Sorry, if I misunderstood. Obviously, NCAA athletes who gamble isn’t a source of growth in viewership. Gambling as an entity is the growth avenue for sports viewership because it brings more casual viewers (not just NCAA athletes) than the game itself otherwise would.
My position is online, legalized gambling WILL keep growing because of that. And since gambling will be growing, student athletes WILL gamble, probably in large amounts. The sport is at greater risk by continually cracking down these student athlete versus putting in mechanisms that allow them to partake but not put the competitive integrity at risk.
The Iowa/ISU situation is the tip of the iceberg. This is hypothetical, but what if ISU loses like 5 starters on the football team for the year because of this. What if Iowa loses 10? Do you think that will make you more or less eager to watch their games this fall?
Since you are a big fan, I’m sure you’ll still watch, but apply that logic to the casual fan. Will they? Probably less likely. Now replace ISU/Iowa with Penn St, or Notre Dame, or Michigan, or USC, or Deion’s CU (all of which reside in states with/soon to have legal, online gambling). Are casual fans going to tune into a neutered Michigan (a ratings darling) get dominated week in and week out cause they’ve lost a bunch of players for betting the NBA championship. The NCAA would have a lot of questions to answer at that point.