We would like some feedback on what you guys thought of the march madness tournament. Please make sure to include what you liked/didn't like and how we can improve it for next year!
March Madness, like always, was a success, but like any other event, there are things that could be improved.
-The first day was super messy - I ran around campus for a bit and we started really late. Next time, we should make sure we have the keys to the ball cart. -Timed games can be exploited. If a team gets a small lead in the beginning, they can just stall the game out. I think games to 7 would be preferable. -Turn out was low, not only from the teams but also from the fans. I don't really know how to fix this problem, though. I think promo was fine. Maybe people just don't like basketball as much this year? -I heard a lot of complaints about the ball. PE balls are not very high quality, but we also don't have access to the basketball team's balls. It might be a good idea to ask if anyone in the Leadership class has good balls lying around.
I have to agree with Jimmy. March Madness is (judging from what I saw last year) a consistently successful event, and this year was no different, but I think a few things are important to note for next year.
Pros: - Anshul's energetic announcing!
- Annette's FB promo was good; it worked well for at least the first few days (I'll address promo later)
- A very fun event to watch (and to, I'm assuming, play in)
Cons: - Getting someone to a) open the doors on time and b) have the key to the basketballs is really important. I feel like getting the door open is always an issue for events in any sort of locked building, and it really discourages participation.
- I think promo could be improved; people showed up for the first day (perhaps to support their friends), but it wanted off after that. Posting on the FB group helped, but I think something unique and creative (like a large poster in the quad like last year) would help a lot.
- I half-agree with what Jimmy said; I actually think the time system is good, but I think a shot-clock should be implemented. If a team doesn't shoot in say, 20 seconds (shortened game), the other team should get the ball. In fact, I would even say that in a close game, a team should be allowed to "foul" the team in possession in order to make them shoot free throws and then get the ball back. Otherwise, a team will just waste time near the end of the game if they're ahead.
I just have a few things (everything else I had has already been said):
-Refereeing/score-keeping: I had a lot of fun score-keeping for the games on day 2! I know that my two teams basically facilitated themselves, so it wasn't needed for me to call any fouls. Out of curiosity, was I supposed to referee as well? -Teacher promotion: Mr. Dybdahl actually promoted the teacher v. students game by posting the "probability of teachers winning" on the whiteboard. I doubt this is something that we can enforce necessarily, but we could ask teachers who are playing/all teachers to promote it? Things to think about. -Maybe we can make the promotion of the team who faces the teachers like how we promoted Girls' Basketball for CCS with the a-frames on campus? That sort of hype, except our "enemy" is the staff
Pros: 1. The events ran fairly smoothly after the first day. 2. The players and teachers were really enthusiastic about the games. 3. The publicity efforts were well done.
Deltas: 1. There wasn't major support in the school for this event. From what I understand, there weren't enough teams, and the crowds were fairly small. However, I feel that publicity was done as we always do. Therefore, I would say that we need to re-innovate publicity tactics (rewards for winners, raffles for attendees) in general and re-evaluate the purpose of these events (how does a March Madness tournament align with ASB goals). 2. Leadership didn't support the event. There were barely any leadership kids there on any given day, and leadership students didn't even do the bare minimum publicity of liking the Facebook posts. 3. There wasn't any photography of the events. Maybe next time Athletics can work more heavily with Tech so that we can get pics/vids of the events to publicize them on FB for future years, or even during the week of the current year.
All in all, I would say that this is an event that a lot of people would miss if it was removed. However, its purpose needs to be re-evaluated considering the decrease in interest from last year to this year.
Everything I wanted to say was said above. These are some things I heard from different players. -they felt that the judges/commissioners were sometimes bias such as not calling obvious and inappropriate physical contact -the rule of only one varsity player allowed on court disregarding gender randomly popped out of nowhere, should have been notified earlier or discussed
I thought march madness was great overall but we should consider ways to improve attendance and interest like arnav said.
I would write a comment although everyone above said it all :( But I definitely heard the same things from players as "saki97" said and I basically agree with everything said above.
Pros: Everyone generally looked like they were having a fun time! :) Really well organized, couldn't have gone smoother
Suggestions: Try and get more spectators! More leadership support + maybe some more hype around the event? Idk like it'd be cool if each day leading up you posted a team and they could have like a quote or something
Pros: Well organized and teams were clearly released. Rules were fair and communicated.
Con's: organize basketballs ahead of time to reduce confusion Announce on the intercom right after lunch starts to remind people to come Raffle off items as an incentive Promo winners of each game a little more
Pros: -Organized and planned early -I kept score/reffed and it was easy and simple -Players had fun playing!
Cons: -participation in teams was low this year -audience participation was low until round robin -a little slow, a lot of down time before games actually started -games by time means players just stall = no fun
Suggestions: -To improve team participation maybe let signing up be free and the shirt is extra money like for spikefest i believe? -get pictures of the action! posting photos of students not only gets them excited but also shows off to students their skills -change from a timed game to a point based game
March Madness, like always, was a success, but like any other event, there are things that could be improved.
ReplyDelete-The first day was super messy - I ran around campus for a bit and we started really late. Next time, we should make sure we have the keys to the ball cart.
-Timed games can be exploited. If a team gets a small lead in the beginning, they can just stall the game out. I think games to 7 would be preferable.
-Turn out was low, not only from the teams but also from the fans. I don't really know how to fix this problem, though. I think promo was fine. Maybe people just don't like basketball as much this year?
-I heard a lot of complaints about the ball. PE balls are not very high quality, but we also don't have access to the basketball team's balls. It might be a good idea to ask if anyone in the Leadership class has good balls lying around.
I have to agree with Jimmy. March Madness is (judging from what I saw last year) a consistently successful event, and this year was no different, but I think a few things are important to note for next year.
ReplyDeletePros:
- Anshul's energetic announcing!
- Annette's FB promo was good; it worked well for at least the first few days (I'll address promo later)
- A very fun event to watch (and to, I'm assuming, play in)
Cons:
- Getting someone to a) open the doors on time and b) have the key to the basketballs is really important. I feel like getting the door open is always an issue for events in any sort of locked building, and it really discourages participation.
- I think promo could be improved; people showed up for the first day (perhaps to support their friends), but it wanted off after that. Posting on the FB group helped, but I think something unique and creative (like a large poster in the quad like last year) would help a lot.
- I half-agree with what Jimmy said; I actually think the time system is good, but I think a shot-clock should be implemented. If a team doesn't shoot in say, 20 seconds (shortened game), the other team should get the ball. In fact, I would even say that in a close game, a team should be allowed to "foul" the team in possession in order to make them shoot free throws and then get the ball back. Otherwise, a team will just waste time near the end of the game if they're ahead.
I just have a few things (everything else I had has already been said):
ReplyDelete-Refereeing/score-keeping: I had a lot of fun score-keeping for the games on day 2! I know that my two teams basically facilitated themselves, so it wasn't needed for me to call any fouls. Out of curiosity, was I supposed to referee as well?
-Teacher promotion: Mr. Dybdahl actually promoted the teacher v. students game by posting the "probability of teachers winning" on the whiteboard. I doubt this is something that we can enforce necessarily, but we could ask teachers who are playing/all teachers to promote it? Things to think about.
-Maybe we can make the promotion of the team who faces the teachers like how we promoted Girls' Basketball for CCS with the a-frames on campus? That sort of hype, except our "enemy" is the staff
Always an awesome event :)
Pros:
ReplyDelete1. The events ran fairly smoothly after the first day.
2. The players and teachers were really enthusiastic about the games.
3. The publicity efforts were well done.
Deltas:
1. There wasn't major support in the school for this event. From what I understand, there weren't enough teams, and the crowds were fairly small. However, I feel that publicity was done as we always do. Therefore, I would say that we need to re-innovate publicity tactics (rewards for winners, raffles for attendees) in general and re-evaluate the purpose of these events (how does a March Madness tournament align with ASB goals).
2. Leadership didn't support the event. There were barely any leadership kids there on any given day, and leadership students didn't even do the bare minimum publicity of liking the Facebook posts.
3. There wasn't any photography of the events. Maybe next time Athletics can work more heavily with Tech so that we can get pics/vids of the events to publicize them on FB for future years, or even during the week of the current year.
All in all, I would say that this is an event that a lot of people would miss if it was removed. However, its purpose needs to be re-evaluated considering the decrease in interest from last year to this year.
Everything I wanted to say was said above.
ReplyDeleteThese are some things I heard from different players.
-they felt that the judges/commissioners were sometimes bias such as not calling obvious and inappropriate physical contact
-the rule of only one varsity player allowed on court disregarding gender randomly popped out of nowhere, should have been notified earlier or discussed
I thought march madness was great overall but we should consider ways to improve attendance and interest like arnav said.
I would write a comment although everyone above said it all :( But I definitely heard the same things from players as "saki97" said and I basically agree with everything said above.
ReplyDeletePros: Everyone generally looked like they were having a fun time! :)
ReplyDeleteReally well organized, couldn't have gone smoother
Suggestions: Try and get more spectators!
More leadership support + maybe some more hype around the event? Idk like it'd be cool if each day leading up you posted a team and they could have like a quote or something
Pros: Well organized and teams were clearly released. Rules were fair and communicated.
ReplyDeleteCon's: organize basketballs ahead of time to reduce confusion
Announce on the intercom right after lunch starts to remind people to come
Raffle off items as an incentive
Promo winners of each game a little more
Great job, Athletics!!
Pros: Well organized, teams and rules were fair and well communicated
ReplyDeleteCons: I don't feel like any one knew about it and it wasn't as big of a deal as it has been in the past.
Sorry for the lack of feedback, I wasn't that involved.
Pros:
ReplyDelete-Organized and planned early
-I kept score/reffed and it was easy and simple
-Players had fun playing!
Cons:
-participation in teams was low this year
-audience participation was low until round robin
-a little slow, a lot of down time before games actually started
-games by time means players just stall = no fun
Suggestions:
-To improve team participation maybe let signing up be free and the shirt is extra money like for spikefest i believe?
-get pictures of the action! posting photos of students not only gets them excited but also shows off to students their skills
-change from a timed game to a point based game