Its my favorite week of the year....spring break combined with what should be national days off - the opening rounds of the NCAA Tournament on Thursday and Friday.

I'm sure many of you are researching heavily trying to put together your winning bracket.  Others are going to adopt a "Go By The Gut" approach.

Every year many sites sponsor a prize for the top bracket.  This year is different.  Quicken Loans, in conjunction with Warren Buffet, are offering a $1 billion prize (If you win, you can take $25 million a year for 40 years or a $500 million check right away) if you are able to put together a perfect bracket.  That means one has to pick all 32 opening round games correct, all Sweet 16 games, the Elite 8, the Final Four, and the championship game - 63 games in all.

Is Buffett taking a risk?

The odds of putting together a perfect bracket are 1:9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (9 quintillion to 1).  To win the $400 MegaMillions jackpot is just a mere 1 in about 258.9 million.

Most (if not all) brackets will be finished by 6 p.m. on Friday.

But, let's say the truly unlikely happens and one gets to the National Championship game with his/her perfect bracket intact?

Buffett says he isn't worried about individuals fixing the games. 

However, if $500 million was on the line:

1. How do you not hedge (i.e. if you pick MSU to win it all against Michigan) by placing a bet on Michigan just in case?  Would your mortgage your house?   What kind of loan could you possibly get to bet against your pick (just to be safe)?  1 million? 5 million? 10 million? More?
2. Would you offer every player on Michigan several million dollars to throw the game?

I'd like to see someone get to that point just to see what kind of scrutiny and pressure would be put on that result.

In 2001, five days after being hired at Notre Dame, George O'Leary resigned from the head coach position.  Why?  O'Leary stated he had played three years of college football and had a Master's Degree on his resume, but background checks showed it wasn't true.

Flash forward 11 years, and we have the case of former CEO of Yahoo Scott Thompson, who stepped down when it was learned he had made a false claim on his resume. Thompson claimed he received degrees in accounting and computer science from Stonehill College near Boston, but Yahoo's largest outside investor revealed earlier this month that the accounting degree was the only one he earned.

Now, we have an applicant running for one of the most important jobs in the world - President of the United States - who lied about his employment record.  In today's Boston Globe...

Romney has said he left Bain in 1999 to lead the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, ending his role in the company. But public Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed later by Bain Capital state he remained the firm’s “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president.”

Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney’s state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.

Given that O'Leary and Thompson could not retain their positions based on their resume transgressions, should Romney's fib eliminate him from consideration from the position? If a candidate lied on his resume as Romney appears to have done, would you hire him or her for your organization?  What separates Romney from O'Leary and/or Thompson?

What say you HR peeps?