The Pros And Cons Of March Madness

The NCAA has stuck with the current format for the bracket since 2011. There are 68 teams that compete in the NCAA basketball tournament from March to April. 32 of the 68 teams automatically qualify if they win their conference championship. The Ivy does not have a tournament championship so whoever is the regular season champion in the Ivy League has an automatic bid as well. The rest of the 36 slots are filled by at-large-bids and are selected by a committee based on their record and how difficult teams schedules were. This selection is televised on ESPN and is called, “Selection Sunday.” After the committee picks who belong in the tournament, they then need to make the seeding’s for each team. If you are a #1 seed you are considered the best team in that region. If you’re a #16 you are the worst team. There are four separate regions in the tournament and in each region there is a #1 seed through #16. The committee sets up the bracket so the #1 seed has

The Tigers slowed the pace in an attempt to neutralize the physical gap with other

Change is unavoidable in any establishment today because of the steadily changing environment in which foundations work. Schools, firms, and other distinctive foundations have seen noteworthy changes in the late years keeping in mind the end goal to adjust to the predominant evolving environment. Change is vital, yet it must be finished with incredible consideration to abstain from prompting undesirable outcomes. This paper concentrates on one of the late direction change which has been received by the NCAA. NCAA has embraced various changes in the most recent couple of years. One of these progressions which have been endorsed was the change of its guidelines to give meetings the ability to add more cash to grant offer giving schools a chance

In the essay “The Shame of College Sports,” Taylor Branch examines the flaws of the National Collegiate Athletic Association in college sports regarding “amateurism” (Branch 227) and the “student-athlete” (227). In doing so, Branch discusses the history of college sports and the National Collegiate Athletic Association while emphasizing certain regulations such as allowing multinational organizations to advertise their brand on athletic gear but athletes cannot use any of their memorabilia to get cash or a free tattoo at a tattoo parlor (227). Branch also argues that athletes are being manipulated for their skills and fame from the National Collegiate Athletic Association and universities and further irritates that they make money off the “unpaid

College athletic programs are among the most popular sporting events in America. With this rise in popularity, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its colleges have also seen a rise in revenue in recent years. In 2014, the NCAA made over 900 million dollars in revenue. Some collegiate coaches, such as Kentucky’s John Calipari, have yearly salaries in the millions, not counting incentives and endorsement deals. While, clearly, money is being made, NCAA regulations ban collegiate athletes from being paid. Many question this rule and argue that athletes at the college level earn and deserve pay for play. The debate to pay or not to pay college athletes rages on despite the latest court ruling supporting NCAA policies. Because colleges and universities earn such a profit from sporting events, many fans feel it is only fair to distribute some of the wealth to the players. Supporters of paying student athletes feel that these young men and women should be fairly compensated for the time demanded of the athletes and the stress put on the athletes, physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. Those in favor of paying college athletes contend that athletic and academic work ethic at both high school and collegiate levels will improve, as well as, fiscal responsibility in these young adults. The NCAA argues that paying athletes would negatively affect their

When it comes to football in the college league, many rules have been changed or new rules have been added to make the game safer for those that play it. The Targeting rule was added going into the 2008 NCAA season of college football for safety reasons. This rule has also introduced a new discussion of whether or not the rule is fair. The rule states that if a player strikes another player in an upward motion, striking with the crown [top] of the helmet, then it is a fifteen-yard penalty, and the player is disqualified from the game. This obviously causes controversy between officials and college football coaches. Many believe that the rule is too harsh and that many calls that are targeting, are not targeting after all. And that it is not fair to eject a player, if the player did not even deserve the call “There are other gripes with the targeting rule. Washington State coach Mike Leach called it ‘micromanaging, for lack of a better word,’ citing too many variables and inconsistent enforcement. Stanford coach David Shaw echoed a sentiment shared by Mora and Pickett: that there should be different levels of targeting penalties corresponding with the severity of the infraction” (qtd in Bolch). NCAA rules states that when the targeting rule is implied, then the officials will review the play, and give a final verdict. However, most of the time the call is not overturned and the player remains disqualified from the game. This new rule has also made it nearly

Although college football is the third-most-popular sport, the majority of schools lose revenue on athletics. The National Collegiate Athletic Association, also known as the NCAA, is promoting beneficial ideas to help players in need while increasing academic standards. As stated in the article, “On some LSU teams, Martin said, half of the players are “special admits””, which means multitudes of players do not achieve the same levels of academic success as “normal” students. As long as academic budgets are miniscule compared to athletic budgets, there will always be controversy. This tension increased when “legendary head coach” Joe Paterno, along with Jerry Sandusky, were fired for being involved in a sex-abuse scandal with a minor.

With the selections concluded, travel arrangements made and the "play-in" games in the books, the final 64 teams are ready to do battle for the NCAA Basketball Championship title. March Madness has become a rite of spring for basketball fans all over the world. In this year's field, every team has lost at least four games, showing the presence of parity throughout the brackets. As play gets underway on March 17, it will be the teams that will decide whose the best college basketball team in the country.

In The Cartel: Inside the Rise and Imminent fall of the NCAA, Taylor Branch is piecing together pieces of evidence and information about scandals that arose both the NCAA’s perspective as well as his own perspective to show contrast in the controversial findings within the NCAA concerning athletes and leadership. Throughout the entirety of the book, the picture that is being painted by Branch is that the NCAA as well as the institutions are reaping the benefits of intercollegiate athletics. While the "big men” are reaping the benefits of the skill and hard work of the college athletes. The information in Branch’s work not only presents the documents of scandals, but also presents his argument and proof for greed that is overtaking humanity, as well as athletics. The main focus is on the underlying theme of greed.

The role of college football negatively influenced the American culture between the 1890s and the 1930s. The players, coaches, universities and fans blew the game of college football way out of proportion. There was an enormous wave of investment for big stadiums in the 1920s, otherwise known as the Golden Age of sports. Many universities built large stadiums for their football program so they could be nationally recognized as a major academic institution and so they could also compete against the other well known universities during the time. Such as Ohio State, when they built Ohio Stadium in 1920s. Ohio State built Ohio Stadium so they could boost their national reputation and also so they could peer match Michigan’s stadium, also known as, “The Big House”.

The former Southeastern Conference Commissioner, Mike Slive, spoke to an audience in Graves Hall 118 at The University of Alabama on Thursday, Aug. 27. The lecture hall appeared to be filled with students aspiring to work within the business aspect of sports, current professors and possible sports journalists.

In this project, many different statistics were used to try and predict the winners of the NCAA March Madness tournament. To do this, statistics were tested from the previous year to see if they moderately correlated to winning games. When a stat is moderately correlated, that means it relates to winning. Using a scatter plot, a graph that gives a visual of whether or not a stat is correlated, correlation coefficients were found for each stat. The correlation coefficient is a decimal that shows if a set of numbers is moderately correlated. After finding stats that were the closest to being moderately correlated, a metric was put together that used the best stats to determine which teams will win games. The stat that was the closest to being moderately correlated was the turnover ratio of the teams. Another stat that was almost moderately correlated was RPI, or Rating Percentage Index. This stat uses a team’s win percentage, their opponents’ win percentage, and their opponents’ opponents’ win percentage to rank teams. Also, missed field goal percentage was a stat that was used.

As a nonprofit the NCAA is often not compared to large companies even it makes comparable revenue. All television and video game revenue, as well as ticket, jersey, and souvenir sales made from college athletics all go to the NCAA, the conferences, the athletic departments, and the coaches. In fact, one study suggests, “Men’s basketball and football combine for $6 billion alone” (Mondello, Piquero, Piquero, Gertz & Bratton, 2013). None of that revenue goes directly to the student athlete even though the NCAA surely has enough money to do so if it chooses. USA Today writer Bruce Horovitz states in his article, March Madness Evokes Marketer Madness that, “The NCAA men’s basketball tournament generated $1.15 billion in television ads in 2013, well beyond the revenue generated by the NFL and NBA playoffs, according to ESPN” (Horovitz, 2014). Marc Edelman, a professor at City University of New York takes it a bit farther in his article The Case for Paying College Athletes, and claims, “The college sports industry generates $11 billion in annual revenues. Fifty colleges report annual revenues that exceed $50 million. Meanwhile, five colleges report annual revenues that exceed $100 million” (Edelman, 2014). In contrast, during the 2014-2015 season the NBA grossed about $5.18 billion in revenues according to Forbes Magazine, which was a league record high. The NCAA revenue money is also not evenly distributed among the schools, as top tiered athletic programs tend to make more money

College basketball is one of the most popular college sports to attend and to watch. The evaluated college is compared to other Division 1 programs a smaller college. However, their basketball team is still very competitive and has appeared in eleven national tournaments, six of which have been at the NCAA tournament. Over the past decade the program has seen a lot of success but they have also battled many hardships.

While there are many concerns about sporting events such as March Madness causing disruptions for companies and reducing productivity; these events also boost morale and encourage communication. Besides March Madness, events such as political, sporting and community events can be disruptive to work at the office. Political events such as the presidential election can cause disruptions. During the last presidential election, the candidates Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton created meaningful discussions in the workplace. Because this election had such polarizing candidates, each side felt strongly against the opposite’s candidate. During the political and even after President Trump was elected, disruptions intervened productivity in the workplace.