The NCAA is escalating its efforts to restrict the growth of college sports prediction markets, warning that the products resemble sports wagering without comparable oversight or protections. NCAA President Charlie Baker issued a letter to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) calling for a suspension of collegiate prediction trading, and repeated the message during the organization’s annual convention.

The request centers on markets offered by financial trading platforms that allow users to buy and sell contracts tied to outcomes of college sports events. Although the platforms have been regulated as financial institutions rather than gambling operators, the NCAA argues the lines between the two have started to blur.

NCAA Urges Regulators to Halt Activity

Baker addressed the CFTC in a three-page letter that asked the agency to stop the trading of contracts related to college sports. He wrote that “protecting the well-being of student-athletes and the integrity of competition are of the highest priority to the NCAA, and the growth and haphazard nature of collegiate sport prediction markets pose a significant threat to both,” adding, “I implore you to suspend collegiate sport prediction markets until a more robust system with appropriate safeguards is in place. The NCAA is willing to work with the CFTC to develop such a system that protects student-athletes and consumers from harm.”

The letter was addressed to CFTC chair Michael Selig and signaled the NCAA’s interest in participating directly in the development of integrity protections. Baker outlined measures he believes should accompany any future approval, including integrity monitoring, age controls, advertising limits and restrictions on certain types of wagers. He also noted that the organization would support anti-harassment rules to address misconduct targeting student-athletes.

The NCAA has been focused on gambling issues since the end of the nationwide sports betting ban in 2018. Several states have legalized sportsbooks in the years since, and the NCAA has responded by advancing its own policy changes. In 2024, it announced a push to end prop betting on college contests. It also briefly floated a policy that would have allowed staff and athletes to wager on professional sports before reversing the decision shortly after arrests tied to unrelated gambling investigations.

Transfer Portal Contracts Raise Concerns

Baker’s recent letter followed his public criticism of reported plans by Kalshi, a prediction market operator, to offer markets tied to the college transfer portal. That offering would have allowed users to speculate on whether athletes would enter or withdraw from the portal or on future destinations.

Baker warned that such markets could intensify harassment and create new pressures on players making personal decisions. As On3 reports, he posted on X that “the NCAA vehemently opposes college sports prediction markets,” adding, “It is already bad enough that student-athletes face harassment and abuse for lost bets on game performance, and now Kalshi wants to offer bets on their transfer decisions and status – this is absolutely unacceptable and would place even greater pressure on student-athletes while threatening competition integrity and recruiting processes. Their decisions and future should not be gambled with, especially in an unregulated marketplace that does not follow any rules of legitimate sports betting operators.”

Kalshi later indicated that it had “no immediate plans to list these contracts” related to the transfer portal. Baker referred to a platform that intended to launch the product “until we called them out and they backed down” during remarks at the NCAA’s annual convention.

Debate Over Classification and Regulatory Authority Continues

Prediction markets have become a contested regulatory issue. Platforms offer contract trading in a format that resembles binary financial products, and they typically generate revenue through transaction fees. Sportsbooks operate differently, setting odds and managing liability on bets. The NCAA contends the experience feels similar for users when the underlying contracts track sports outcomes such as spreads, totals or moneylines.

Baker has pointed to gaps in age verification, advertising restrictions and integrity monitoring compared with legal sportsbooks. He also questioned the lack of mandatory communication between operators and sports governing bodies, which is common in regulated wagering environments. He reiterated his criticism of prop-style college wagers and highlighted athlete harassment as a mental health concern.

The NCAA’s push comes amid broader uncertainty about how prediction markets intersect with sports betting laws. States and tribal regulators have challenged sports-based financial contracts, while market operators have cited federal preemption. At the same time, integrity investigations have added pressure. The Associated Press reported that more than a dozen basketball players were recently ruled ineligible for manipulating performance tied to point spreads and prop wagers.

For now, the NCAA is asking federal regulators to stop college markets and create a clearer framework before further expansion.