As Final Four nears, dangers of college prop betting come under scrutiny
As the men’s and women’s Final Four play out this weekend, some financially invested fans will have their focus on the game behind the games:
For an untold number of bettors, they aren’t just on the edge of their seats over game outcomes or margin of victories. Rather, they’ve gone all-in on prop bets – short for proposition bets – wagered on the individual performances of the college athletes.
Will Purdue’s Zach Edey score more than 25.5 points?
Will UConn’s Paige Bueckers grab more than 6.5 rebounds?
Think there are any prop bets for Iowa’s Caitlin Clark, the face of all college basketball? A quick scroll through FanDuel’s app reveals no less than 10 prop bets for Clark: points, assists, rebounds, made 3-pointers, a triple-double – whatever strikes your prop betting fancy.
As the American Gaming Association estimates that $2.7 billion will be bet on this year’s March Madness, there is intensifying scrutiny on the dangers of college prop betting.
Just last week, NCAA President Charlie Baker called for a ban on college athlete prop bets in states with legal sports wagering. And just this week, Louisiana became the latest state to order the banning of college prop betting, effective this summer.
Claiming sports betting issues are on the rise nationally, Baker, who has been strident over the past year in voicing concern about a myriad of sports wagering concerns, said that college prop bets continue to “threaten the integrity of competition” and lead to athletes getting harassed.
“The NCAA has been working with states to deal with these threats,” Baker added, “and many are responding by banning college prop bets.”
21 states allow prop betting on college sports
Sports wagering is now legal in some form in 38 states plus the District of Columbia. Twenty-one states currently allow prop betting on college sports. And a large handful of those states have no restrictions whatsoever on college prop betting.
“They [prop bets] are common in professional athletic wagering, but do have some issues even there,” said Michelle Malkin, an assistant professor of criminal justice at East Carolina who has done extensive research and spoken at numerous conferences and symposiums on gambling’s connection to crime. “When it comes to student-athletes, the issues are even greater.”
Some NBA players and coaches have recently expressed concern about the reaction of gamblers who lose bets because of their performance. And athletes throughout the NCAA tournament are not immune from having their social media accounts inundated with complaints from bettors.
“It’s terrible,” North Carolina’s Armando Bacot said during a news conference prior to the Sweet 16. “Even at the last game, I guess I didn’t get enough rebounds or something. I thought I played pretty good last game. But I looked at my DMs, and I got, like, over 100 messages from people telling me I sucked and stuff like that because I didn’t get enough rebounds.
“I think it’s definitely a little out of hand. But at the same time, too, I get the point of it. If you bet a lot of money on something and you’re like one pick away and somebody messes it up, I understand the part of fans being mad. But it’s annoying, too, at times.”
Betting could create integrity questions
In addition to harassment, college prop betting could also call the integrity of competition into question. Numerous sports wagering experts have told On3 over the past year that there is virtually a 100% chance of a sports betting scandal on campus within the next couple of years. Just last month, U.S. Integrity flagged a Temple regular-season game for wagering concerns.
Prop betting could influence a coach or player to focus on achieving the goal of a specific prop bet, Malkin said.
“For example, if there is a known prop bet on a point guard that they will have 12-plus points, three-plus rebounds and five-plus assists, the player or coach could focus on ensuring that prop bet is or is not met in the plays and influence the game,” Malkin said. “Looking at wagering focused on the overall game score or win/lose has less of that focus on exact plays by an athlete.”
College presidents ‘very much worried about it’
Tom McMillen, CEO of LEAD1 Association, has repeatedly told On3 over the past year that sports wagering represents his No. 1 issue in all of college athletics because it poses an “existential threat” to the enterprise and consequences could be “catastrophic.”
McMillen said on Wednesday that he applauds Baker’s call for a ban on college prop betting. But McMillen said he would go even further in pushing for a national sports wagering bill. As he noted, sports wagering is regulated by the states domestically, while in Europe countries regulate their respective betting ecosystems.
“If we don’t get a [federal] college sports bill done this year, I think very likely there could be an attempt to resurrect a national sports betting bill like [Chuck] Schumer and Orrin Hatch proposed in 2018,” McMillen told On3. “These prop bets are very, very risky for colleges and universities. Yes, employment is a big issue. Yes, NIL is big. But sports betting is really big. And I can tell you, college presidents are very much worried about it.”
Prop betting doesn’t typically account for the overwhelming majority of dollars bet on sports.
In fact, the Ohio Casino Control Commission said last month that prop bets last year on NCAA athletes with sports gaming operators in the state generated some $104.6 million, which accounted for just 1.35% of the total amount wagered, according to the Associated Press. Prop bets on college athletes specifically accounted for some 2.2% of wagers.
NCAA working with states to ‘deal with threats’
Change is afoot.
Ohio, Vermont and Maryland no longer allow prop betting on college athletes online and in sports books. And just this week, the Louisiana Gaming Control Board issued an order suspending prop bets on college athletes beginning Aug. 1, 2024. Only prop bets based on full college team statistics are permitted.
“The NCAA is doing more than ever before to protect student-athletes and the integrity of competition from the harms of sports betting and would like to see all states ban individual performance prop bets on college competitions from their books,” NCAA spokesperson Saquandra Heath told On3 on Wednesday. “The NCAA has been working with states to deal with these threats and many are responding by banning college prop bets. We are actively contacting officials across the country in states that still allow these bets and asking them to join Ohio, Vermont, Maryland and many others and remove college prop bets from all betting markets.”
In some states – including Kansas, Michigan and Wyoming – bettors can place prop bets on college athletes regardless of where they play.
“Most states see the financial benefit of allowing prop bets,” Malkin said, “which allows for continual wagering throughout a single game resulting in potential greater losses for the gamblers and more income for the state.”
Final Four bets could inflame reaction
Widespread concern over sports wagering implications has been on Baker’s mind since he took over as NCAA president some 13 months ago. A year ago at the LEAD1 Association spring meetings, Baker drilled down on the pressure student-athletes feel because of emotionally charged reaction to their play on social media. Betting outcomes often trigger that type of fan reaction.
Individual player statistics in the men’s and women’s Final Four this weekend will undoubtedly inflame reaction from an untold number of bettors who wind up on the wrong side of athlete prop bets.
“If 100 people come at you on social media – I don’t care who you are – that’s a beatdown,” Baker said. “So imagine having thousands, a few thousand come at you – and you’re 20 years old – because you missed the penalty kick and cost your team the game or whatever it might be. And you hear these stories, and you start thinking about what’s going to happen to some of these kids when they make the shot, miss the shot, whatever it is, that changes the [betting] line at a sporting event.”