When the NCAA researched its image recently, those are the statements that came back from the general public. After almost a century of existence, the public knew that the NCAA equaled college sports, but it didn't believe college sports equaled the NCAA.

Most people think of the NCAA when they see the Men's and Women's Final Fours. Most people also think of the NCAA when they see a high-profile football or basketball player run afoul of the law, or when their favorite team is put on probation. Those same people struggle to associate 85 college sports championships other than the Men's and Women's Final Fours with the NCAA, or the hundreds of thousands of student-athletes at 1,000 member schools who integrate their intercollegiate sports participation with their educational pursuits and do so without incident.

While this certainly isn't the first time the NCAA has been confronted with an image challenge, it is the best chance the Association has had to do something about it. Nothing smacks of opportunity more than a $6 billion rights package that includes items such as the television contract, radio, Internet, marketing rights, championship publications, fan festivals and the multiple message platforms afforded by it. But it was the signal the NCAA received from the networks, not the money, that made the Association decide to put its game face on.

"After the bundled-rights agreement was signed over two years ago, television networks and corporate America essentially indicated they were going to define the NCAA if the NCAA didn't define itself," said Dennis Cryder, NCAA vice-president for branding, broadcasting and promotions. "They clearly said, 'NCAA, you need to start treating yourself as a major brand because that's what we bought and that's how we're going to market you.' "

The billion-dollar bank check was a billion-dollar reality check for the NCAA. Because of the big money involved, the network "investors" needed big returns. "In other words," Cryder said, "CBS, ESPN and corporate America expected the NCAA to invest in itself as a brand in order to maintain and enhance the value of the NCAA assets purchased by these 'investors.' They aren't paying $6 billion merely to be 'associated with' the NCAA, as was the case in sports marketing during the 1970s and 1980s."

Television already had created a one-dimensional NCAA image over time with the Men's Final Four, and more recently with the Women's Final Four, developing them into "super sub-brands" that almost transcended the NCAA itself. Beyond those championship events, though, the television networks had only a vague idea of other NCAA attributes.

But because television is about viewership, the networks were prepared to build the NCAA to an image of their liking. Cryder said that's when the NCAA went looking for its true brand identity. "If we had not stopped to define ourselves as a major brand," he said, "we could have been morphed into something that would have only helped sell TV viewership, selected products and nothing else."

The NCAA brand

Most people think of a logo when they think of a brand, but the NCAA wanted an identity more than a design. It wanted to build on and protect its assets, proclaim unique attributes that aligned the Association with its purpose, and develop an integrated communication and marketing approach that sent the messages in a unified voice. The NCAA brand -- more than a visual icon, more than a sound bite, more than even 87 championships and 360,000 student-athletes -- is the essence of what the NCAA stands for.

The NCAA went looking for those attributes through research. The statements at the beginning of this story indicated what the public thought the NCAA was, but the NCAA probed further. What did the public think the Association should be and could be? That research, combined with the NCAA's stated mission of integrating intercollegiate athletics participation with the educational experience, led to six unique attributes -- learning, balance, spirit, community, fair play and character -- that suggested the essence of the Association.

It may sound simple, but choosing and framing the right words makes a difference. Take the attribute "fair play," for example. Perhaps the most misunderstood function of the NCAA is the responsibility to enforce rules -- not only playing rules but also myriad recruiting and eligibility rules that make up the NCAA Manual. That enforcement role has been a disconnect for the public -- sometimes even the NCAA's own membership -- since the Association's early days. Yet, when people are asked if NCAA schools should "play fair," the answer is a resounding "yes."

"Once people understand why the Association, as a membership, imposes penalties on its members when they violate the notion of fair play, that becomes a reasonable paradigm for them to better understand," Cryder said.

That "ah-ha" alone might become the NCAA brand's biggest victory. The attribute of fair play has been at the heart of the Association since 1906, but it often has been mischaracterized or, more importantly, misunderstood.

"Right from the beginning, the NCAA had both a regulatory and advocacy role," said NCAA President Myles Brand. "The NCAA needs to be able to set and enforce rules as well as talk about the positive aspects of intercollegiate athletics. It's not that they are at odds; it's that they are two parts of a larger whole."

"What we're talking about here is promoting and clearly communicating the values that guide our key purpose," said Kent State University President Carol Cartwright, who chairs the NCAA Executive Committee. "You can still promote the attributes of fair play, character, learning, spirit and balance in an organization that has a mission to set rules and enforce them on behalf of its membership. It's not an either/or; it's an additional component that can and should be taken seriously."

The bundled-rights contract gives the NCAA its best platform ever to deliver those sorts of clear and focused brand messages.

"It's a $6 billion integrated sales strategy that opened our eyes to the real potential of viewing ourselves as a brand," Cryder said. "At the same time, we're not building an NCAA brand for six billion business reasons, so to speak, in order to meet the expectations of our 'investors.' We're building the brand to articulate the NCAA's stated principles and core purposes. We're defining the NCAA so others won't define us for their own purposes."

Moving the needle

Because the television-rights agreement is "bundled," the NCAA has access to more than just television to market itself as a brand. There are other media platforms, such as radio and print, strategic alliances with collegiate groups (NACDA, NACWAA, CoSIDA), coaches associations and other national groups like the National Youth Sports Corporation. The NCAA also has access to corporate America through the NCAA Corporate Champions Program. The Coca-Cola Company leads the way in that arena with an 11-year commitment to "championing" NCAA attributes.

The primary brand drivers, however, are the 87 NCAA championships and the multiple exposure opportunities made available through the CBS and ESPN agreements. Those national platforms remain the best way to promote the NCAA attributes and to tell the story of the NCAA student-athlete. The NCAA's attributes should be a common thread that weaves through television and radio programming, special events, corporate champion and partner activation, campus tours, fan festivals, Internet exposure, publications and championships. The possibilities to communicate and build the NCAA brand are endless.

Cryder said he wants to see the needle move by 2006, the NCAA's centennial year. How will he know the branding effort has made a difference? "When you ask the average fan about the attributes and whether that fan connects them with the NCAA," he said. "It might sound overly simplistic, but if they understand that college athletics is truly integrated with college, then we've moved the needle. If the word-association game with the NCAA is learning, character and fair play, instead of only Final Fours and enforcement, then we've successfully moved the needle."

"People don't understand how many institutions and student-athletes are performing according to the rules, living the values, doing the right things and graduating. That's why the branding initiative is so important," said Cartwright. "We have to believe that this will work because the alternative is not acceptable. And as long as we promote evidence-based principles (like academic reform), it's hard for people to argue with that."

"The brand says, 'Here's what the NCAA really is and we want everyone to know,' " said Bob Lawless, president of the University of Tulsa and former chair of the Executive Committee. "It's not saying, 'Well, people think we're bad and we want to convince them that we're good.' The whole thing thrives on the credibility of behavior according to our values and publicizing the good things.

"We have to spend a lot more time letting people know about the totality of the NCAA so that they understand that fair play and the penalties for not playing fair are necessary parts, but not necessarily what the Association is all about."