Featured Post from Cedarville University

Indiana’s Player-Prop Decision Raises Stakes for College Athletics

Sep 25, 2026

2 min


CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


The rapid expansion of legal sports betting has created a particularly complicated issue for college athletics: wagers based on the performance of individual student-athletes. Indiana became the latest state to confront that issue Thursday when regulators rejected an NCAA request to ban pregame college-player proposition bets. These wagers allow bettors to predict individual outcomes—such as how many points a basketball player will score or how many passing yards a quarterback will record. The NCAA has increasingly targeted these bets, citing concerns about athlete harassment, access to inside information and the potential manipulation of individual performances.


Indiana regulators ultimately chose to preserve the state’s current rules, which permit certain pregame college-player props while prohibiting them once a game is underway. Sports-betting operators maintain that legal sportsbooks can monitor unusual betting patterns and alert regulators to suspicious activity, an oversight mechanism that does not exist in illegal or offshore markets. The NCAA takes a different view, arguing that attaching money directly to an individual college athlete’s statistics creates risks that are difficult to eliminate through monitoring alone. Several states have already restricted or prohibited these wagers, leaving the country with an increasingly uneven regulatory landscape.


Indiana’s decision puts a larger question about the future of legalized sports betting into focus. College athletes now compete in an environment where thousands of people may have money riding on their individual performance, even when the athletes themselves receive none of the wager. Are existing safeguards enough to protect athletes and the integrity of competition? Should college sports be treated differently from professional leagues when regulators decide what people can bet on? And if states adopt different answers, how effective can any single state’s restrictions ultimately be? 



Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Cedarville University

Rising Measles Cases Put Public Health Communication in Focus featured image

2 min

Rising Measles Cases Put Public Health Communication in Focus

The continued spread of measles is drawing attention to both disease prevention and how health officials explain risks to the public. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 4,852 confirmed U.S. cases through October 29, more than twice the 2,289 cases recorded during all of 2025. With 96% of this year’s cases associated with outbreaks, the figures underscore the importance of helping communities understand how the disease spreads and who faces the greatest risks. Measles spreads through the air and can cause complications including pneumonia and brain inflammation. Young children, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems are among those at higher risk of severe complications. The CDC identifies vaccination as the best protection, with two doses of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine approximately 97% effective at preventing measles. Communicating those facts clearly gives families a foundation for discussing their circumstances with health professionals. The communication challenge extends beyond publishing case totals. Families need understandable explanations of what an exposure means, how local conditions affect their risk and where to turn with questions. Effective outreach must also distinguish established evidence from uncertainty, acknowledge concerns respectfully and explain the reasoning behind recommendations. Those tasks become particularly consequential when people encounter conflicting claims about the same disease. How can health professionals communicate urgency while building trust? Dr. Zach Jenkins, professor of pharmacy practice at Cedarville University, has training and clinical experience in infectious diseases and has helped community stakeholders, policymakers and media outlets understand public health issues. His background provides a relevant perspective on explaining outbreak risks and translating medical evidence into information families can use. 

Manufacturing Gains Highlight the Tension Between Growth and Rising Costs featured image

1 min

Manufacturing Gains Highlight the Tension Between Growth and Rising Costs

U.S. manufacturing activity strengthened in October, offering an encouraging sign for the economy while highlighting continued pressure on business costs. The Institute for Supply Management’s report released November 2 showed its manufacturing index rising to 55.5 from September’s 54.5. A reading above 50 indicates expansion. Production accelerated, but manufacturers also reported rising input prices and slower supplier deliveries, illustrating why stronger factory activity does not necessarily bring immediate relief from inflation. The report’s pricing measure declined from September but remained well above the threshold indicating increasing costs. That distinction matters: fewer manufacturers reporting price increases does not mean the materials they purchase have become cheaper. Survey respondents also described uncertainty surrounding pricing, trade policy and delivery times. Together, those pressures can complicate decisions about purchasing equipment, adding employees and committing to long-term contracts, even when orders remain strong. For consumers, the question is how businesses respond. Manufacturers facing higher expenses may absorb some costs through lower profit margins, seek more efficient production methods or pass increases along to customers. Stronger production could help meet demand, but its effect on affordability depends partly on whether supply keeps pace and cost pressures ease. These developments raise a broader question: How much can manufacturing grow before rising expenses begin to limit its gains? Dr. Jared Pincin, associate professor of economics at Cedarville University, brings relevant expertise to examining how business costs, consumer prices and economic policy interact—and why encouraging production figures can coexist with financial strain. 

Reported Iranian Threats Prompt U.S. Embassy Precautions featured image

1 min

Reported Iranian Threats Prompt U.S. Embassy Precautions

Reported threats against American personnel are prompting new precautions at U.S. diplomatic posts in the Middle East. The State Department is reducing staffing at embassies in Jordan, Lebanon, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates following intelligence warnings about increased Iranian efforts to target Americans. The embassies remain open under restricted operations, and the staffing changes differ from the ordered departure of nonessential personnel and families from Saudi Arabia. The precautions underscore the challenges of maintaining a diplomatic presence during a regional conflict. Embassies support communication with foreign governments, assist American citizens and provide information that helps guide U.S. policy. Reducing staff can limit personnel’s exposure to danger, but it also requires officials to reassess which activities can safely continue. Reported threats involving Iran-backed Houthi militants add another layer of complexity to those security decisions. The developments also raise questions about how Washington can protect its personnel while preserving channels for negotiation. U.S. officials have denied that the staffing reductions are connected to potential new American and Israeli strikes against Iran. The precautions nevertheless illustrate how intelligence warnings can affect diplomatic operations before an attack occurs—and how regional tensions can place Americans serving abroad at risk. 

View all posts
Powered by