Time-Out Feature: Q&A With NABC Executive Director Jim Haney

NABC Executive Director Jim Haney discussed current college basketball issues in the Fall 2016 edition of NABC Time-Out Magazine

The following interview with NABC Executive Director Jim Haney appears in the Fall 2016 edition of NABC Time-Out Magazine. To read the full Fall 2016 issue, click here.
As we begin the 2016-17 Academic Year, where does the issue of student-athlete time demands stand?
Haney: During the coming months, the NCAA and the Autonomy 5 conferences will be voting on student-athlete time demand recommendations that will obviously impact our men’s basketball student-athletes as well as coaches.  The initiative to study and recommend changes to student-athlete time demands emanates from the results of the NCAA Student-Athlete Advisory Committee survey circulated among DI student-athletes in all sports last summer.   There is a strong sense of urgency among institutional, conference and NCAA administrators that this matter is important and action needs to occur soon.  The NABC Board in January 2016 approved the formation of an Ad Hoc Group to study men’s basketball student-athletes’ time demands and make recommendations.  Those recommendations were shared with the DI head coaches during the NABC Convention in March.  The Group consisted of former coaches now serving as associate commissioners for DI conferences, men’s basketball student-athletes, NABC Board members Bo Ryan and Paul Hewitt and staff members from the NCAA and NABC.  Those recommendations were forwarded to the NCAA and Autonomy 5 conferences in April.  The feedback we have received from the NCAA is that the recommendations from the Ad Hoc Group were very helpful and appreciated!
 
There was another Ad Hoc Group that was formed to study and make recommendations to the Men’s Basketball Championship Committee.  What is the status of those recommendations?
Haney: First, let me underscore that the NABC Board of Directors and the Ad Hoc Group members have nothing but respect for the Men’s Basketball Committee and the challenges they have in selection of teams, seeding of teams and bracketing of the tournament.  At no time does anyone question the integrity of the members of the committee in carrying out their responsibilities. 
The NABC Board of Directors in May approved the formation of an Ad Hoc Group to make recommendations to the Basketball Committee regarding selection, seeding and bracketing.  The Group was comprised of representatives (four of whom were coaches) from each of the Autonomy 5 conferences, five coaches from conferences whose teams have consistently received multiple bids to the NCAA Championship and five coaches representing conferences who historically only receive the automatic qualifier.  In addition, Dan Guerrero, director of athletics at UCLA and former chair of the Basketball Committee, Doug Elgin, commissioner of the Missouri Valley Conference and member of the Basketball Committee, and Mike Slive, former commissioner of the SEC and chair of the Basketball Committee served on the Ad Hoc Group.  Mike Slive served as co-chair with me.  The Group met by conference calls and had one in-person meeting in New York City in late June. 
The Group forwarded 10 recommendations to the Men’s Basketball Committee.  The Basketball Committee met in mid-July.   They spent significant time reviewing the recommendations during a meeting that was already packed with agenda items.  The response to the Ad Hoc recommendations was very positive.  The Committee went to great lengths to reinforce their appreciation for recommendations.  Some they immediately approved including providing the number one seed in the championship the opportunity to choose its second and third round site as well as its regional site.  The balance of the recommendations is to be addressed by four Basketball Committee members and four Ad Hoc Group members with implementation taking place in 2018, if appropriate.   Bob Huggins, Mark Few, Ron Hunter and Phil Martelli will be representing the Ad Hoc Group and the NABC.  NABC staff will also participate in the discussions. 
 
Can you give us an example of the recommendations?
Haney: Among the recommendations was the use of a “composite” ranking to replace the RPI as the primary sorting tool during selection and seeding.   The Men’s Basketball Committee historically has used the RPI to identify what would be a top 50 win, a top 100 win, etc.  There are a number of rankings that now exist that have their own recipe for identifying the quality of a win.   The recommendation, similar to all the recommendations, was to respond to the ever changing environment including analytics.  Very simply, the question is: Is there a better way today?  The Ad Hoc Group believed that using more rankings and thereby creating a “composite” score to rank wins and losses was a better way today of sorting teams for selection and seeding.
 
We have heard recently about “free agency” coming to college basketball.  Will you share your thoughts on this matter?
Haney: Let’s start with the fact that men’s basketball already has a very high transfer rate.  Some are projecting as many as 700 men’s basketball players are transferring this year.  Any transfer from a DI program transferring to another DI program must sit a year in residence before becoming eligible per NCAA rules.  An undergraduate football player has filed a lawsuit challenging that NCAA rule that requires an undergraduate transfer to fulfill a one-year residence requirement at the institution he transfers to before he is eligible to compete.   My understanding at this time is the case will be heard early in 2017.  The NCAA is prepared to vigorously defend the present rule.  The term “free agency” is being applied to the potential recruiting landscape if the court rules in favor of the student-athlete.  The result would mean any student-athlete in men’s basketball or football that transfers would be immediately eligible.  One can envision student-athletes transferring in huge numbers looking for a better playing situation: more playing time, more television exposure, better role on the team, etc.  College coaches would be actively recruiting players competing on other teams during the collegiate basketball season.   The negative implications on team APR and graduation success could be monumental based on how many student-athletes transfer from your team in any give year.   The number of teams ineligible to compete in the NCAA Championship would be significant and the institutions not eligible could be equally significant. 
 
We hear the NBA may increase the salaries offered to D-League players.  What light can you shed on that topic?
Haney: We have heard that there are proponents of increasing the salaries for two or three members of D-League teams from the present $20,000 range to upwards of $100,000 per year.  The D-League already can take players out of high school.  The concern is that heretofore, the salary was so minimal, it was not attractive.  However, if a D-League team were to offer upwards of $100,000 that could definitely be a strong draw.  
 
How is the Benevolent Fund doing?
Haney: The program is still relatively young.  We have provided relief for 18 members thus far.  We are very excited about its impact on coaches in need of financial assistance.  We still face a challenge of making our coaches aware that the fund is there for them to draw on if they meet the criteria.  The challenges that our members in need face after losing a job or other circumstance that creates a financial hardship is heart breaking.  When we help, it is gratifying to know we are responding to their critical situation.  You only wish you could do more.  The NABC Board at its August meeting established a $300,000 fundraising goal for the next 12 months.  In addition, the board is looking for 100% participation by DI head and assistant coaches.  There is no required amount, just give!  $10 from an assistant coach is meaningful.