US state QB John Mateer Denies Online Gambling Allegations

US state quarterback John Mateer has denied allegations of online gambling after screenshots of Venmo transactions labeled “sports gambling” went viral Monday night. The rising star from Oklahoma justified that the captions were “inside jokes” and denies placing any bets, as both he and the University of Oklahoma face increasing scrutiny amid the NCAA’s strict gambling rules.

US’ Oklahoma QB Linked to Online Gambling Scandal

The Venmo screenshots, which show two transactions from November 20, 2022 , quickly went viral on social media. One of the payments included a reference to the USC–UCLA football game that took place the day prior, during Mateer’s freshman year at Washington State.

As the matter spread like wildfire, Mateer issued a statement on X, denying these allegations. He added, “I’ve never placed a bet on any sporting event,” Mateer wrote. “The Venmo memo was a joke between friends, not an admission of gambling. I take NCAA rules seriously and would never jeopardize my eligibility or my team.”

Oklahoma Athletics also responded publicly, stating that the university “uses ProhiBet integrity monitoring” and that it is not currently aware of any NCAA prbe asociated with Mateer.

“OU Athletics takes all gambling-related matters seriously and coordinates closely with the NCAA and its monitoring partners,” the school said in a statement shared with multiple outlets, including USA Today and Fox News. “At this time, we are not aware of any inquiry or violations.”

Nevertheless, university officials revealed that they were conducting standard due diligence. This also includes reviewing compliance processes and monitoring any third-party integrity alerts, routine steps even in the absence of a formal NCAA investigation.

The screenshots reportedly originated from Mateer’s public Venmo history, which has since been deleted. No dollar amounts were visible in the shared images, but the “sports gambling” memo and date raised qustions. Also, there is no current evidence that Mateer placed bets on his own team, his own sport, or while at Oklahoma. Note that these factors could significantly elevate the seriousness of the case under NCAA rules.

According to the NCAA’s current gambling policy, all student-athletes, coaches, and athletics staff are barred from betting on NCAA-sponsored sports at any level, college or professional. Penalties can be anywhere from temporary suspensions to permanent loss of eligibility, especially when betting includes one’s own team or sport.

A new NCAA proposal introduced in June 2025 could eventually make a change. If proposal is passed, student-athletes will be allowed to legally bet on professional sports (in states where it’s allowed). The ban on college sports wagering, however, would still be there. But if that rule is approved, it would not apply retroactively.

Until now, Oklahoma’s internal position appears cautious but not alarmed. There is no active NCAA inquiry going on now.

But, it is still not clear if any third-party monitoring companies like ProhiBet finds anything fishy related to Mateer’s accounts. It also remains to see if the national office will choose to follow up on the viral screenshots.
The situation also comes in at a time when college sports are witnessing mounting pressure around gambling amidst athletes. In the beginning of the year, many athletes were penalized under the NCAA’s gambling rules.

Speaking on global scale, several nations, including Chile and India are considering regulations on online gambling. This was due to rising concerns such as money laundering and sometimes, addiction especially amongst youth. In a similar instance, the Philippines’ Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) has strictly banned all its employees from engaging in any kind of online gambling. This ban also applies to officials and staff of local government units (LGUs).

The DILG said online platforms are just as harmful as physical gambling, if not worse. The regulatory body also said that they are a serious threat to the integrity of public service.