March Madness: A Textbook Lesson In Branding (Part 2)

The NCAA’s March Madness marketing machine is through Rounds 1 and 2 and down to the the Sweet 16. As I mentioned in Part 1 of this post, this event is a classic study in branding. Branding connects with people on an emotional level, and anytime you have grown people yelling at their television sets, you know an emotional connection has been made. The television is not an interactive medium. It will not answer your plea for “What in the hell was he thinking?” or “How could he miss that?” You have been absorbed into the illusion and transported to courtside where your shouts of encouragement or disdain will no doubt be heard.

This 20-day event is a carefully crafted, cresendo-building piece of coordinated marketing perfection. At news sources all over the country today, you will see information about the Sweet 16 high on the list of lead stories. Midweek will be filled with news about who will challenge and who will prevail in next weekend’s rounds. It won’t just be the regular sources of news carrying the story, either. Bloggers and other consumer generated media will carry the message forward in record numbers. As of this morning, Technorati, the blog search engine, counted 39,965 blog posts containing “March Madness” including this one.

Television, radio, newspaper, magazines and the Web will be saturated with stories in the days ahead about what will be and what could have been. Similar to cult brands in the product world, this event has achieved cult brand status in the sporting event world. It is a branded spectacle that helps people—good or bad—define who they are and what they like. In that regard, the March Madness basketball tournament probably takes its proper place at the table along with the SuperBowl and the World Series.

This is the NCAA’s moment to shine. If you look at some of the financial reports from the NCAA, you’ll see the importance of Division I sports and the importance of this basketball tournament. A pie chart illustrates the relative size of budgets for Divisions I, II, and III. Also, if you download and examine the Division I Championship Financial Analysis, you’ll see that only five out of the 36 total men’s and women’s sports championships create positive cash flow for the NCAA, and there is nothing remotely close on that list to the success of this March Madness NCAA tournament.

The drama will continue for two more weeks. As a marketer, I will marvel as the promotional juggernaut builds March Madness to what I am sure will be another successful conclusion on April 3. Do your part to build the brand and fill in the blanks.

Found in General • Media • Society • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink http://www.sundog.net/index.php/sunblog/entry/march-madness-a-textbook-lesson-in-branding-part-2/

Comments

wrote on Mar 24, 2006 at 12:41 AM

let’s play indian-talking-stick here and make sure I understand this one clearly…

So, all I have to do in order to “build a strong brand” is to bring together roughly 768 of the most athletic, talented, and gifted athletes between the ages of 17 and 21 who play one of the most beloved sports invented at the most exciting level, and who do so out of pure heart, desire, passion—the purest example of pure love of the game…

Then I’ll mix in some hall-of-famer coaches, some of the greatest, most legendary leaders ever to grace any court, playing field, or competitive environment (sport or otherwise)… who dedicate their entire lives to inspiring the aforementioned 17 to 21-year olds.

Ok, now that we’ve aggregated the proper “mix” of people, let’s pit them against each other in the ultimate clash of titans… cram 64 teams and 63 games (er 65 and 64 if you count the play-in) into a single elimination “win or go home” tournament.

Just for good measure, throw in some historical performances, extreme personalities, maybe even a young fella who broke every ACC scoring-related record in the books, some overtime games, some double-OT games, and plenty of buzzer-beaters and, oh ya, some 1-up-ya-"oh, you thought it was over?” buzzer-beater-beaters too…

That should probably just about do it. But to ensure we push it over the top, don’t forget to include some memorable upsets, heartbreakers and the occasional “cinderella” team.

There—whaddaya know, a great brand.

Labeling March Madness a ‘classic study in branding’ is an insult to the event and the sport.

and… you’ve got your causality mixed up… The tremendous excitement surrounding this event does not exist because of all the marketing and media hype… the marketing and media hype exist because of the tremendous excitement native to the event itself.

wrote on Mar 24, 2006 at 02:59 AM

Hoopz,
Well, we agree on one thing and that is the causality: March Madness is not a classic study in branding because of all the hype. The authenticity of the event is what has allowed that brand to grow. The marketing “hype” you refer to is because of that authenticity and the drama surrounding exciting teams and talented players in a win-or-miss-the-final-dance format.

I disagree that calling it good branding is an insult to the event. On the contrary, I think it is a tribute to the event. The lesson of branding isn’t about starting with good advertising and media attention. If you have a good product and give people what they want your brand should grow. No amount of marketing will help if you don’t start with those two basics. I don’t think that is a difficult concept to grasp. I also think it is the reason that March Madness has grown into big event that it is.

I’m passing the stick back to you…

Greg

wrote on Mar 25, 2006 at 10:29 AM

Mr Ness - Your second sentence from your lead blog is 100% contradictory to your comment in the opening statements from your reply.

Isn’t the purpose of a blog to hold your ground, and not buckle under the pressure when someone disagrees with you, no matter how strongly?

Get back up on your horse and take him on - instead of running away with your skirt up.

I like seeing cat fights between men.

wrote on Mar 26, 2006 at 11:15 AM

I actually wasn’t going to “feed the fire”, but I have a feeling Mr.Ness would like to say a little more, and I am holding the stick. (note to self, when commenting on blogs in the middle of the night after watching a couple high-intensity ball games, leave the talking stick in the toolbox)…

2 things first…

1) Please, let’s NOT discuss the merit and purpose of blogs! Jennifer, if what you meant was to describe the purpose of debate, I still do not believe you have it correct… effective debates shouldn’t aim for ending in irreconcilable differences (a commonly held misconception). Debates (especially talking-stick debates) should be used for finding common ground. It’s a shame more people don’t understand that too… because it’s the root of so much political divisiveness. In fact, I was just thinking I should send my talking stick to capitol hill. Also, your gender assumptions are hereby forgiven. But I digress…

2) Good one Floppy… folks like yourself add real value to otherwise boring, empty debates. 689,317 people in 2005 cared enough to attend the ballgames. I’m far too lazy to look up television or on-demand webcast ratings, but I think I heard CBS game nights commonly draw audiences in excess of 10 million viewers. Millions of fans drawn in by outstanding competition guaranteed, not because CBS and the NCAA call it “march madness”, by the way ;) ... Again, thanks for taking the time to make your point heard.

Greg—It appears that we agree on the source of all the tremendous excitement… purity of sport and authentic, emotional competition.

But I still cringe at your labeling any of that a “marketing machine”, or even a brand. To me, calling it a classic study in branding implies that it’s ingredients and resulting “cult-like” popularity can be somehow recreated and re-applied. If this is the case, why doesn’t the NCAA simply make the women’s tournament equally popular?

This fan isn’t likely to swallow the march madness marketing pill. If you want to study the plethora of brands nearly synonymous with NCAA men’s basketball, I’m fine with that. CBS makes me think of men’s college hoops in march. Coach K and Chevrolet show up every year to leave their impression. I buy souvenirs (but not Chevy’s). But I beg you, please keep your ad-speak out of the purity of my beloved competition! Do not dilute the value of the sport that is NCAA men’s hoops with an indulgence in advertising like the football game that some people forget occurs on Superbowl sunday! People who despise football still watch the superbowl. Only we fans and competition-lovers watch college hoops.

I might be biased. OK I admit, I am biased. Contrary to my own advice, I tend to stereotype marketers and advertisers as being self-indulgent. No denying, this is *part* of my instinct to repulse at any claims of credit to world of marketing for the success of this sport.

Therefore, I hereby disqualify myself from further discussion, and I hereby forfeit the stick to whoever wants it.

wrote on Mar 26, 2006 at 01:44 PM

Jennifer,

I don’t get what you see as contradictory, but maybe my reply to Hoopz will help.

As far as “hold your ground” and “not buckle under pressure” I think Hoopz and I do disagree on some things.

However, I do agree with him on the nature of blogs and his “talking stick” analogy was interesting and useful. Blogs are far more interesting if they are used as a conversational tool rather than a manifesto. There wouldn’t be much use for comment boxes if all blog authors did was tell everybody who disagreed with them to “go to hell.” And, by the way, thanks for joining the conversation.
Greg

wrote on Mar 26, 2006 at 02:16 PM

Hoopz,
Thanks for passing the stick. I think part of what makes you “cringe” is the difference between the old and new eras of marketing.

The old era of marketing (still practiced by most practitioners) relies on a lot of hype and trying to manipulate people. I believe the old era of marketing is doomed...partly because of consumer generated conversations (blogs) like the one we are having.

Great books such as “All Marketers Are Liars” from Seth Godin (http://sethgodin.typepad.com) represent the new era of marketing. New marketing relies on an authentic products and “storytelling” to get the word out on the product. That is part of what I mean when I talk about the “marketing machine.” Millions and millions of people are viewing this event and talking about it with their friends. This is word-of-mouth advertising at its best and that is the best, most effective marketing that can be generated. Of course the traditional news media is also doing its part.

A brand is nothing more than a product/service/event that represents a “promise” to that person. March Madness has a strong brand image because it does represent a promise. And, it couldn’t do that if it was just hype. Like all good brands it has built its brand image over time by providing great excitement and entertainment year after year.

I empathize with your reluctance to associate marketing with an event you love. Much about the old world of marketing is worthy of your scorn. However, people who will succeed in marketing in the future realize that as Doc Searls (http://doc.weblogs.com) says, “markets are conversations.” Blogs, by their very nature, are an integral part of that conversation.

Lastly, when you see the importance of this event to the NCAA budget, don’t think for a minute that they aren’t going to do everything in their power to leverage all the “conversation” already going on. There is serious marketing going on for this event. However, because the event is already such a great “product”, the marketer’s job is eminently easier. Thanks for your input Hoopz...it’s been interesting. Greg

wrote on Mar 26, 2006 at 10:32 PM

I know, I said I was done. I do need to work on my self-restraint. I’m certain this one is going to get me into a lot of trouble too. I tried to tell myself “don’t do it, don’t post"…

Ah hek…

For relative brevity, I’ll not comment on the fourth estate.

If “old era marketing” is dying, and if the “new era” is about humbling the hype, muting the propaganda, embracing the authentic… then I don’t know, that doesn’t seem so bad after all.

In fact, it reminds me of a favorite story containing the same lesson told on film more than a decade before Mr. Godin published his book.

But I could also maintain that it seems a bit like a desperate attempt to latch onto something wildly successful and turn it into a “classic study in new era marketing” (a little oxy-moron-ish, isn’t it?). Almost as if those who practice in the discipline of marketing (another oxy-moron?) are saying “whoa, the way we used to sell not only isn’t working very well, sometimes it backfires. we need to associate ourselves with something authentic and popular quick, or we might get repurposed.”

So far, I think… we’ve been trying to answer the question… what is [new] marketing? Maybe we should just ask… What isn’t marketing?

Where is the line drawn? Are there celestial boundaries? With the direction and claims insofar, I could expect that next you are going to tell me that new age marketing practitioners the world over should be patting each other on the back for the tremendous popularity and marvelous market penetration of world religions. I mean, who can deny the timeless brand recognition of The Bible, or The Koran, or the [insert divine institutional scripture here]. Jesus and Mohammed and [insert divine entity representation here] were marketing machines. A classic study in branding indeed! I guess I was wrong… Marketing truly is a profession of divinity after all. Someone give Christ an Addy! (Disclosure: I am a person of strong faith meaning no offense to anyone or any religion, please forgive me).

OK, we already know I bring a skeptical bias toward marketing (rooted in legacy, as Greg kindly helped clarify) - a strange irony playing the devil’s advocate on this one. But can we step off our marketing holy horses occasionally and just let natural human interest run its course without pasting ad-speak all over it? If even just until April the 4th? It’s all I ask.

I’m not a complete pessimist, either. Marketing can be cool, sometimes. And adaptation is a completely necessary and respectable business endeavor. And if I think about this for too much longer, I might actually go re-read the Good Book for ideas on how to promote my next whatever.

I smell smoke....... Uh Oh… now the stick is burning. And look, it started that talking bush on fire. A sure sign I’ve taken this too far.