Charles Barkley and Dick Vitale talk about Oklahomas selection for the NCAA tournament.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2018/03/11/charles-barkley-and-dick-vitale-rip-into-oklahomas-selection-for-ncaa-tournament/?utm_term=.fe92351665a8
Do you think that the NCAA took into account how much money a team would make when making decisions?
Should the NCAA be able to take this into account when making decisions?
If you think this is a problem how should it be fixed?
Money may have been a factor when choosing who was in and who was out. Trae Young is one of the top prospects for the NBA next year and would surely bring a lot of views to the game. I do believe Oklahoma was seeded a little to high and the OSU should have been in the tournament but Oklahoma was not undeserving of making March Madness. They managed to make a great game against URI bringing it to overtime. I think Oklahoma was involved because they would generate more viewers than OSU but OSU should still have made the tournament, just because Oklahoma is in doesn't mean OSU can't be. This problem is very difficult to fix because there is no proof it even is a problem. Oklahoma was still a good team that probably should be in the tournament so there is no real way to prove that this was about money.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that Oklahoma State should have been in the tournament along with Oklahoma. I think this because of their recent performances. In their last 10 games Oklahoma State went 6-4 and Oklahoma went 2-8. Not to mention Oklahoma State beat Oklahoma in the big 12 tournament. Even though Oklahoma was given a higher rank it should only have been fair to allow Oklahoma State into the march madness tournament due to their recent stats and their ability to beat top teams which Oklahoma has struggled to do recently.
ReplyDeleteThe NCAA above all things is a business and therefore should take into consideration what teams will generate the most money when choosing who gets a bid. I think the money Trae Young and Oklahoma stood to produce definitely played a factor in their selection because OSU was clearly a better team. In their last 10 games Oklahoma State went 6-4 and Oklahoma went 2-8 and Oklahoma State beat Oklahoma in the big 12 tournament. I think that the NCAA won't try and fix this problem because the one thing we know for sure about the NCAA is that they are very much motivated by money. However, there is no way to know that Oklahoma was chosen because of the money they stood to make and therefore it is very hard to prove that this is an issue.
ReplyDeleteI think that the NCAA selection committee for March Madness definitely took into account how much money they would make by including Oklahoma and how much money they would loose by not including Oklahoma. Oklahoma University is a Big 12 school with a huge fan base. This means that these fans are very likely to purchase more logo ware / merchandise and maybe even travel to the games. This in turn puts money directly into the pockets of the NCAA. In theory the selection committee should be impartial, but it is definitely not surprising that they would do something like this.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is not surprising that the NCAA would do anything they possibly can to make more money, I do not think that it should be allowed. College athletics should not be focused around making the most money, rather it should be about playing for the love of the sport. There is no clear cut solution to this problem because there are so many college teams and only a certain amount of slots in the tournament. This means that someone has to rank all the teams based on the difficulty of their schedule and then decide which teams are considered the best even if they may have a few more losses.
Not knowing much about college basketball or basketball in general and only watching the documentary on the NCAA which showed them in a bad light I would have to say that yes they did take into account the money situation. For what I know the NCAA loves money so why wouldn't they take it into account?
ReplyDeleteI think the NCAA should 100% not take money into account of who will face off in the tournament, it should be based off form and who are clearly the better team if they are going to keep the pick and choose factor of who gets into the tournament and who doesn't. I agree with what Dick Vitale is saying, how the tournament is supposed to reward success.
Do I think this is the right decision for the NCAA to do this? No and I think colleges should introduce something similar to the NFL or Champions League for example. Where you have a group stage, then knockouts, then semi finals and final. I think this would be a fix to the problem of picking and choosing.
Taking Oklahoma State's recent performance and comparing it against Oklahoma, I think it is unfair how the NCAA was only looking in teams depending on how much money they make. Based off of general knowledge and watching the documentary in class, it comes off as no surprise that the NCAA would pull this act.
ReplyDeleteI think what the NCAA was wrong, and that they should have considered putting Oklahoma State into the March Madness tournament. College sports is supposed to be about the love of the game, and shouldn't be revolved around who makes the most money. Looking at Oklahoma State's performance, they went 6-2 in their most recent games and they beat Oklahoma in the Big 12 tournament. Since Oklahoma State proved themselves capable of qualifying for March Madness, they should have been allowed in by the NCAA
In Oklahoma's situation, it seems obvious that the NCAA takes into account how much money a team would make when selecting teams for March Madness. The hype around Oklahoma, and more specifically Trae Young, brought in thousands of viewers that a 10 seed wouldn't usually bring in. The NCAA should take these things into consideration because at the end of the day, March Madness is all about viewership and making the games as hype as possible. The NCAA shouldn't do anything about it because this is how March Madness should be. March Madness is for entertainment and Oklahoma showed to be one of the most entertaining teams in all of college basketball.
ReplyDeleteThe NCAA most likely took into account how much money they would make when including Oklahoma. Since Oklahoma State was better than Oklahoma this season, the NCAA was probably motivated by business aspects when they made their decision. It is understandable why the NCAA would make a decision like this, however it isn’t exactly fair to the teams who are not included. It will be difficult to fix this issue as there is not much proof of the motives of the NCAA.
ReplyDeleteI think that money was definitely a factor of the NCAA’s decision of choosing Oklahoma and not Oklahoma State. Oklahoma State has done better in their recent games compared to Oklahoma’s 11 losses out of their last 15 games, so it would make sense for Oklahoma State to be chosen over Oklahoma. However, Oklahoma has Trae Young who is most likely going into the NBA next year and he brings in a lot of viewers and higher revenues for the NCAA. Oklahoma also has a huge fanbase and all of the fans’ purchases would bring more revenue into the NCAA. I think the NCAA should be able to take money into account of their decisions because it is a business that needs money to fund its programs and facilities. Although there are a lot of extra profits, I do not think that the NCAA will try to fix this problem. The NCAA has been making a lot of money throughout the years and I think it will stay on that track and try to make as many profits as it can.
ReplyDeleteMoney is a huge factor in the NCAA and the fact is that they are going to pick team that are going to make them more money in the tournament even if they don't really deserve it. On the other hand though some of these teams that may be better no one has ever heard of them so they won't do well with the public in the tournament. Someone like Trae Young though is a very good asset for the NCAA even though he carries his team through the tournament. Finally this is there tournament so they are going to do what they want and how they want to do it so if you don't like it then don't go to it or watch it.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that money was the biggest factor when the NCAA made the decision to include Oklahoma in the tournament. There were plenty of teams that were better and more deserving than Oklahoma, yet the NCAA decided to include them in the tournament. A prime example of a team that deserved to be in the tournament is USC. They made it into the PAC 12 title game, and although they lost, they were clearly a more proven team than Oklahoma. I'm sure that there are already plenty of solutions to this problem, but there is no way it is going to get fixed. The NCAA, in all its corruption and greediness, don't care about who deserves what. All they care about is money. So no matter how many solutions are proposed, none of them will be implemented.
ReplyDeleteI think the NCAA most definitely took their earning into account when picking the teams for the tournament. This year we have learned enough about the NCAA to know that they are corrupt and, even though they claim to be non-profit, base their decisions off of money. I think that they assumed that the bigger teams would draw more viewers to the tournament, even id they were less deserving of the spot than a lesser known team.
ReplyDeleteShould the NCAA be able to take this into account when making decisions?
I do not think that the NCAA should take this into account when making these decisions, given that they are a nonprofit organization, they should not be basing any of their decisions of money or profit. They should have a fair mindset and each team should be given an equal chance at the tournament. The amount of viewers and publicity should not be taken into account when choosing teams.
I think that this is a problem and that is is a tough fix. The NCAA has a strong grip on what they are doing and certainly are in control. However maybe if you make a streamline, equal way to choose teams, something based on statistics, that way personal need for the NCAA cannot be taken into account.
I do believe that the NCAA took into consideration what teams would bring in the most money. Many teams should have made it into the tournament but didn't. Cleary, the big schools, were going to bring in more money than these smaller mid-major schools. But at the end of the day, they are hosting the tournament, and it's their choice who plays in it. I was happy they put teams in such as OSU and Syracuse in the tourney. These schools have superstars who are fun to watch, and I much rather watch those teams than teams from schools nobody knows about. I think that the decision of what schools play in the tournament should be based on who is the most fun to watch. I want to watch big schools play other big schools because the games become exciting and very hyped up. These small schools don't have the experience that these big schools have, and I believe that if mid-Tennessee played over OSU, they would get trampled due to the lack of experience they have. Although this issue is unfair it's not going to be fixed, people want to watch the big names play, and if the people want it, the NCAA wants it.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that the Ncaa took in to account how much money they would make when they select which teams go to march madness. In the case of Oklahoma they had a top NBA prospect in Trae young, and people want to see him play ball.
ReplyDeleteEven though I do not think it is right, march madness is run by the ncaa, and with all of the power they have in college basketball it is their tournament, so they get to pick who comes and who doesn't. Oklahoma's pick was definitely because of the appeal of start Trae young; as Charles Barkley said, “how in the world can Oklahoma State be sitting home today, and Oklahoma in the tournament, when Oklahoma loses 11 of their last 15 games, they didn’t win one game in the year 2018 on the road, and on top of it, Oklahoma State beats them twice. Not once, twice.” If it were up to me I would make a system where teams that were top "x" seed in their league would come to march madness.
I think the big problem lies with all of the power that the ncaa have in college sports. They have no competition and their rules allow them to make stupendous amounts of money from athletes that they do not even have to pay a penny which we learned about in class.
The NCAA is known for it's covetous attributes and tendency to choose teams based on popularity over stats. They pick the teams with the players that rack in the views over the teams with no stars. Magnifying Oklahoma's situation in the tournament sheds light on the obvious star; Trae Young. Announcing his eligibility for the upcoming NBA draft in June, he's got quite the following. NCAA is in fact a franchise, and for sure took this into account when picking their teams.
ReplyDeletePersonally I feel as though it is not "fair" to Oklahoma State, for they beat Young and his team in the big 12 tournament. However, money and success doesn't come without strong decision and the ability to chose numbers over morality. Understanding this, it seems evident that the future of March Madness will continue to follow these patterns.
I think that the NCAA did take into account how much money they will make when deciding who will play in the tournament. The NCAA is a business and their main goal is money. They want to choose teams that people will want to see in order to get more views and make more money. If teams play that nobody cares about the tournament will not be as exciting and not as many people will want to watch it. I believe that the NCAA can do whatever they want because it is their tournament, but if its really about seeing what team is best, who plays should be based only on the statistics of the team. Overall, they are trying to entertain the viewers so it only makes sense to put teams in that the people want to see.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI think that it is extremely likely the NCAA took revenue into consideration when picking teams. The NCAA has a long history of greediness regarding the capital of their teams/players. Morally I dont think that the NCAA should take a teams revenue potential into consideration. Every team and player deserves a chance to win or least compete in the tournament. However, technically speaking the NCAA does own the tournament itself, and has created all the power that exists in college basketball. So being that the NCAA is the proprietary owner of all the teams it is really up to them who gets to play.
I think that if the NCAA really wanted to have a fair and/or exciting bracket they should not consider money as a factor, but ultimately it is up to the NCAA whether or not they want to make tons of money. I believe that they really shouldn't take money into account on what teams they think should be in the tournament, and for how to solve this problem is colleges need to deal with the corrupt NCAA. That's really the only way to deal with it.
ReplyDelete