Curbing harassment of college athletes is a challenging task. In many states and with various approaches, elected officials are trying.
College player prop bets, which are wagers placed on an athlete’s performance rather than the outcome of a game, face restrictions across much of the country. Fifteen states including Maryland, Ohio, Louisiana, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia, ban all college player prop bets. More than a dozen others allow only certain types of wagers, often restricting bets on college athletes at in-state schools.
Several states also ban abusive gamblers from betting platforms. Ohio, the first state to take that step in 2023, singles out abuse that targets athletes, referees and coaches “where the threat is related to sports gaming.”
NCAA President Charlie Baker said eliminating college player prop bets has been one of the organization’s top priorities since he took office in 2023.
“We now have more states that don’t permit prop bets than do…But it’s a hard slog, one state at a time,” Baker told Capital News Service.
Whether state laws and other measures have slowed prop betting on college sports is unclear. An analysis by the Shirley Povich Center for Sports Journalism and the Howard Center for Investigative Journalism found that sportsbooks offered more than 7,000 player prop betting lines during the National Collegiate Athletic Association men’s basketball tournament. That doesn’t include daily fantasy sports wagers, which offer similar lines but are regulated differently.
Ohio illustrates those challenges. During the 2026 March Madness tournament, Ohio residents couldn’t legally place prop bets on any players, including those suiting up for Ohio schools. Those rules do not reach gamblers outside Ohio. During the tournament, betting platforms offered more than 200 prop bets on men’s basketball players on Ohio teams, according to the Povich and Howard centers’ analysis. In all, gamblers could wager on 17 players participating for four Ohio universities: University of Akron, Miami of Ohio, Ohio State and Wright State.
“I would love five years down the road to see a marked decrease in student-athlete harassment,” said Matthew Schuler, executive director of the Ohio Casino Control Commission. Schuler noted that the issue has been a priority for many in Ohio, including coaches, law enforcement “and our own governor and General Assembly.”
Differing approaches, shared goals
While state legislatures pass laws governing sports betting, gaming and casino control commissions enforce the rules.
A key tool used by gaming regulators is exclusion lists for people deemed to pose a threat to the integrity of gaming. In D.C., that includes people who cheat or pose an injurious threat to the interests of the District. In Wyoming, regulators can place people who harass athletes on an involuntary exclusion list that bans them from sports betting in the state.
“We decided to focus on the bad actors rather than focus on the type of bet that seemed at the time to be the biggest cause of the harassers,” said Michael Steinberg, deputy director of the Wyoming Gaming Commission.
Ohio and West Virginia also have exclusion lists. Under Ohio law, the penalty can be applied to bettors who display “violence or harm” toward anyone involved in a sporting event. The list has also been used to exclude two people for sharing insider information in violation of the state’s sports gaming laws.
To be placed on the list in West Virginia, bettors must harass or show a “harmful pattern of conduct directed at a sports official, coach or participant of a sporting event,” according to the state’s Lottery Sports Wagering Act.
In Ohio, one of the first states to ban college player prop bets, Gov. Mike DeWine and Baker, the NCAA president, proved to be a potent combination.
The prop bet stuff at a minimum needs to go away. Period.
The issue came into focus in 2023 due to an incident involving the men’s basketball team at the University of Dayton. After a Dayton game, Flyers coach Anthony Grant appeared to reference online harassment of a player when he told reporters: “When we have people that make it about themselves and attack kids, because of their own agenda, it sickens me.”
Grant declined to be interviewed about the incident for this story. A spokesman for University of Dayton Athletics said the coach “still feels strongly” about the harassment issue.
DeWine has been outspoken about the need for a law. “The evidence that prop betting is harming athletics in Ohio is reaching critical mass,” the governor said in a 2025 statement.
Baker petitioned the Ohio Casino Control Commission to ban college player prop bets, citing threats and harassment of student-athletes and concerns about the integrity of sports. In February 2024, the commission enacted rules removing college prop bets from the state’s approved sports wagers.
Baker said the NCAA will continue urging states to eliminate college player prop bets.
“We’re going to continue to bang the drum on the fact that the prop bet stuff at a minimum needs to go away. Period,” Baker said.
Hurdles and opposition
In some states, moves to enact laws have been slower to develop or haven’t begun.
In New Jersey, a bill to ban prop bets on college athletes in 2025 had bipartisan support but was never brought to a vote in the State Senate. Sen. Kristin Corrado, R-NJ, the bill’s sponsor, reintroduced the legislation in 2026.
Corrado said college athletes should not be targets “simply because someone wants to gamble on an individual stat line.”
Like New Jersey, Missouri has not enacted a complete ban on college player prop bets.
Missouri, which legalized sports betting in December 2025, has rejected a prop betting ban so far, although betting on athletes playing in games involving Missouri colleges and universities is prohibited.
I don’t think our work here is ever going to be done.
As states continue to test different approaches for addressing sports betting-related harassment, officials acknowledge that protecting college athletes remains an ongoing challenge.
“I don’t think our work here is ever going to be done,” Schuler said. “We’ll try one thing, and if that doesn’t work, we’re going to try another.
Cat Murphy, Jordan Fine, Daniel Sarver and Tahlia Williams contributed to this reporting.
This story was originally published by Capital News Service, cnsmaryland.org. Reprinted without changes.
