Share 
State of Play’s TL;DR
- The Indiana Gaming Commission unanimously voted to keep allowing pregame college player prop bets.
- Commissioners rejected a request from the NCAA to ban the betting type.
Indiana will continue allowing pregame college player prop bets after the Indiana Gaming Commission unanimously rejected the NCAA’s request for a ban.
For now, the state’s sports wagering rules stay as they are, with regulators signaling that any broader change should come from lawmakers, not the commission.
The decision keeps one of the more closely watched college betting policy debates alive in a major regulated market. It also underscores the wider tension between legal betting options, integrity concerns, and the NCAA’s campaign against player-specific college markets.
Indiana regulators declined to change the current rules
The Indiana Gaming Commission voted unanimously against the NCAA’s request to prohibit pregame college player proposition bets. In-game college player props have already been banned in Indiana since 2019, but the commission chose not to extend that restriction to pregame markets.
The issue had been discussed in June before regulators postponed a final decision for further review. In support of the proposed ban, NCAA representatives argued that college player props create integrity risks and can contribute to harassment of student-athletes.
Clint Hangebrauck, managing director of enterprise risk at the NCAA, called the NCAA’s request “simple and modest.” Mark Hicks, the NCAA’s managing director of enforcement, made the case more bluntly, saying, “Bottom line, from an integrity perspective, it’s easy to manipulate and it’s hard to monitor.”
The petition also drew supporting letters from Butler University, Indiana University, and Purdue University.
Why the commission said no
Opposition came from the Sports Betting Alliance, which argued a ban would not solve the harassment problem. SBA President Joe Maloney said eliminating the bet type “would not stop a single harasser,” framing the issue as part of a broader social media problem rather than something a wagering rule alone could fix.
Commissioners also questioned whether they, rather than lawmakers, should make that policy call. Commissioner B.R. Lane said the matter involved criminal activity better addressed by lawmakers, while Commissioner L. Scott Pejic called it “a legislative question.” Pejic added that lawmakers could still prohibit the bets as early as Jan. 1.
Based on reporting by SCCG.
