Kentucky & Minnesota Consider Banning College Player Prop Bets

The push to ban college prop bets in Kentucky and Minnesota comes as regulators argue that unpaid college athletes (despite NIL deals) face greater vulnerability to manipulation than professional players, while large rosters and limited oversight make monitoring these markets more difficult. If enacted, the restrictions would force operators in those states to retool their college offerings and create additional compliance challenges across state lines.

The Complex State-by-State Betting Framework

The legislative push is creating an increasingly complex regulatory landscape for sportsbooks operating across multiple jurisdictions. Some states that already allow sports betting have implemented restrictions on college player props, while others permit them with varying limitations. The proposed bills in Kentucky and Minnesota would outright ban prop betting on college sports. 

College player prop betting is currently banned in Louisiana, Maryland, Ohio, and New York. Washington, meanwhile, recently passed SB 6137, which limits prop betting to in-state college teams and includes penalties for bettors who harass student-athletes. 

For sportsbooks, these restrictions impact both compliance and revenue. College player props have become a popular betting option, particularly during March Madness and college football season. Operators will need to adjust their risk management models, retrain staff on jurisdiction-specific rules, and potentially invest in more sophisticated geofencing and compliance technology to ensure they’re not inadvertently offering prohibited markets to customers in restricted states.

College Players More Susceptible to Outside Influences

Unlike professional athletes who earn substantial salaries, college players have historically received limited compensation. NIL deals have changed the landscape, but most student-athletes still don’t earn anywhere near professional wages. Regulators argue that, because of this, college players are more susceptible to outside influences or inducements to manipulate their performance.

The sheer size of college rosters compounds the monitoring challenge. College programs cycle through hundreds of players across dozens of teams each season. This makes it exponentially harder for sportsbooks, regulators, and athletic departments to flag suspicious betting patterns or investigate potential manipulation.

Adding to the concern is the documented harassment college athletes have faced from bettors who lose money on player props. Reports of threatening messages, social media abuse, and even in-person confrontations have prompted both the NCAA and individual conferences to call for stronger protections. Lawmakers in some states view eliminating these betting markets as a direct way to reduce the incentive for such behavior while protecting student-athletes.

How the NCAA Views Prop Betting

The NCAA has been actively lobbying for restrictions on college player props for several years, arguing that protecting student-athletes from gambling-related pressures should be a priority. It contends that college players are students first and should not be subjected to the same betting scrutiny as paid professionals. 

“Sports betting issues are on the rise across the country with prop bets continuing to threaten the integrity and competition and leading to student athletes and professional athletes getting harassed,” said NCAA President Charlie Baker in 2024.

The debate reflects broader tensions in the sports betting industry about how to balance market growth with responsible gambling practices and integrity protections. As more states consider similar legislation, the outcome of the proposed legislation in Kentucky and Minnesota could set precedents that influence how college sports betting is regulated nationwide. It may also impact how operators approach other amateur or lower-level professional sports markets where similar concerns about athlete vulnerability exist.