This proposal has generated debate as the Division I Council prepares to vote this week. If approved, it would lift the long-standing ban on pro sports betting for athletes, coaches, and staff across Division I.
The outcome could reshape how the NCAA enforces its gambling rules and supports student-athlete well-being.
What the Proposal Would Do
Under the current rules, NCAA participants are barred from betting on pro leagues that the NCAA sponsors, such as football, basketball, hockey, baseball, golf, and tennis.
In April, the Division I Board of Directors voted 21–1 in favor of directing the Division I Council to “adopt legislation to deregulate the prohibition on wagering on professional sports.” If the council approves the change this week, athletes and staff would still be banned from betting on college sports, but they could legally wager on major leagues like the NFL and NBA.
Momentum for this shift has built over the past few months as sports gambling has become commonplace. Betting is now legal in 39 states, including Iowa, and many student-athletes live in areas where IA sports betting apps are widely available.
In May, the council moved the proposal forward to a formal vote. If it passes, the proposal then goes to the Division II and III councils for their approval in July.
Two years ago, the NCAA updated its penalties by creating a sliding scale for suspensions based on bet size. This change aimed to reduce harsh punishments for small, low-risk wagers.
After a 2023 probe into Iowa and Iowa State athletes caught in an Iowa betting sting, conference commissioners asked the NCAA to review its policies alongside those used by pro leagues and Olympic bodies. This review highlighted that NCAA rules were stricter than those of other organizations.
Why Some Oppose It
Despite the push for deregulation, not everyone supports the proposal. Members of the 35-person Division I Council have described the discussions as hotly debated.
Some worry that allowing pro sports betting could lead athletes to cross the line into college-game wagering. They argue it may create more problems than it solves, potentially harming the integrity of NCAA competitions.
Mental-health concerns are another focus. Opponents point out that gambling can be addictive and that fines or suspensions may discourage athletes from seeking help.
One source told Sports Illustrated that “gambling as a mental-health issue” is not tracked well and that athletes should be treated rather than penalized. Campus counselors have been given resources to address problem gambling, but critics say these efforts may not be enough if betting becomes widely accepted.
Integrity issues also fuel resistance. Some fear that normalizing betting could open doors to point-shaving, game-fixing, or performance manipulation. Ongoing federal and NCAA investigations into game-fixing cases in men’s college basketball highlight these risks.
Last season, several players were suspended or dismissed for wagering on college games or influencing their play to benefit gamblers.
Next Steps and Outlook
The Division I Council’s vote is expected on Tuesday or Wednesday. If the proposal passes, it will move to Divisions II and III in July. Should all levels approve, the rule change could take effect later this summer.
The NCAA’s goal is to redirect enforcement efforts toward serious threats—such as fixing games or improper insider betting—while focusing on education and treatment for those with gambling problems.
A change in policy would mark a significant shift in the NCAA’s approach to sports wagering. By lifting the ban on pro sports betting, the organization aims to streamline enforcement and better support student-athlete health. However, the debate reveals deep concerns about mental health and integrity that may shape the council’s decision.
