NFL Tightens Rules on Player-Influenced Prop Bets

The National Football League (NFL) is intensifying efforts to restrict certain types of proposition wagers, or “prop bets,” on regulated sports betting platforms, according to a memo circulated to all 32 teams on Thursday. The initiative comes as federal prosecutors in Brooklyn continue a broad investigation into alleged gambling improprieties across multiple professional sports leagues.

In the memo, the NFL stated that it is working with state legislators, regulators, and sportsbook operators to limit—and where feasible, prohibit—prop bets it considers detrimental to the integrity of the game. The league highlighted bets that can be directly influenced by the actions of a single player on a specific play, citing examples such as wagers on a kicker missing a field goal or the next pass being incomplete.

“Our commercial agreements are regularly reviewed and updated to prohibit wagers that are tied to the kind of conduct that was identified in recent federal law enforcement activity,” the memo read. “We maintain regular contact with state officials to ensure that these wagers are appropriately addressed.”

Categories of Concern

• The NFL identified several categories of prop bets for further scrutiny:
• Inherently objectionable props: Bets that are deemed derogatory, inflammatory, or against public policy, including wagers on player injuries, fan safety, and misconduct.
• Officiating-related bets: Wagers linked to officiating, such as penalties, replays, and officiating assignments.

Pre-determined outcome props: Bets on outcomes determined before or outside the natural flow of gameplay, including whether the first offensive play will be a run or pass or which quarterback will start a game. The league also expressed opposition to trading on prediction markets, such as Polymarket, where users can speculate on starting lineups. On the collegiate side, NCAA President Charlie Baker has advocated for a nationwide ban on prop bets involving student-athletes, and he commended the NFL for taking steps to safeguard integrity in professional football.

The NFL confirmed it has engaged with state regulators but did not disclose which states were involved. With sports betting now legal in over 35 states, individual regulators retain authority to approve or reject specific prop wagers. For example, Colorado’s Division of Gaming recently rejected proposed bets on the length of Super Bowl scoring drives and the parity of a touchdown scorer’s jersey number, while approving a wager on whether the first offensive play would result in a safety.

An anonymous state regulator told iGB that professional leagues’ efforts to limit risky betting products are a positive step toward maintaining integrity in sports wagering.

From the earliest days of legal sports betting, we have recognised the particular risks associated with prop bets and the corrosive effect they have on fan perceptions, league reputation and the safety of players, club staff and game officials.

Broader Context

The memo arrives amid multiple high-profile gambling scandals. Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York have charged more than three dozen defendants in connection with a joint poker and illegal sports betting investigation involving prominent NBA players. Meanwhile, Cleveland Guardians pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz face federal charges in a pitch-rigging scheme.

Since the Supreme Court’s 2018 PASPA decision, which legalized sports betting nationwide, the NFL has disciplined several players for violations related to gambling, including Calvin Ridley, Jameson Williams, and Isaiah Rodgers Sr.

The memo underscored the league’s longstanding concerns over prop bets, stating: “From the earliest days of legal sports betting, we have recognised the particular risks associated with prop bets and the corrosive effect they have on fan perceptions, league reputation and the safety of players, club staff and game officials.” The NFL’s current push reflects growing scrutiny over sports gambling and a proactive effort to align state-level regulations with its internal standards for integrity and public trust.