Beyond the Brackets: The Real Winner Behind March Madness

It's about that time of year again, when sports fans agonize over busted brackets and untimely upsets.  The NCAA March Madness college basketball tournament is often considered the most exciting and unpredictable event in sports.  As a sports fan, its darn near impossible to avoid getting caught up in all the hype.  These athletes are playing their hearts out on the highest stage in collegiate basketball. On top of that, there is all the frenzy created by bracket predictions, especially with this year's billion-dollar bracket challenge held by Warren Buffet.  Even President Obama is getting in on the action!

President Barack Obama making his 2014 NCAA tournament predictions
Source: ESPN

From the excitement of the games, to the thrill of the brackets, the NCAA has audiences captivated and locked-in to the roller-coaster ride of March Madness.  It seems like everyone has their own tournament predictions, including Houston Texan's pro-bowl running back Arian Foster.

Ncaa will win. They'll get billions, players get a trophy.RT @mcorado33: @ArianFoster which team do you think will win the NCAA tournament?
— Arian Foster (@ArianFoster) March 19, 2014

Pause. Did Arian Foster really just say that? What a shot at the NCAA!  At a time when the regular sports fan thinks about the tournament in terms of just buckets and brackets, Foster takes a moment to consider perhaps the most important people involved in creating the March Madness experience: the athletes themselves.

For those unfamiliar with Arian Foster, he is truly an interesting and inspiring person to say the least. He studied philosophy and played football at the University of Tennessee, and now plays professionally for the Houston Texans.  Foster is not new to the spotlight when it comes to controversial statements.  This is not even his first jab at the NCAA.

Houston Texan's RB Arian Foster.  Source: ABC News

Foster made national headlines when he admitted to taking forms of compensation from the University of Tennessee during his time a collegiate athlete, which is in violation of NCAA regulations.  In a documentary titled "Schooled: The Price of College Sports," Foster says that financial hardships were a burden on himself, his football career, and his family.  He often had to choose between paying rent and buying food.  Foster even says he had to go days without meals while enduring the demanding schedule of a student-athlete.

"We had just won and I had a good game, 100 yards or whatever You go outside and there's hundreds of kids waiting for you. You're signing autographs, taking pictures, whatever. Then I walk back, and reality sets in. I go to my dorm room, open my fridge, and there's nothing in my fridge. Hold up, man. What just happened? Why don't I have anything to show for what I just did?" - Arian Foster

In a vacuum, this seems to me like a black-and-white ethical situation.  Workers who produce revenue for an organization should be compensated for their work.  On a more human level, a college student in dire need of assistance should able to accept a small helping hand without fear of criticism or scrutiny.  For some reason, however, when it comes to the NCAA, all bets are off the table, and its the athletes who suffer the consequences.

"Pay for Play" promotion.  Source: GoBankingRates.com

Foster's complaint seems reasonable to me: athletes should be compensated for the work they do.  However, the NCAA responds with the argument that these are not athletes, but rather students, who's first priority is receiving an education instead of a pay-check.  The term "student-athlete," in fact, was created by the NCAA to avoid worker's compensation laws, according to the former head of the NCAA Walter Byers.



The discussion of whether a college player is a student or an athlete, to me, seems rather vague and nebulous.  People can debate the definition of "student" and "athlete" all day.  Meanwhile, the NCAA continues to take in massive revenue, and athletes like Arian Foster are left to struggle with the rigor of collegiate sports on their own.  Finding the right label for these players does very little to help their situation.  Instead, lets simply focus on the facts surrounding the NCAA and March Madness:

• Thirty-second ads during this year’s championship game could reach $1.4 million, according to AdWeek. (source)
• Ad revenue for the N.C.A.A. men's college basketball tournament exceeded $1 billion last year -- topping the total revenue for the NFL postseason. (source)
• Officials expect over 100,000 people to travel from out of town to Atlanta, where the Final Four will be held, just to watch the games.  (source)
• Last year's title game between Louisville and Michigan drew 23.4 million TV viewers (source)

Floor of the NCAA March Madness tournament court.  Source: UrbanCusp.com

The point? The NCAA makes quite a bit of money on the March Madness tournament.  Last year's tournament revenue exceeded billions of dollars for the NCAA. These billions go into the pocket of the NCAA and their television and media affiliates.  Meanwhile, players are left to find their own way to eat and pay rent while having a litany of burdensome NCAA regulations on their shoulders.

As sports fans, most of us can agree that although organizations like the NCAA have value, they are not more important than the athletes themselves.  This is something readily accepted in professional sports, and in other professional businesses, but for some reason it creates controversy in the NCAA.  What is more appalling is that we are talking about college-age students; people who are not yet ready to provide for themselves and who are still growing up and maturing.  To not reach out and fulfill basic needs for these people is cruelly insensitive, and demonstrates how we have placed entertainment above humanity when it comes to sports.

Players at Florida Gulf Coast University celebrating
a tournament win.  Source: ESPN

That is the real message that needs to get across when it comes to discussing collegiate athlete compensation.  At the end of the day, we are talking about human beings that work as hard as anyone on the planet, but see little to no reward for their work.  Keep in mind, these are kids, playing in front of a national spotlight for our entertainment.  This core issue at the heart of this discussion should speak volumes about the NCAA's violations of basic rights.

These athletes that work tirelessly to achieve their dreams and goals.  They put in maximum effort on the court to the cheers and applause of the entire nation, but go home with nothing more than a trophy to show for it.  Players like Arian Foster are human beings first, and athletes second, and until sports fans can recognize and act on this, the NCAA will continue to be the only true winner come March every year.  

Controversial Calls: How the 2002 Playoffs Changed the NBA Forever

The hot-button issues in sports I write about tend to be controversial because there are differences in opinion, where conclusions may be gray and unclear. The topic I'm writing about today is very different, because it involves accusations against a pro-sports league of intentionally and deliberately cheating. Cue the dramatic music.

The National Basketball Association has become one of the biggest institutions in the sports and entertainment world. With all that public attention inevitably comes some rumors and misinformation, but perhaps none greater than the allegations made about the sixth game of the 2002 Western Conference Finals.

Former NBA Commissioner during 2002, David Stern.  Source: Style Magazine

Here's a quick recap of the allegations made against the NBA: The Los Angeles Lakers and Sacramento Kings were engaged in a best of seven playoff series, in which the winner would advance to the NBA Finals. The Kings had already won three games, so a win in game six would seal the victory for them. On the other hand, a Lakers win in game six would force the series to continue to a seventh game, which would create increased revenues for the NBA their media affiliates through more advertising and viewership. Many people believe that game six was rigged by the NBA in order to ensure a Lakers victory, and force a seventh game. This was allegedly done by the referees unfairly calling excessive fouls against the Kings down the final stretch of the game.

This video is a great recap of the event in question, and the reactions to the controversy by sports pundits.

Video titled "Recap of the Worst Officiating in NBA History" Source: Youtube

This wasn't just any average game; this was a big make-or-break playoff match. Plus, these weren't just average claims being made, as people were actually accusing the NBA organization of intentionally cheating to alter results. The Lakers won game 6 and game 7, and went on to play in the NBA Finals, where they would eventually win the NBA championship. The Sacramento Kings, on the other hand, never made it back that far in the playoffs, and their franchise currently flounders to stay afloat in their highly competitive conference.


It was almost like ESPN was airing soap operas with the amount of drama that ensued following this incident. Now, the details of what actually happened in game 6 have been debated back and forth a million times already over the last ten years, so I won't bore you with those. For any readers still looking for discussions on whether or not the game was truly rigged, there are a few good, qualified sources here, and here.

Laker's Kobe Bryant throws elbow against
Kings' Mike Bibby without being called for a foul.  Source: Round Ball Daily

What I want to discuss is the long-term effects that the game has had on both the franchises involved. This morning, I got the opportunity to have a brief chat with the former Vice President of Marketing and Brand Development for the Sacramento Kings, who also just happens to be one of my advertising professors at UT Austin. Professor Stephen Wille was involved with the Kings organization during the time of the controversial game, and it was part of his job to deal with the resulting blowback to the franchise. Getting his statements on the game in question really gave me another side to the story.

"Our mouths dropped open, and we couldn't believe it," was the first thing Wille said when I asked him about his reaction to the game. He was stunned because he believes the Kings played harder and with more skill during that game, yet somehow came up with the loss. It hurt worse because the loss was to the Lakers, who had been a long-time rival of the Kings, even at the front office level. According to Wille, the Lakers organization would not even return phone calls from the Kings during the playoff series.

Lakers' Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant celebrating their NBA Finals win.
Source: Comcast Sports Network

The Kings were a franchise that had never even had a 20-win season in the few years before they made their playoff run in 2002. Compared to the Lakers, who are a storied franchise with 16 NBA Finals championships, this was the biggest stage in franchise history for the Kings. The Kings knew this, Stephen Wille knew this, and the entire city of Sacramento knew this. 




Kings fans are often considered some of the loudest fans in pro-sports, and Wille recalls the atmosphere of game six as being electrified by the fan excitement. As the game and the referee's calls took a turn for the worse, the fans grew even more frenzied. Suddenly, the whole building was in an uproar as the referees continued to make perceivably egregious foul calls. Within a few minutes, the fourth quarter ended, and the Lakers stunned the arena by coming out with the win.


This was Wille's account of the game in question, and this is how many Kings' and NBA fans will remember the game as well. The Lakers went on to win that years NBA Finals, and Lakers' superstars Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant secured their place in history on their way to a three-peat NBA championship performance. For the Kings, however, nothing would ever be the same. The team was never able to capture that level of success again. The excitement and buzz around this young, on-the-rise franchise began to die down. The Sacramento Kings had the prize right before their eyes, but because they were unable to secure the victory, the team has faced a tumultuous few years following the controversial game.

Kings' players Mike Bibby, Chris Webber, and Vlade Divac (left to right)
Source: Angel Fire

In 2014, the Kings currently clock in amongst the bottom three teams in its conference. They have not made significant playoff noise in the last decade. The only time the Kings have gotten as much media attention as they did in 2002 was last year, when owners were forced to discuss closing down the franchise and moving the team to Seattle. This is the state of the Kings franchise now, and it hurts many to think about what may have happened had they beaten the Lakers in 2002. Maybe they would have gone on to win it all, and secured their place in history and the hearts and minds of sports fans. Maybe the success would have been enough to attract star talent around the NBA to come play in Sacramento, and maybe the team wouldn't be in the dismal state it is in today.

Despite having young talent such as Ben McLemore, pictured in the NBA dunk contest,
the Kings find themselves in another disappointing season.  Source: Twitter, @MySportsLegio

That's pretty much all we can do, consider the "maybe's" and "what if's" involved, but the reality of the situation is the Kings did not get the win in game six. Whether it was the result of an unfair covert campaign by the NBA, or simply a coincidental bad night for the the referees, what happened in that game forever changed the future of the Sacramento Kings organization.


As fans, we often get caught up in the hype of the game. When we turn the TV off, or leave the stadium, the game ends for us, and we go on with our lives. The Kings wish they had that luxury, but when they walked off the court on May 31, 2002, they knew their organization would never be the same. The people involved, such as Stephen Wille, knew that there was an opportunity snatched from their grasp. This incident happened over ten years ago, but it still affects the Kings organization today, and this is a side of sports that many fans don't ever really stop to consider. Some moments in sports make for great stories and ESPN features; others can haunt an entire organization for years to come.

Trash Talk Troubles: The Richard Sherman Story

Life just feels a little empty when football season ends.  The 2013-14 NFL season ended with the Seattle Seahawks winning the Superbowl, but it was their star corner Richard Sherman who stole the headlines.  Sherman became an overnight celebrity thanks to an infamous post-game interview he gave after the Seahawks clinched the NFC title game against the San Francisco 49ers.  

 Sherman's controversial interview after the NFC Championship game 

against the San Francisco 49ers on Jan. 22, 2014 (Courtesy of Youtube, Fox Sports). 

This incident is nothing new in the life of Richard Sherman.  Fans who have kept up with with the all-pro defender know that this rant on national TV was just Sherman up to his usual trash-talking antics.  Most fans also know that Richard Sherman is more than capable of backing up his trash-talk with his stellar play on the football field.  Even the recent controversial post-game interview came just moments after Sherman deflected San Francisco's final pass intended for receiver Michael Crabtree, which sealed the victory for the Seahawks.  

 Sherman (right) deflecting the game-winning pass intended for
WR Michael Crabtree in the NFC Championship game
on Jan. 22, 2014.  (Photo: Wall Street Journal)

Sherman was immediately met with criticism for his trash-talking rant.  Commentators said that Sherman's actions reflected the worst aspects of the sport and showed a blatant disregard for sportsmanship.   Sherman's behavior was blasted for being a poor representative of competitive conduct in professional sports, and he quickly became a villain in the eyes of many observers.

I personally do not understand all the uproar about Sherman's incident.  This is not the first time an athlete has trash-talked an opponent in front of a national audience; it's not even the first time Richard Sherman has done so.  Great athletes throughout history are not only known for their trash-talk and competitive spirit; they are also praised for it.  

Clips of Muhammed Ali's greatest trash talking moments

One of the most celebrated professional trash-talkers of all time is none other than Muhammed Ali, arguably the greatest boxer and one of the most iconic athletes of all time.  Ali was known for often engaging in colorful wordplay and trash-talk before fights.  He would poke fun at his opponents and applaud himself as being significantly more talented than any of his competitors.  Trash-talking was a big part of Muhammed Ali's persona as a professional athlete.  Fans loved to hear Ali hype up his upcoming matches and confidently declare himself to be the greatest fighter alive.  It is a big part of why Ali is still remembered as a legendary fighter today.  

"Im ready to back up everything I'm saying.  I'm through talking"

- Muhammed Ali

I think the quote above is crucial. This is what sets apart distasteful and rude commentary from competitive trash-talk in a professional setting.  Muhammed Ali was fantastic with his words and comments, but he was even better as a competitor in the ring.  He wouldn't mention a competitor by name unless they he truly wanted to compete against them.  For Ali, trash-talk was simply a way to help him fuel and augment professional competition, and not a way to berate or humiliate opponents.  Sports commentators at the time had no problem with this; they heralded Ali as a legendary competitor, both for his words and for the actions that backed them up.  

Ali standing above boxer Sonny Liston after a first-round
knockout in a 1965 fight.  (Photo: Monroe Gallery)

So what makes Muhammed Ali any different from Richard Sherman when it comes to trash-talk?  I'm personally unsure, and do not see any reason the two should be evaluated differently.  Ali would get in front of national audiences throughout his career and make inflammatory comments to help fuel the competition he engaged in.  His comments were loud, colorful, and borderline hurtful, but it was clear that the context in which Ali trash-talked was professional, and not personal.  It was also clear that Ali was more than capable of defending his words, and that earned him respect and adoration within his sport.   Muhammed Ali was not a villain, rather he was a fierce competitor. His drive to win was reflected in his words, and demonstrated in his actions.

Sherman surrounded by reporters on Superbowl XLVIII
media day, Jan. 28 2014 (Photo: Mashable)

Everything I described about Muhammad Ali can be said of Richard Sherman.  Yes, he gets loud and sounds angry when he speaks.  Sure, he trash-talks his opponents significantly more than the average NFL player.  That doesn't mean Sherman is a villain, nor is he looking to attack someone on a personal level.  Ali used to call his opponents "bums", "tramps", and "ugly" before he fought them.  All Sherman said was that he was "the best corner in the game" and that Michael Crabtree was "a mediocre receiver".  Those comments were backed up by Sherman's performance on the field.

It is sad that Sherman's game against the 49ers will be remembered for a few seconds of colorful interview airtime, as opposed to his incredible, game-winning play against Crabtree.  Commentators may be calling him a villain, but I believe by the time his career is over, Richard Sherman will be remembered as "the best corner in the game", not only because he declared himself so, but because he earned the accolade through his hard work, talent, and competitive drive on the field.