The Curious Case of Ohio State’s NCAA Appearance: Brand Recognition and Bias in Selection

While it may come as a surprise to some, the recent success of the Ohio State basketball team in securing an invitation to the NCAA tournament, despite losing 13 of their last 20 games and more recently, 4 out of their last 5, raises intriguing questions about the selection biases inherent in the system. This article delves into the dynamics and strategies behind these selections, focusing primarily on the power of brand recognition and institutional bias in the NCAA betting pools and marketing.

Big Money and Big Bias

In the world of college basketball, the stakes are not just academic but financial as well. CBS, the primary broadcast partner of the NCAA, shares contractual exclusivity with the NCAA, resulting in a significant revenue stream for larger institutions. Additionally, the inclusion of advertisements for major corporations like big insurance, Frito-Lay, and beer companies adds to the financial clout. This arrangement underscores the consumer-driven nature of the NCAA tournament, where the goal is to maximize viewership to justify the high costs associated with broadcasting and ticket sales.

For the average viewer, the allure of watching college basketball from well-known institutions like Ohio State or the University of Connecticut (UConn) is undeniable. Even a casual fan might recognize the names Jim Calhoun (UConn’s coach) or recall that Ohio State has historically been a powerhouse in basketball. This instant brand recognition ensures that many viewers will choose to watch the games featuring these big-name programs, rather than those from lesser-known institutions, even if the latter's teams might be more deserving based on recent form.

Brand Recognition: The Key to Success

The strength of brand recognition is a powerful marketing tool. In the case of Ohio State, the school's established reputation as a top-tier athletic program is a significant factor in its selection. Regardless of the team's performance during the season, the allure of the brand is enough to secure a spot in the tournament. Other factors contributing to this phenomenon include the rich history of the program, the presence of notable former players, and the widespread recognition of the coaching staff.

UConn’s inclusion in the tournament serves as another example. The team’s storied past and the memory of Jim Calhoun’s championship runs stimulate a sense of nostalgia and brand loyalty among viewers. Even when the current team struggles, the strong legacy and brand recognition ensure that they remain attractive to audiences.

The East Coast Bias and Big School Bias

In addition to brand recognition, there are other biases evident in the NCAA selection process. Notably, there is a consistent East Coast bias and a preference for bigger schools. This inclination towards teams from more prestigious institutions and geographically advantageous locations can further distort the fairness of the selection process.

The East Coast bias is particularly significant in the NCAA tournament, given the historical dominance of schools from this region. New England, in particular, tends to have a disproportionate number of teams selected, reflecting the significant exposure and financial impact of these institutions. Big universities like Ohio State, UConn, and others in the Big Ten and Pac-12 enjoy a similar advantage, as their programs have historically produced high-caliber teams and maintain strong regional recognition.

Ultimately, while the brand recognition and institutional bias in the NCAA selection process have their merits, they also raise concerns about the fairness and inclusivity of the tournament. The gap between deserving smaller schools and well-established big-name institutions highlights the need for a more balanced and equitable selection methodology.