for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
The NCAA is urging federal regulators to step in on prediction markets that let users trade contracts tied to college game outcomes, warning the products are starting to function like sports betting without the guardrails that states typically require.
In a Jan. 14, 2026 letter to Commodity Futures Trading Commission chair Michael Selig, NCAA President Charlie Baker asked the agency to suspend collegiate sports prediction markets “until a more robust system with appropriate safeguards is in place.”
Baker repeated the message during remarks at the NCAA’s annual convention in Oxon Hill, Maryland, describing prediction markets as “unregulated betting on college games” and calling on federal regulators to stabilize the space.
“This acts like sports wagering,” Baker tells regulators
The NCAA’s argument is that the product looks less like a niche financial tool and more like a sportsbook menu.
In the letter, Baker notes that prediction market operators are offering college markets that mirror sports betting staples, including moneyline, totals, and spreads, while more mainstream betting and fantasy brands have signaled interest in the same lane.
Prediction market operators have long argued that what they offer is different because users trade “yes/no” contracts with each other rather than placing bets against a house. ESPN noted that prediction markets typically earn revenue through transaction fees, more like a broker, while sportsbooks earn a commission built into odds.
Still, the NCAA is drawing a straight line between the user experience and the risks. Baker’s view is that if it walks and talks like wagering, it should be regulated with comparable protections.
The NCAA’s core complaint: missing safeguards
Baker’s letter lists several areas where he says prediction markets fall short of the protections that surround legal sportsbooks.
He points to differences in age limits (with prediction markets often available at 18), the lack of clear college-campus advertising restrictions, and what he describes as thinner integrity monitoring, including limited tools such as geolocation checks that are commonly used in sports wagering investigations.
The NCAA also wants a formal role in the process, arguing that sportsbooks in many states must coordinate with governing bodies on issues like market approval and suspicious activity reporting, obligations that do not consistently exist for prediction markets.
Baker also flags prop-style markets as a looming concern, repeating his broader campaign against wagers on individual college athlete performances, and adds a separate focus on harassment of athletes by angry bettors, an issue he says affects mental health.
Transfer portal trading put the NCAA on alert
Baker used one recent example to underline why he wants intervention now: attempts to list contracts tied to the college transfer portal.
There have been reports that Kalshi notified the CFTC in December that it was self-certifying markets tied to whether college athletes would enter the transfer portal, triggering sharp NCAA criticism. Baker referenced a site that backed off transfer-related offerings after the NCAA called it out.
In the letter, Baker calls transfer portal trading a “catastrophic” risk for student-athletes, arguing it could intensify pressure and harassment around personal decisions.
An escalating fight with no end in sight just yet
The NCAA has been in the gambling crossfire since the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision that opened the door for state-by-state sports betting.
But prediction markets have added a new layer because they sit in a contested zone: federally overseen as derivatives in one view, treated as sports betting by many state regulators in another. Reuters has described the category as a growing legal battleground, with states and tribes challenging sports-based event contracts and companies arguing federal preemption.
Baker’s warning also comes as integrity cases pile up. The AP reported the NCAA has declared more than a dozen basketball players ineligible in recent months for manipulating performance connected to point spreads and prop-style outcomes.
For now, the NCAA is asking the CFTC to hit pause, and to build a tighter rulebook before college sports markets grow further.
Source: News10
