Menu
In-Depth

7 questions for 7 athletic directors

Athletic directors discuss the state of college basketball and how the sport can boost its stat sheet

A Sports Illustrated headline recently screamed that college basketball needs an “Extreme Makeover.” The coach at Iona complained in the New York Times that the “product stinks.” Attendance has dropped seven straight seasons and the last few minutes of a game now take half an hour to play. As the country drops in for its annual celebration of March Madness, many of those deeply associated with college basketball worry more about its ailments and what can be done to fix them. With that in mind, SportsBusiness Journal asked a panel of seven athletic directors to give their State of the Game with these seven questions.

Aside from the one-and-done issue, what is the largest overall issue facing men’s college basketball today?

GREG BYRNE, ARIZONA: The movement of kids, the number of transfers, has really had an effect on the game. You’ll get kids in the program that truly have been led to believe they have an opportunity to go to the NBA early.
And if they don’t have that kind of success, then they think they need to go someplace else to highlight their skills better. There are only so many kids who get drafted, and there’s only so many first-team, all-conference players. A coach has to balance the chemistry and there are all kinds of influences that affect a team from outside. All of the instability that comes with transfers is a major issue.

JIM SCHAUS, OHIO UNIVERSITY: We had a coaching change, and what happens is schools put feelers out to kids and parents when a coach leaves, even kids that have signed already. We had a coaching change and we lost all four recruits — the whole class. The transfer dynamic, overall, is very concerning. It’s an epidemic. If you’re not happy for any reason, your immediate reaction is to bolt.

{podcast}

SBJ Podcast:
Michael Smith and editor Tom Stinson discuss some of the topics from the AD panel, what surprised them and what could be interesting in the future.


BOB DRISCOLL, PROVIDENCE: The issues are largely resource-driven. Will we have the resources necessary to keep pace with the schools in the power five conferences? It takes resources to build buildings and pay coaches, and those escalating costs are a real challenge. There’s so much uncertainty surrounding these lawsuits and the O’Bannon case — that’s what keeps me awake at night.

TROY DANNEN, NORTHERN IOWA: It’s the new governance model. All of this autonomy was done with

football in mind. Once that’s addressed, you look at basketball and wonder what the effect will be. A lot of us at our level are very worried about how autonomy will play out, especially in terms of access to championships. We all worry about postseason access. We’ve lost a lot of control over our own destiny.

LYNN HICKEY, TEXAS-SAN ANTONIO: The concern that keeps coming up is the transfer issue. It’s how it’s applied — there’s just not a lot of consistency. It’s too lenient. I understand we’re trying to help the kids, but there are a lot of transfers that are allowed to play immediately and that can hurt the programs they left. Those transfers, from the numbers I’ve seen, are not graduating at a real high rate. That needs to be addressed.

CRAIG LITTLEPAGE, VIRGINIA: The transfers — the number of transfers and the frequency. It does create a major issue for the betterment of the game. It affects the ability to establish expectations and build a program. Some young men come in before they play their first game talking about staying a year or two years. That’s not good for the game when they’re leaving over minutes or not getting enough shots or the team is not as good as they thought it would be. It’s disruptive to the game and it’s disruptive to building any kind of identity for the team.

JOE CASTIGLIONE, OKLAHOMA: To me, it’s a matter of sustainability for the sport and the impact it has on the revenue generated for the department. When you look at attendance on the decline, we’ve got to make sure we’re focused on the elements that keep the interests of the fans.

What do you think of making basketball a one-semester sport, starting in mid-December and ending later in April or May?

SCHAUS: I like the current time frame. It’s called March Madness for a reason, and that’s what college basketball is. It uniquely fits before the Major League Baseball season and the NBA playoffs. It’s a great window to showcase college basketball.

LITTLEPAGE: That idea was floated a number of years ago by the elders of the game — Dave Gavitt, C.M. Newton. They talked about it for many years. It would allow a more natural beginning to the season when it wouldn’t be overshadowed by football. I like the idea of that kind of separation between basketball and football, but you bump into other issues, like the Masters. I would like to hear more discussion about it and whether a schedule could be worked out.

BYRNE: The time frames for all sports are being discussed. I don’t know that I have a strong opinion. I’m willing to listen, but I don’t know that it’s necessary.

CASTIGLIONE: As a member of the [NCAA] men’s basketball committee, this is something we’ve talked about a

ADs are split on the idea of tipping off the hoops season later.
Photo by: Getty Images
lot. To get to that point, we’d have to accept some significant changes. Right now, we play a lot of tournament games in NBA arenas, and they probably couldn’t save the dates in April or May because of the NBA playoffs. But when you look at the length of the seasons, I think I would be in favor of a change.

DANNEN: I’m still not sure what the rationale is. You cannot make an academic rationale with it. If you move to one semester, you run the postseason into final exams.

HICKEY: In one sense, I like the idea of getting through football season before you start basketball. Nobody in Texas is paying attention to basketball until after the bowl season anyway. But you hit too many obstacles. We’ve built so much into March Madness and to lose all of that excitement would be a tremendous loss. Because of that, I’m not a proponent of stacking basketball into one semester.

DRISCOLL: I understand the logic behind the idea because of the time commitment required of student athletes, but I’m not in favor of it. You’d probably be looking to play the same number of games in possibly a shorter period of time. I don’t think that’s the solution.

Should the NCAA men’s basketball committee consider some form of in-season or weekly ranking similar to the College Football Playoff?

DANNEN: No way. Any moment-in-time snapshot is going to be misleading. Look at what happened with TCU in football. They won a game by 50 points and dropped from third to sixth. I don’t think that makes the process any more or less transparent. Bracketology itself has become its own cottage industry.

HICKEY: There are significant differences in both football and basketball championships. There’s a larger number of teams, you’ve got all of the at-large berths, the number of games … I don’t see how you’d do it like football. I think people like the buildup to Selection Sunday.

DRISCOLL: I think it’s a great idea, and it’d be great for college basketball, the same way it generated a great buzz for college football. I know it’s more complicated in basketball, but it’d be interesting. Take our team last year, I thought we were in, but it turned out that we had to win our conference tournament to get in. It would be nice to know where you stand. I think that kind of open discussion would be good. I think people don’t pay a lot of attention to college basketball until football season is over. This might keep it on the front pages.

BYRNE: Yes, I like that a lot. It allows for more transparency. I’d release the teams around halfway through the season. I think you’re going to garner more interest in the game, especially from all of the debate that would come from that. It would generate a lot of watercooler conversation.

SCHAUS: There’s certainly some fan appeal to it, but you have a lot more teams to manage in basketball. There are so many more working parts and the landscape changes so much and so often.

CASTIGLIONE: I would not be in favor of a weekly release of the seed list or projections for how a tournament would begin. I remain open-minded to a look-in, if you will, at a midpoint of the season, knowing that whatever gets released by the committee is purely informational and not connected to the bracket on Selection Sunday. That’s a tradition people love and we should uphold.

LITTLEPAGE: No, I think that’s where football and basketball are much different. You’ve got one game a week in football versus sometimes three basketball games a week. So much can change in a seven-day period.

Would you like to see any changes to the current multi-team event rule? Are you satisfied with the multi-team event (MTE) marketplace and opportunities?

LITTLEPAGE: Years ago we eased up on the rule that limited the events you could play in, and that has not served basketball well. Teams being able to play in an event once every three or four years is a lot better. It allows more schools the opportunity to play in these events. In November tournaments now, it’s a lot of the same teams every year. I like the idea of more access for all of the teams.

BYRNE: These events, Maui and others, are great experiences for the guys on the team. The neutral-court games,

the one-game deals, that’s really limiting the ability for good home-and-home games. As an institution, we’re doing more home-and-homes. We just played two with Michigan, we’re playing Gonzaga home-and-home, and upcoming we’ve got UConn and Missouri. We’ve decided to do at least three, and we’ll try to do four home-and-homes per year. I think that’s good for the game, it’s good for the team, and it’s really good for the fans because it drives interest in the November and December games. The true road-game experience is going to help our team prepare for the conference season. They’ve got to learn how to play on the road.

HICKEY: It gives us a great chance to play high-level teams on neutral courts. They won’t come and play on our home court. Our choices are to go play at their place or play at a neutral site. It might be a little inconsistent on the different formats, but we see it as a positive.

Multi-team events such as the Maui Invitational give schools a chance to play high-level teams.
Photo by: AP Images
SCHAUS: I like the exempt tournaments. You get to play different types of teams and it’s a quality experience for the players. You’re typically going to see teams you couldn’t schedule otherwise.

CASTIGLIONE: I like that it gives certain teams a chance to play competition they wouldn’t ever get a chance to face. That can be helpful for college basketball. But it’s also becoming a little cost-prohibitive. As long as we can keep it manageable, cost-wise, it’s good.

DRISCOLL: For us, it’s been a good thing. We’re fortunate that we play in a high RPI conference, but it’s still difficult to get the best teams to come to Providence. We played Kentucky at Barclays Center and then return the game at their place.

DANNEN: For mid-major programs, those MTEs are the most important part of our nonconference schedule. That’s our opportunity to build a résumé for at-large berths. If we want to play high majors, we’d either have to play on their floor, or meet them in a MTE. Our league mandates participation in MTEs. We’ve got events scheduled for the next four years.

With the retirement of John Adams following the Final Four, there will be a new NCAA coordinator of officiating in 2015-16. Is there a national officiating initiative you would like to see?

HICKEY: John did a great job dealing with the politics of getting all the groups and conferences together. That’s a huge strategic undertaking. The key, to me, is consistency from the East Coast to the West Coast. I hope that would continue to be the focus.

SCHAUS: One issue that needs to be reviewed, and will be, is the 30-second shot clock. It’s important to keep the pace of play moving and keep it exciting. I would not, however, advocate for a 24-second clock.

DRISCOLL: I’d like to see some clarity on the block/charge foul. It just seems to be very inconsistent and it affects

the flow of the game.

DANNEN: I’m glad we’re experimenting with the 30-second shot clock in the NIT. One thing I didn’t like last year is that we changed the block-charge and didn’t experiment. It just went right into play. I like the 30-second clock and the expanded arc under the basket. Maybe I’m in the minority, but we’re investing millions of dollars in the game, and the officials need to move from an avocation to a vocation. We’ve got too much money invested not to invest in officiating.

LITTLEPAGE: One of biggest issues is that the screener is screening illegally. He comes right up on the defender and does not give the defender the opportunity to adjust. That should be a blocking foul. On offense, the way guys dribble the ball and come over the top (palming) is incredible. Every once in while, you see it called and coaches go wild. There should be a lot more palming called.

BYRNE: It’s critical, especially for the power five conferences, to be on the same page. We’ve got to have the same training camps and emphasis on the same issues. We want to make sure the college game in the Northeast is played the same as in the West. It’s important to be united on that. We’ve also got to limit how much officials travel.

What is the single biggest issue with the way the game is being played?

DRISCOLL: The last two minutes of a game is taking so long with all of the reviews. The officials have a very tough job and I know they want to get it right, but it hurts the game with the number of stoppages. Sometimes I think we just need to trust the calls and live with it. I also think the coaches have learned how to manipulate the system. Every time somebody gets a rebound and raises their elbow, it’s a review.

DANNEN: If Naismith invented the game today, he’d start with a bigger court. Players have evolved so much over the last few decades. We have different players playing the game now. I’m an international basketball rules advocate. I like the longer 3-point line and the wider lane.

HICKEY: It’s just so physical. Kids are so big and so strong now. Every year, that needs to be a point of emphasis. The physicality of the game now just gives the defense too much of an advantage. We’re not protecting the dribbler or the cutters like we should. I think that would help the flow of the game.

CASTIGLIONE: Just in general, the flow of the game, the pace of play, the physicality that has developed. We’ve got to look for ways we can create more offensive opportunities. We’ve got to look at all of those things and try to prioritize what would enhance the flow of the game. I’ve heard some people say it’s become unwatchable, and we need to step back and ask why. You can shorten the shot clock, but that’s not the end-all, be-all fix. It’s just a step. People like to see points.

BYRNE: The stoppage of play hurts the flow of the game. One way to do that is to stop allowing timeouts on made

Official reviews also can impede the flow of the game.
Photo by: Getty Images
baskets, and grant them only on dead balls. When a coach calls timeout to stop a run, that’s stopping the flow of the game. Keep the game moving. The international game is considered pretty fun to watch and it’s very popular. If you look at what they do, they’ve widened the lane, they moved the 3-point line back, and that has created spacing. It allows the flow of the game to be better.

LITTLEPAGE: There clearly are issues with offense and scoring and shooting. Some of that is a reflection of sophisticated defenses and techniques. You can see every game, every move a player makes, and you can more successfully defend the other teams. Also, I’m all for a 30-second shot clock.

SCHAUS: Official reviews are good and they’re helping get the calls right, but it does affect the flow of the game. Maybe we could reduce the number of timeouts to counter that.

What is college basketball’s most distinguishing feature that needs to be nurtured and protected?

CASTIGLIONE: Game day. The distinguishing characteristic of college basketball is the culture of game day in a number of iconic venues across the country. There are many must-experiences, where you feel the passion, the excitement, and the quirks of one arena versus another.

BYRNE: The NCAA tournament. It’s something the entire country pays attention to. It’s a great experience for teams and for the fans.

LITTLEPAGE: The tournament has to be protected, it has to continue to exist in its current format, open to all

350-some schools. What’s special is the David-and-Goliath matchups and the drama those matchups create.

SCHAUS: I think it’s just the pageantry, the face-painted students. The NBA is a business. We just need to focus on who we are and what we’re great at. Our game spans every state in the country, it’s more grassroots, it’s alumni activities that help us stay in touch with our graduates.

DRISCOLL: First and foremost, it’s still an amateur sport. The whole pay-to-play argument, the whole perception with student athletes … it’s still a very small percentage of guys who go on to play professionally. We use basketball to educate our guys. The other point is that our guys bring it every single night. You can’t do that in the NBA.

DANNEN: It’s the atmosphere, the ownership and the investment. We’ve got 100,000 alums, and it’s their connection back to their alma mater.

HICKEY: They’re student athletes who have left home for the first time, and we need to do everything we can to give them a great experience so they learn how to be leaders and of service to others. This is not a professional experience. It should be an old-school experience.

SBJ Morning Buzzcast: March 18, 2024

Sports Business Awards nominees unveiled; NWSL's historic opening weekend and takeaways from CFP deal

ESPN’s Jay Bilas, BTN’s Meghan McKeown, and a deep dive into AppleTV+’s The Dynasty

On this week’s Sports Media Podcast from the New York Post and Sports Business Journal, ESPN’s Jay Bilas talks all things NCAA. Big Ten Network’s Meghan McKeown shares her insight into the Caitlin Clark craze. The Boston Globe’s Chad Finn chats all things Bean Town. And SBJ’s Xavier Hunter drops in to share his findings on how the NWSL is making a social media push.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SBJ I Factor: Nana-Yaw Asamoah

SBJ I Factor features an interview with AMB Sports and Entertainment Chief Commercial Office Nana-Yaw Asamoah. Asamoah, who moved over to AMBSE last year after 14 years at the NFL, talks with SBJ’s Ben Fischer about how his role model parents and older sisters pushed him to shrive, how the power of lifelong learning fuels successful people, and why AMBSE was an opportunity he could not pass up. Asamoah is 2021 SBJ Forty Under 40 honoree. SBJ I Factor is a monthly podcast offering interviews with sports executives who have been recipients of one of the magazine’s awards.

Shareable URL copied to clipboard!

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2015/03/16/In-Depth/AD-Roundtable.aspx

Sorry, something went wrong with the copy but here is the link for you.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2015/03/16/In-Depth/AD-Roundtable.aspx

CLOSE