-on-pro-sports-betting-remains-in-place.aspx.
Dowd, Josie. “Sports Gambling and the Affect on College Athletes.” The Waltonian, October 9, 2025. https://waltonian.eastern.edu/sports/sports-gambling-and-the-affect-on-college-athletes/.
Could virginia college sports benefit from more betting? Accessed February 7, 2026. https://sbcamericas.com/2026/02/04/virginia-college-betting-interview/.
Collegeinsider. “College vs. Pro Sports Betting: What’s The Real Difference?” Collegeinsider. Accessed February 6, 2026. https://collegeinsider.com/college-vs-pro-sports-betting-whats-the-real-difference.
NCAA.org. “NCAA Releases Sports Wagering Survey Data.” NCAA.org, May 24, 2023. https://www.ncaa.org/news/2023/5/24/media-center-ncaa-releases-sports-wagering-survey-data.aspx.
Princetonlegaljournal. “Let the Bidding Begin: Tennessee v. NCAA and the Future of Nil Recruitment Bargaining - Princeton Legal Journal.” Princeton University. Accessed February 6, 2026. https://legaljournal.princeton.edu/let-the-bidding-begin-tennessee-v-ncaa-and-the-future-of-nil-recruitment-bargaining/.