Ohio Republicans Say Ban on College Player Props Unjustified in NIL Environment

In light of student-athletes' ability to make money off of their name, image, and likeness (NIL), three Republicans in the Ohio House of Representatives argue that the state's restriction on prop bets on collegiate players is unnecessary.

The Ohio State Legislature heard the findings of the Study Commission on the Future of Gaming last month. T he 11-person bipartisan delegation of lawmakers and state racing and gaming authorities couldn't agree on whether to support the legalization of online casino gambling and online lottery activities.

The committee's three Republican members, however, publicly backed giving Buckeye State citizens access to additional gambling alternatives, such as online slots, table games, and lottery sales. T hen also expressed their disapproval of the Ohio Casino Control Commission's (OCCC) decision to outlaw player prop bets on NCAA athletes earlier this year.

Regulation That Is Not Necessary

In February, OCCC Executive Director Matthew Schuler decided that in order to preserve the integrity of collegiate athletics and prevent player harassment, the state's retail and online sportsbooks must eliminate college player props, per NCAA President Charlie Baker's request. According to Schuler, these player props made up less than 1.5% of Ohio's total sports wagers from the previous year.

Reps. Cindy Abrams (R-Hamilton), Jeff LaRe (R-Violet), and Jay Edwards (R-Athens) of Ohio argue that since student-athletes can now get NIL money, they should be regarded the same as professional athletes and that the prohibition of such betting lines accomplishes little to safeguard collegiate players.

“While we understand the circumstances in which this decision was made, we believe it is one that was not needed,” the Republican lawmakers wrote in their policy recommendations.

"With the current landscape of collegiate athletics and NIL, players are now being paid to play (and perform) in certain sports. That is no different than any other professional sport. Reports of harassment and potential threats are unacceptable at any stage of athletics. Such acts should be investigated and prosecuted accordingly,” the suggestion continued.

“But the response from the OCCC to simply ban prop-betting on individual collegiate athletes looks to solve the problem without addressing the issue. We recommend that the OCCC’s policy be rescinded and prop- betting on college athletes be restored,” they concluded. 

Prop Bans

Player props on collegiate athletes are illegal in the majority of states where licensed sportsbook firms operate. These props usually entail a wager that is dependent on the performance of a single player.

College player props are only permitted in a few sports betting jurisdictions: Kansas, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, and Washington, DC. New Jersey likewise permits college player props, although it prohibits odds involving players who attend state-based institutions.

This year, politicians and/or casino regulators in Louisiana, Maryland, and Vermont changed their sports betting laws to forbid collegiate player props, joining Ohio.

Player props in college sports are "enormously problematic," according to Baker, who signed Massachusetts' sports betting statute into law while serving as the state's governor. College athletes are "generally surrounded by a huge percentage of their classmates who bet on sports," according to the former governor who was appointed president of the collegiate sports regulatory body in March 2023.