NFL is not ruling out prediction markets in the future, despite previous objections
Despite previously being outspoken about prediction markets, the NFL has said it is considering them for the league, even as the platforms face regulatory backlash in numerous states.
Speaking to Front Office Sports on Radio Row, NFL Executive Vice President Jeff Miller said the league is paying close attention to the platforms, calling the markets “dynamic” as he noted that regulatory issues are unresolved.
While Miller has considered the negatives the markets could have on the league, he told Front Office Sports, “it isn’t just about anticipating the worst. It is a fan engagement tool, there’s no question around that, and that’s been good for the league.”
He added, “There’s no question that we’re going to be spending a lot of time talking about this in the coming months, and maybe even years. But our principles are going to remain the same.”
In December, Miller wrote a letter to the House Committee on Agriculture expressing concerns about the integrity of the games that sports events contracts could affect.
It followed comments made by league Commissioner Roger Goodell earlier in the month, who said prediction markets were “not something we’re about to enter into,” and the league banned the use of prediction markets advertisements during the Super Bowl this year.
It followed the NFL flagging prediction markets as sports betting in August last year and banning players and league officials from using the platforms.
Abi Bray brings strong researching skills to the forefront of all of her writing, whether it’s the newest slots, industry trends or the ever changing legislation across the U.S, Asia and Australia, she maintains a keen eye for detail and a passion for reporting.
Verticals:
Sectors:
Topics:
Dig Deeper
Related stories
2026/01/19: NFL and PGA Tour maintain ban on player endorsements of prediction markets
2025/11/25: What does the future hold for prediction markets after big players break from AGA?
2025/11/28: Prediction markets expected to win big from Thanksgiving NFL matchups
2026/01/21: Kalshi to halt operations in Massachusetts after judge ruling
2026/01/19: NFL and PGA Tour maintain ban on player endorsements of prediction markets
2025/11/25: What does the future hold for prediction markets after big players break from AGA?
2025/11/28: Prediction markets expected to win big from Thanksgiving NFL matchups
2026/01/21: Kalshi to halt operations in Massachusetts after judge ruling
The Backstory
Why the league’s tone is shifting now
Prediction markets have moved from the periphery of online wagering to the center of a regulatory and commercial tug of war. As platforms push to list contracts tied to sports outcomes under federal commodities oversight rather than state gaming laws, the business case has sharpened: a scalable, exchange-like product promising liquidity, pricing transparency and a path into states that have not legalized sportsbooks. Public signals from other stakeholders help explain why the league’s stance appears to be evolving from categorical resistance to conditional openness. One marker came as industry coverage noted the NFL was watching the space closely even while regulatory questions remained, framing prediction markets as a potential fan engagement tool if integrity and compliance standards could be met. That messaging echoed reporting by Front Office Sports that the league is not ruling out prediction markets in the long run, underscoring a pragmatic posture as market structure and safeguards are debated (Front Office Sports reported the league’s evolving view).
The context: operators and exchanges alike have accelerated product launches around marquee sports seasons while state attorneys general and regulators test the jurisdictional lines. The result is a fast-shifting map that blends finance and gambling policy, with clear implications for league integrity rules, sponsorships and how fans interact with live games.
Operators redraw alliances around prediction markets
In November, a rift inside organized gaming policy blew into the open when two market leaders broke with the industry’s main trade group over prediction markets. Reporting by InGame’s Jill Dorson detailed how DraftKings and FanDuel split from the American Gaming Association after signaling plans to offer sports event contracts regulated by the CFTC rather than by states. The piece, republished at CDC Gaming, framed the break as a strategic bet on a parallel regulatory lane and a way to reach audiences in large holdout states that lack legal mobile betting (CDC Gaming recapped the schism). COMPLETE iGAMING’s follow-up traced the stakes across the ecosystem, from potential “bad actor” stigma to the prospect of nationwide liquidity and sharper pricing for consumers if exchanges take hold (industry analysis on the AGA split and consumer impact).
That realignment has knock-on effects. Fanatics confirmed a foray via a crypto exchange tie-up, and Underdog rolled out markets in multiple states through a similar partnership, signaling that online-first brands are willing to test the boundary. At the same time, some regulators have warned licensees that involvement in prediction markets could carry repercussions in their home states, raising the cost of experimentation for traditional sportsbooks.
Regulators push back in the states
The state vs. federal oversight fault line sharpened in Massachusetts, where a judge halted Kalshi from offering sports event contracts without a gaming license. The preliminary injunction, sought by the state attorney general, makes the case that these products amount to unlicensed sports wagering under state law and should sit under the commonwealth’s licensure and oversight regime. Kalshi plans to appeal, but the order lands as a first-of-its-kind state court restriction and could influence other jurisdictions now weighing similar questions (Massachusetts court ruling on Kalshi).
Separately, legal briefs filed in the Kalshi matter have laid out the federal posture and limits, including the exchange’s arguments to trade sports-linked contracts and the government’s response (court filings detail the evolving legal theories). More than 10 states are probing or challenging event contract markets, producing a patchwork that complicates national rollouts. That fragmentation raises operational risk for any league or operator considering formal partnerships or ad inventory, particularly if rules differ during the same season across major media markets.
Big tech and brokers test the edges
Beyond native sportsbooks and exchanges, mainstream finance and tech brands are tiptoeing in. Robinhood launched short-window football prediction markets, positioning them more like tradable contracts than traditional bets, and teasing a path to weekly listings. The offering is limited in scope for now but signals intent to make the platform a one-stop shop for investing and trading adjacent to sports engagement (Robinhood’s football event contracts rollout). Rival exchange Kalshi, despite legal uncertainty, has continued to expand features such as props and parlays to mirror sportsbook familiarity while preserving exchange mechanics, a move flagged by sports business outlets this season (Front Office Sports covered Kalshi’s product additions).
For leagues, the entrance of retail brokerage and fintech brands introduces both distribution reach and compliance complexity. These firms bring larger retail user bases and data infrastructure but also face distinct securities and commodities rules that may clash with state gaming regimes.
Sportsbooks juggle growth, taxes and risk
Core sportsbook economics also color the prediction markets debate. DraftKings posted strong top-line growth and rising monthly unique payers even after two rough hold quarters tied to unfavorable outcomes. On its earnings call, the company flagged seasonality and outcome variance while projecting high single-digit to low double-digit handle growth. It also warned that rising state tax rates in places like Illinois and Maryland risk pushing bettors to unregulated operators, undermining channelization goals (DraftKings’ outlook and tax concerns).
Those pressures could make exchange-style markets attractive as a diversification play, especially in states where sportsbook expansion has stalled. But they cut both ways. Regulators in states with mature betting markets may see prediction markets as a loophole and react with license scrutiny, as some have already warned. That leaves operators weighing incremental customer acquisition against the possibility of collateral damage to flagship sportsbook licenses.
What it means for fans and the map ahead
For consumers, the promise of prediction markets is straightforward: better pricing through peer-to-peer order books, fewer limits on winning players and faster onboarding that can span multiple states. Analysts interviewed by COMPLETE iGAMING said nationwide liquidity could benefit serious and casual users alike, particularly in jurisdictions without legal mobile betting. But they also cautioned that memories are long among regulators and industry peers, and participation could invite “bad actor” labeling that lingers in future licensing cycles (deep dive on consumer upside and regulatory risk).
The stakes for the league are tied to integrity optics and fan engagement. If exchanges remain boxed out of key states or face rolling injunctions, alignment looks risky. If a federal-state détente emerges with clear guardrails on data, limits and enforcement, these products could become another engagement lane alongside fantasy and sportsbooks. For now, the legal skirmishes in places like Massachusetts, the policy fractures evidenced by the AGA split, and the product experiments by firms from fintech to fantasy explain why the league is signaling curiosity but caution. The next few quarters — as courts rule, tax regimes settle and operators decide how hard to push — will determine whether prediction markets mature into a regulated complement to sports betting or remain a patchwork that leagues keep at arm’s length.
