The National Football League is pushing prediction market platforms to avoid offering certain contracts that the league believes are vulnerable to manipulation.
As first reported by ESPN, the NFL sent letters to operators including Kalshi and Polymarket requesting that they not offer markets tied to outcomes that can be influenced by a single individual or small group, including those related to officiating decisions, player injuries, and even broadcast commentary. The move marks a more direct effort by the NFL to shape how prediction markets operate, shifting from public criticism and congressional engagement toward private pressure on operators.
The push comes as prediction markets have drawn significant trading activity around major sporting events, including more than $1.6 billion in volume tied to the Super Bowl earlier this year.
The NFL’s approach stands in contrast to strategies adopted by some other leagues. Both the National Hockey League and Major League Baseball have entered partnerships with prediction market platforms in part to gain visibility into trading activity and influence over which contracts are offered.
MLB has gone a step further, working directly with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) as the agency develops its framework for event contracts, positioning itself to help shape how sports-related markets are monitored and structured.
NFL outlines NFL contract types it views as problematic
The NFL sent the letters Sunday asking platforms to refrain from offering trades on events that can be easily manipulated or determined in advance. The NFL confirmed the letters had been sent to “CFTC-registered DCMs who offer contracts on NFL events” and shared a copy with DeFi Rate.
The league outlined four categories of concern:
- Events that can be influenced by a single participant, such as missed field goals
- Outcomes that may be known in advance, including draft picks, player signings, and coaching changes
- Contracts tied to officiating
- “Inherently objectionable” topics like player injuries and fan safety
It also pointed to newer types of markets not typically seen at traditional sportsbooks, including contracts tied to NFL broadcast mention markets and which celebrities will attend a game.
“Some people are going to have that information … that they can then share,” NFL executive vice president Jeff Miller told ESPN. “We’re trying to stay as far as we can from some of those sorts of inside information wagers that could exist in this space.”
The league said it is seeking to avoid markets that could expose participants to “unfair and unwanted allegations” tied to trading activity.
In a statement given to DeFi Rate, Miller said sports event contracts are “not effectively regulated currently.”
“As part of our ongoing engagement with the CFTC, we sent a letter to all sports prediction markets detailing our objectionable bets, mirroring the prohibited wagers in the legalized sports betting space,” Miller said. “Sports prediction markets are not effectively regulated currently. We will continue to engage with the CFTC in pursuit of the necessary guardrails to protect both the integrity of the game and consumers participating in these rapidly evolving markets.”
Leagues engage with CFTC on contract oversight
The NFL’s outreach also comes amid ongoing engagement with the CFTC, which oversees regulated prediction markets in the U.S.
Miller told ESPN the letters follow months of conversations between the league and the agency. While the NFL does not have a formal agreement with the CFTC, Miller said the league believes regulators value its input as new types of sports contracts emerge.
Other leagues have taken a more structured approach. MLB recently reached an agreement with the CFTC to share information and meet regularly to discuss markets that may be easier to manipulate, giving the league a more formal channel to weigh in on contracts.
The CFTC, led by chairman Michael Selig, has signaled a more active role in determining which contracts should be allowed. Selig told ESPN he believes trading on sports outcomes has long been permissible, though previous administrations were less willing to approve such markets. As sports become a larger part of the prediction market ecosystem, he said collaboration with leagues is essential.
“If a league is telling us that a contract is going to be readily susceptible to manipulation and an exchange is still trying to certify that, of course we’ll evaluate the risks there,” Selig said. “The leagues are very well positioned to make those calls and so we are going to afford a lot of deference to the leagues on these types of issues.”
CFTC rulemaking process addresses manipulation risks
The debate over which contracts should be allowed is also playing out in the CFTC’s ongoing rulemaking process.
The agency earlier this month opened a public comment period on prediction markets, asking, in part, for input on how to determine whether certain event contracts are “readily susceptible to manipulation” or contrary to the public interest. The comment window is open through April 30.
Some early submissions reflect concerns similar to those raised by the NFL. In one filing, Seton Hall law professor Ilya Beylin wrote that “many event contracts raise heightened risk of manipulation,” particularly when they “settle on outcomes determined by one individual or a small group of individuals.” He pointed to examples including contracts based on “words an individual uses in a press conference.”
While the rulemaking remains in its early stages, the overlap highlights how leagues, regulators, and outside observers are increasingly focused on the types of markets that may face greater scrutiny.
Pressure on sports event contracts grows at state and federal levels
The NFL’s outreach comes as prediction markets, particularly those tied to sports, face increasing scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers.
At the state level, officials have taken action aimed at preventing prediction market platforms from offering sports-related event contracts, arguing that those contracts constitute unlicensed gambling under state law. Most recently, in Washington, officials took legal action against Kalshi, arguing the platform’s event contracts violate state gambling law. While the case is not limited to sports (it’s asking the King County Superior Court to declare the exchanges illegal), it reflects a broader trend of state actions that have focused on restricting sports-related markets.
In Congress, multiple proposals introduced in recent weeks would directly target sports event contracts. For example, the bipartisan Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, introduced last week, would amend the Commodity Exchange Act to prohibit federally regulated exchanges from listing sports-related and casino-style event contracts.
The NFL’s position suggests a narrower approach, seeking to limit specific types of contracts it views as more susceptible to manipulation or misuse rather than opposing sports-related prediction markets outright.
