The Indiana Gaming Commission (IGC) has decided to postpone a final decision whether to ban college player prop bets in state-regulated sports betting markets. Instead of issuing a decision, the commissioners unanimously agreed to submit the NCAA’s request and revisit the issue at its next meeting scheduled for September 24, 2026.
The move expands an ongoing review of a controversial betting category that has attracted the attention of regulators, universities and sportsbook operators. The commission said it needed additional time to collect data and better understand the potential impact of statewide restrictions on prop bets related to college athletes.
During the business meeting (pdf), the commissioners emphasized the complexity of the issue, noting the challenges of balancing consumer protection, market integrity and the structure of the legal sports betting industry.
The NCAA raised concerns regarding integrity and abuse
The NCAA formally requested that Indiana regulators ban all betting on college players, arguing that betting tied to individual athletes’ performance increases the risk of abuse and threatens competitive integrity.
The organization told regulators that it had collected information from its 566,000 student-athletes, indicating widespread abuse related to betting activities. NCAA representatives also pointed to past disciplinary cases involving athletes convicted of gambling-related offenses, including betting on their own teams or sharing inside information.
NCAA external affairs leaders stressed that while they support regulated sports betting, supporting markets create unique vulnerabilities.
Tim Buckley, Senior Vice President of External Affairs, said: "We have excellent relationships with sportsbooks, operators and casinos. We also have excellent relationships with regulators like you.”
Buckley also noted that student-athletes are often targets of online harassment when an individual’s appearance influences betting outcomes, pointing out that nearly half of Division I men’s basketball players reported receiving betting-related harassment messages in a recent NCAA study.
Support for the NCAA’s position was also expressed by Indiana-based universities, including Butler University, Indiana University, and Purdue University. In a written statement, university representatives warned that prop betting places disproportionate pressure on individual athletes compared to traditional team-based betting.
The sports betting industry warns of unintended consequences
Opposition to the proposed ban was expressed by the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), which argued that eliminating regulated ancillary markets would not eliminate abuse or integrity risks but would instead shift betting activity to unregulated operators.
Scott Ward, advisor to the SBA, said: "However, banning prop bets does not eliminate the harm. It simply removes visibility by directing bettors to unregulated markets where prop bets are readily available.”
Industry representatives also argue that regulated markets provide oversight tools that help identify suspicious behavior and maintain integrity controls. According to this view, removing supporting markets could reduce transparency and limit the ability of regulators to effectively monitor betting patterns.
Some operators also suggested that law enforcement should focus more directly on the abusive behavior itself rather than restricting betting products that are still widely available in other jurisdictions.
Internal divisions over policy direction
Within the commission, members acknowledged the difficulty of reaching consensus. BR Lane, an IGC commissioner, said the decision required careful consideration of both regulatory responsibilities and commercial realities.
"We all agree, we want a safe and prosperous ecosystem. I don’t know how to do that, how to balance compliance and fair trade in a situation like this at the moment,” Lane said at the meeting, as reported by SBC Americas.
Commissioners ultimately agreed that more time was needed before taking action. L. Scott Pejic added that this issue should not be rushed, noting the importance of reviewing evidence from all stakeholders before making a final decision.
Indiana isn’t the only jurisdiction considering restrictions on college player prop betting. The NCAA has made similar requests in other states, with mixed results. Some regulators have implemented such bans, while others have refused to implement them.
The debate reflects broader tensions in US sports betting regulation: how to manage athlete protection and competitive integrity without pushing betting activities to overseas markets or unregulated markets.
For now, Indiana regulators will continue to review testimony and data ahead of a September meeting, where the NCAA and sports betting industry representatives are expected to provide further arguments before a decision is made.
