The purpose of this study was to analyze 27 years’ worth of public communication and newspaper coverage of arguments surrounding legalized sports betting in the United States and to assess current perceptions of legitimacy related to this emerging industry. The three-step process produced a rich collection of qualitative and quantitative data from a Narrative Policy Framework analysis of transcripts from Congressional hearings and court documents, framing analysis of newspaper articles, and a broadly distributed survey that tested perceived legitimacy. Findings from the first two stages of the study described and explained a stunning shift in tone between the early 1990’s, when protecting the integrity of the games dominated the discourse, and the mid-2010’s, when sports betting (most of it illegal) was perceived to be such a normalized slice of society that a landmark Supreme Court decision that reversed 150 years of tradition and policy was met with eager acceptance instead of shock and outrage. The final stage of the study appeared to confirm that key publics expressed apathy towards potential problems associated with expanded gambling opportunities. By providing a baseline explanation for the normalization of sports betting, this study intends to inspire a new line of sports media and communication research.