Listen to the article
Missouri gaming regulators on Thursday denied the NCAA’s request to ban prop bets on college athletes, despite concerns about recent betting scandals. The decision comes just a week after the NCAA urged state gambling oversight boards nationwide to prohibit these popular wagers that focus on individual player performance.
The Missouri Gaming Commission expressed reluctance to modify rules less than two months after sports betting launched in the state. Missouri became the 39th state to legalize sports betting on December 1 following narrow voter approval of a constitutional amendment.
“I just don’t feel that I have enough information to grant a request by the NCAA to prohibit this type of sports wagering, because I don’t know enough yet,” commission chair Jan Zimmerman said, though regulators left open the possibility of revisiting the issue as Missouri’s sports betting market matures.
The NCAA’s push for restrictions stems from concerns about bet manipulation. In a letter sent to state gambling boards, the organization highlighted last week’s federal indictment of more than two dozen individuals for alleged bribery, wire fraud and conspiracy. The scheme reportedly involved over 39 players on more than 17 NCAA Division I men’s basketball teams attempting to rig over 29 games.
NCAA President Charlie Baker noted in his letter that his office “regularly hears concerns from schools and student-athletes across the country on the impacts of sports betting,” particularly regarding prop bets. The NCAA contends these wagers create vulnerability for athletes who may face pressure, harassment, or bribes from bettors.
The legal sports betting landscape in the United States has expanded rapidly since the Supreme Court paved the way for state legalization in 2018. Through the first 11 months of 2023, legal sportsbooks generated $15 billion in revenue, a 17% increase from the previous year, according to the American Gaming Association. Missouri has not yet reported its initial sports betting revenues.
States have adopted widely varying approaches to college athlete prop bets. More than a dozen states place no restrictions on such wagers, while nearly an equal number prohibit them entirely. Missouri falls in the middle ground, prohibiting prop bets on athletes participating in games involving Missouri colleges and universities but allowing them for all other collegiate contests.
Since 2023, the NCAA has been encouraging states to adopt restrictions on bets involving college athletes. Louisiana, Maryland, Ohio, and Vermont have subsequently joined states banning individual prop bets on college athletes.
The Sports Betting Alliance, an industry group including major operators like Bet365, BetMGM, DraftKings, FanDuel, and Fanatics Betting & Gaming, opposed the NCAA’s request in written comments to the Missouri Gaming Commission. The alliance argued that legal sportsbooks played a crucial role in detecting and reporting the suspicious betting activity involved in the recent federal indictment.
Rather than justifying new restrictions, the alliance suggested the case demonstrates how regulated betting markets can help identify potential corruption that might otherwise go undetected if bettors turned to unregulated bookmakers. The group contended that the NCAA’s request failed to meet Missouri’s criteria for regulatory changes and “should not trigger a radical change” to the state’s nascent sports betting industry.
Individual bettors also voiced opposition to the proposed limitations. Kansas City sports wagerer Chuck Kucera wrote to the commission that restricting prop bets would simply drive gamblers to “offshore and illegal operators” with fewer consumer protections. “The NCAA’s efforts would be better directed toward player education, internal compliance, and enforcement of its own rules,” Kucera argued.
The commission’s decision highlights the ongoing tension between expanding gambling markets and concerns about maintaining the integrity of college athletics as legal sports betting continues to grow nationwide.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


18 Comments
Interesting regulatory decision in Missouri. While the NCAA’s concerns about betting scandals are understandable, it’s good to see regulators taking a measured approach and wanting more data before making changes to the new sports betting market.
Agreed, it’s a complex issue that will require careful monitoring and oversight as the market matures.
The Missouri Gaming Commission’s stance on prop bets seems reasonable given the newness of the state’s sports betting market. More data is needed to properly evaluate the risks and benefits.
Absolutely, a flexible, data-driven approach is essential as regulations evolve to address emerging issues.
Missouri’s decision not to immediately ban prop bets on college athletes is an interesting one. The NCAA’s worries about betting scandals are understandable, but regulators seem to want more time to assess the risks.
Agreed, it’s important to strike the right balance between protecting integrity and supporting the new sports betting market.
This is a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. Missouri’s decision to hold off on banning prop bets seems prudent – more time is needed to properly assess the risks and benefits.
Absolutely, a cautious, data-driven approach is the best way to navigate the trade-offs and protect the integrity of college sports betting.
While the NCAA’s concerns about bet manipulation are valid, it’s good to see Missouri taking a measured approach. Rushing to impose restrictions could do more harm than good to the new sports betting industry.
Agreed, a balanced, responsive regulatory framework is key as the market matures and new challenges arise.
Prop bets on college athletes are controversial, but outright banning them may be an overreaction. Missouri regulators seem to want more time to assess the risks and benefits before making major changes.
Yes, a balanced, data-driven approach is prudent here. Sports betting regulations need to evolve thoughtfully.
The NCAA’s concerns about bet manipulation are valid, but it’s good to see Missouri taking a pragmatic stance. Rushing to ban certain bet types could hamper the new sports betting industry unnecessarily.
Agreed, a flexible, responsive regulatory framework is ideal as the market develops.
This is a tricky issue – balancing integrity concerns with supporting a new legal sports betting market. Missouri’s regulators seem to want more data before making major changes, which seems prudent.
Absolutely, a cautious, evidence-based approach is the right way to navigate these complex trade-offs.
The NCAA’s push to ban prop bets on college athletes is understandable, but Missouri’s reluctance to immediately impose that restriction is reasonable. More time is needed to evaluate the real-world impacts.
Agreed, a flexible, responsive regulatory framework is key as the sports betting market matures and new issues arise.