BOSTON, MA--(Marketwire -03/07/12)- The Retirement Income Industry Association (RIIA) announces the launch of the RIIA Market Insight (RMI) initiative, a research program that transcends traditional product and organizational silos by bringing together industry leaders, researchers and their collective data to create a 360-degree view of consumer households who buy and depend upon the industry's products and services. RIIA invites firms to join an advisory board to guide the RMI research and collaborate with board members and participating firms in the execution of the program.

Joining with RIIA as members of the RMI are the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC), Turner Consulting, LLC, Strategic Business Insights (SBI), Sagence Group, GDC Research, CANNEX, Ernst & Young and Price Waterhouse Cooper (PwC) with the goal of delivering a sophisticated, strategic use of analytics applied to rich, high quality market data which develop and expand insights that lead to accelerated business success.

The first member of the RMI Advisory Board is the National Association for Fixed Annuities (NAFA). NAFA is a national trade association exclusively dedicated to promoting the awareness and understanding of fixed annuities. "We are pleased to have NAFA as a founding Advisory Board member," says Francois Gadenne, Executive Director and Chair of RIIA. "We anticipate that NAFA will bring their depth of experience and focus on fixed annuities to our program and will help guide research related to this important product."

Eric Thomes, NAFA's Chair, agrees, "As a premier annuity-based association and chief advocate for fixed annuities, we need to understand the trends that affect our products and our members. Our seat on the Advisory Board will help us achieve this objective."

The RMI is seeking additional working group members and sponsors to help guide the development of the various databases, reports and services. "While we are starting with annuity database analytics, the RMI members and sponsors will expand that view across product, service and distribution silos," explains Elvin Turner, President of Turner Consulting, LLC, and RIIA's Director of Research.

To create a cross-silos retirement income research platform, RIIA is building a RMI Advisory Board that represents various views and expertise across the industry, with members from the annuity, mutual fund, investments, insurance, distribution, DC plans and other communities. Their common goal is to gain actionable information about market share, distribution channels, products, customer profiles and household spending, now and in the future, that will result in data-based decisions that improve business performance.

"The bottom line for us," concludes Kim O' Brien, NAFA's CEO, "is being able to view actual sales and sales potential of fixed annuities quickly after those sales occur and with a level of insight and understanding that was not possible before. That is the opportunity offered by this initiative."

To join the RMI or to request more information, please contact Francois Gadenne, Chairman and Executive Director, RIIA at (781) 738-0484 or Elvin Turner, Director of the Research Business Unit, RIIA at (860) 242-4878.

About the Retirement Income Industry Association (www.riia-usa.org)

Founded in 2006 by leading financial companies, advisors, associations and academics, the Retirement Income Industry Association (RIIA) provides a rigorous, research-driven, household-focused foundation for developing retirement solutions to serve retirees today and into the future. A non-profit organization, RIIA achieves its mission through a unique View Across the Silos allowing members to see change and disruption before others while achieving competitive advantage through diverse discussions, advanced education, market insight, research, comprehensive data, standards and thought leadership for successful retirement income management. RIIA members span the entire industry and include banks, insurers, mutual fund companies, brokerage houses, financial advisors and distributors, plan sponsors, researchers, technology companies, marketing firms, academics, and industry media.

Read the original here:
Retirement Income Industry Association Creates Retirement Market Insight Initiative to Bring Database Analytics and ...

BOSTON (MainStreet) -- Few days pass without some new study or survey reinforcing a dire message that Americans are not saving enough for a comfortable retirement. For some, that message may actually be detrimental. While true that many -- perhaps most -- are dangerously behind with their savings timeline, even those with a suitable nest egg are prodded continually into saving more. Some run the risk of saving too much, of letting their lives be dictated by compulsive frugality. Think of them as the financial equivalent of hoarders. They're so dead set on accumulation that they find it psychological torture to spend anything. Ted Bovard, principal and financial consultant for Fort Pitt Capital Group in Pittsburgh, says his firm has high net worth clients who fall into this category. Even though they could never spend all of their money, given their frugality, they still worry about running out of money in retirement or not having an inheritance to leave their children. As an example, one client, despite having a $9 million nest egg, called to seek advice on whether she could afford to buy a new clothes dryer. "We have clients who have $6 million to $7 million saved and they ask, 'We were thinking about giving money away to this school, or this charity, or the grandkid -- do you think we can do it?' Well, how much money are you thinking of giving away? 'Probably just the gifting limit for the grandkids, maybe $13,000 times three or four.' Well, I think with $7 million you are OK," Bovard says. "There is nothing wrong with being careful, but you can overdo it, says Peter D'Arruda, president of Capital Financial Advisory Group in Cary, N.C. "It's like the skinny squirrel who stores a bunch of nuts in a tree over and over again, but doesn't eat them. He just runs off looking for more nuts. Then termites get in there and when squirrel comes back the tree's not there anymore." D'Arruda uses that fable-like example to explain that the fear of depleting assets doesn't just lead investors to take on an unhealthy degree of risk; they can also err on the side of perceived safety. The fear of running out of money isn't always without merit, he says, pointing to the "biggest risk of all" -- the eventual need for long-term care. With these needs in mind, he urges clients to create an income stream and hedge against future expenses with various annuity and life insurance policies that include long-term care riders. What he doesn't advocate is relying on so-called "safe" investments -- including cash, CDs and other bank products -- to provide peace of mind. "CD accounts are not earning anything," D'Arruda says. "I refer to it as losing money safely. Look at inflation right now. You can go to the grocery store now and see how expensive it is, and there are also rising fuel costs and increasingly expensive health care. You need to be keeping up with inflation if you want to make sure you have money for the future." Bovard sees several reasons for why some people have a hard time accepting that their savings are, in fact, sufficient. Factors include a lifetime of frugality, over-reacting to market fluctuations and the intangibility of wealth that is in investments, not in physical cash, gold or even stock certificates. "A lot of time, I think I, as their adviser, am the person who can help them relax," he adds. "For the folks we have had longer-term relationships with, they look to you to tell them what they can do and what they can't do. If we tell them they can do it, they are more comfortable." A challenge, he says, is getting clients to move past an all-encompassing drive to save and accumulate wealth and to focus as well on enjoying the fruit of their labor. "People ask, 'How much do I need, do I have enough?' We don't really focus so much on the total number. We see how do you want to live and what it's going to cost," Bovard says. "If it is $500,000 a year, your $2 million isn't going to get you very far. If it is $50,000 a year then yes, you are probably going to be in very good shape." A persistent voice warning that some are saving too much for retirement is Laurence Kotlikoff, an outspoken economics professor at Boston University. In a past interview, Kotlikoff, who co-wrote the book Spend 'Til the End -- The Revolutionary Guide to Raising Your Living Standard, Today and When You Retire (Simon & Schuster, 2008) with Scott Burns, put much of the blame on the retirement calculators companies such as Fidelity, TIAA-CREF, Vanguard, Schwab and T. Rowe Price deploy on their Web sites. "Financial advisers are giving bad advice using bad financial tools that aren't remotely capable of dealing with the question that they are trying to answer," he said, noting that advisers can profit from their inadequate assessments. "The bottom line is that if you over-recommend products, you sell more," he said. "If you get compensated, either directly or indirectly, based on your sales, there is an incentive to make recommendations that are, on average, too high." Kotlikoff, who has crafted his own retirement software tool, ESPlanner, estimates that about 20% of households are likely saving too much for retirement, compared with the 40% he believes are saving dangerously too little. "I think under-saving is probably a bigger problem, but there is still a risk with over-saving," he said. "You could save like crazy and then you can drop dead when you hit 55. It is not only that you may die young, it is also that you can be induced into much riskier securities than you should be investing in because you think that this is the only way you can make your target. The whole focus is on making a target that is ridiculous to begin with." Bovard says many retirees who have saved and invested appropriately throughout their life follow a similar pattern of financial realization. They start out very nervous they don't have enough. That persists for the first seven years or so. Then they start to breathe a sigh of relief and get comfortable with the idea that they can enjoy life and spend down some of their assets. Later, they fully grasp that they have more money than they can ever spend and face regrets over what they wish they had done. Bovard isn't surprised by the psychology at play among those who resist post-retirement spending. "You spent 40 to 45 years accumulating this pot of money, and you did it by saving and saving and scrimping," he says. In response, he tries to work with clients, especially during the early years of retirement, to "bump that expense level up a bit" and factor in the cost of various trips and activities they have expressed an interest in but haven't had the time to do until retirement. "Sometimes part of our job is not just to be your financial adviser, but also a counselor," Bovard says. "It's all about striking a balance. If there are a couple of things you want to get done, lets figure out how to do them and still feel comfortable whether the markets are up or down or back and forth. While you still have the health and energy and desire, let's make these things you want to do happen." "If you can't actually do that and relax, why retire? Maybe you are just tired of work, and that's fine, but if the idea is to retire because there are things you want to do and enjoy, then you are going to have to learn to relax a little bit," he adds. "It is a very different thought process for people when they've spent years pumping money in and now they turn around and have to take money out. Psychologically it is a huge transformation and if they are a workaholic, this can be a very difficult transition." The balancing act between preserving financial security and enjoying your money differs from person to person, Bovard says. It is hardest for those he describes as "worrywarts." "You have to deal with that personality differently, and they may never be comfortable," he says. "You say that they can afford to do something and they reply, 'Oh, I'd better not.' As soon as you go through the first downturn together -- and if you look at them long enough you are going to go through at least one or two or maybe three -- they are like, 'See, I knew it, I've got to pull back, I knew I shouldn't have gone on that trip.' What I have to say to them is that we've got the money set aside and life is going to move on whether the markets are up or down." Bovard says having a solid financial plan in place helps investors learn to enjoy life in retirement. It also keeps them from taking on excessive risk in the name of returns. "It's important to have the ability to stick to that plan through the good the bad and the ugly," he says. "It is not just when things are bad that people go off the reservation. When things are great, people believe they are much less risk averse. 'Oh look, everybody is making tons of money and I'm not making as much.' Well, remember that we have a balanced portfolio because when things are down you get really upset. We'll still get to the same place, we are just going to do it with less bumps." --Written by Joe Mont in Boston. >To contact the writer of this article, click here: Joe Mont. >To follow the writer on Twitter, go to http://twitter.com/josephmont.

Read more here:
Pity the Retirement Hoarder

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- I'm 28 and on track to save 40% of my salary in retirement and other accounts this year. I wonder, though, whether I'm focusing too much on stashing away money rather than enjoying it more at my age. Am I overdoing it? -- Adam, Minneapolis

There's no question that you're socking away money at a much higher rate than most people are able to manage financially or would chose to do.

A 2010 Aon Hewitt survey of contribution rates to 401(k) plans shows participants in their 20s contribute 5% of salary on a pre-tax basis compared to a rate of about 7% for participants of all ages.

Clearly, you're a champion saver. Does the fact that you're saving so much more than your peers mean you're overdoing it?

If overdoing it means saving more than is necessary to fund a comfortable retirement, then sure, it's possible you're going overboard in that sense.

Say you want to retire at age 65 on 80% of your pre-retirement salary. If you go to our What You Need to Save calculator and plug in your age and an annual salary of, say, $40,000, you'll see that the recommended savings rate is just over 9% -- and that's if we assume you haven't saved a dime to date.

Of course, you'll have to save considerably more if you want to retire early or live large after you call it a career. You can try different retirement ages and target retirement incomes using T. Rowe Price's calculator. But it's hard to imagine you'll fall short of a secure retirement at any reasonable age if you consistently save 40% of your salary a year.

Ah, but is it really likely you'll be able to continue this pace throughout your career? My guess is that as you get older and take on more financial obligations like maintaining a house and raising kids, you'll find that it gets tougher to save.

There may also be periods where saving is a challenge. At some point over the next few decades, you could find yourself out of work due to a layoff or health issues or some other reason, for example.

If things get bad enough, you could end up having to draw down your savings in order to get by, as many diligent savers have been forced to do as a result of the recession.

See the original post here:
Am I saving too much for retirement?

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS and TORONTO, ONTARIO--(Marketwire -03/06/12)- BMO Financial Group today announced the expansion of the BMO Retirement Institute into the United States. The BMO Retirement Institute provides thought-provoking insight and financial strategies for Americans planning for, or currently in, their retirement years.

"With BMO Financial Group's recent growth in the U.S., we thought it was an ideal time to bring the BMO Retirement Institute into the country," said Tina Di Vito, Head, BMO Retirement Institute. "We look forward to sharing our insights in this important market, and assisting Boomers in making a smooth transition into retirement."

The BMO Retirement Institute will examine a variety of topics related to retirement and issue comprehensive reports on the financial and non-financial aspects of this milestone. Its inaugural report, Single in Retirement, was released today.

"BMO is recognized around the globe for their excellence in programming, products and services and for their commitment to define great customer experience," noted Kenneth Krei, executive vice president, BMO Private Bank. "The similarities in the Canadian and U.S. marketplaces offer a unique opportunity to expand the reach of the BMO Retirement Institute to better serve all of our clients."

BMO Retirement Institute Report: Single in Retirement

The odds of being single at some point during retirement are high. In fact, 43 per cent of Americans aged 65 years and older are single due to divorce, having never married, or the death of a partner.(1)

Outlined in the report are a unique set of financial, emotional, and planning challenges for those who are "Suddenly Single" (unexpectedly widowed or divorced) or "Ever Single" (never married) in retirement. These include:

Planning for retirement

The report notes that, as the cost of living for singles is 40 to 50 per cent higher than for married individuals, singles are at greater risk of not having enough saved for retirement.(2)

The report found that married couples are more likely than their Ever Single counterparts to have a financial plan, to receive help in preparing their plan, and to have a more up-to-date financial plan.(3)

Continued here:
BMO Financial Group Launches the BMO Retirement Institute in the U.S.

Have you ever seen an investment firm message that our retirements are on track and we should just head to the beach? Me neither. Up to a point, a certain amount of "sky is falling" rhetoric is not surprising. However, one critic of standard investment advice thinks there is more going on here.

[In Pictures: The Best Places to Retire in 2012.]

Austin Nichols is a senior research associate at the Urban Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank that does a lot of research on economic issues. In a recent paper, Nichols takes aim at the notion that people should try to achieve retirement incomes that are roughly 80 percent of their pre-retirement incomes.

This is a common goal in retirement planning, and it makes a lot of sense at first. The thinking is that people have developed some balance in their income-spending needs through the years, and that their incomes near retirement are thus sufficient to meet their needs. After they stop working, their income needs will decline. They will need to set aside less money for retirement savings, for one. Also, their tax rates are likely to fall, and so will their work-related expenses.

That, at least, is the common wisdom. But Nichols says it's just flat wrong. To achieve a retirement income goal of 80 percent of pre-retirement income would require a large amount of savings, he says, even for people who begin when they're young. And if people wait until their 40s, say, to get serious about funding their retirement needs, there is no way they can achieve an 80 percent target.

[See How to Calculate Your Retirement Number.]

"To hit a target of 80 percent of pre-retirement income," his paper says, "workers retiring at 62 ... who began to save in 2010 at age 45 might need to save 65 percent of their income." Besides being impossible on a practical basis, saving that much money would mean that a person was spending only 35 percent of their income. When they retire, by contrast, they would find themselves with 80 percent of their income to spend--an enormous and probably unneeded boost in their living standard.

"They should be saving less today and consuming less when they retire," Nichols says. "But one cannot optimize by targeting a percentage of gross pre-retirement income. Instead, one must target spending."

Looking at spending capabilities, a lot of the fear about retirement readiness disappears. Yes, some people will have tough retirements. But the odds are that they have had a tough time making ends meet all their lives. Being retired won't magically change their financial situation. The story for most people, however, is different and more positive.

Research by University of Wisconsin economist John Karl Scholz, among others, finds that roughly 75 percent of Americans were adequately prepared for retirement several years ago. In other words, they had accumulated enough assets to maintain their pre-retirement living standards after they retired.

Originally posted here:
Is Retirement Advice Biased Against You?

COLUMBUS, Ohio--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

Nationwide Retirement Solutions announced today that it has redesigned and enhanced its website to better serve public sector plan sponsors and participants, and make planning for retirement easier.

We strive to deliver a truly exceptional customer experience to our plan sponsors and participants through our comprehensive service model, and the web is a key component of that, said Anne Arvia, president of Nationwide Retirement Solutions. "Weve reworked every page of the website and the content to ensure were providing our clients with the information they need.

The newly redesigned and updated site is a result of extensive research and testing with both plan sponsors and participants. From that research Nationwide identified what plan participants value most with their web experience: that they want to be able to quickly determine if they are on track for retirement, what they can do to help improve their situation and the flexibility to engage with the site based on their personal preference. Plan sponsors, on the other hand, are looking for ways to help their employees prepare for retirement, to understand how their plan is performing and a way to easily report plan performance to key stakeholders.

Enhancements to the participant site include:

The new plan sponsor site:

Our research-based approach gives us confidence that were delivering a user-centric site thats more intuitive, easier to navigate, and packed with helpful tools and information presented in a clear, concise manner, added Arvia. Our goal is to help our plan sponsor clients complete many of their day-to-day tasks more efficiently, and to help simplify retirement planning for our participants.

The sites also include the Nationwide On Your Side Interactive Retirement PlannerSM. The Planner was launched in 2010 and can help users set retirement goals, track progress, and find suggestions to improve their unique retirement outlook all in about 10 minutes.

For more information about the new website for public-sector retirement plans, plan sponsors should visit http://www.nrsforu.com or contact a Nationwide representative at 877-496-1630.

About Nationwide

Go here to see the original:
Nationwide Retirement Solutions Redesigns Website

I'm 28 and on track to save 40% of my salary in retirement and other accounts this year. I wonder, though, whether I'm focusing too much on stashing away money rather than enjoying it more at my age. Am I overdoing it? -- Adam, Minneapolis

There's no question that you're socking away money at a much higher rate than most people are able to manage financially or would chose to do.

A 2010 Aon Hewitt survey of contribution rates to 401(k) plans shows participants in their 20s contribute 5% of salary on a pre-tax basis compared to a rate of about 7% for participants of all ages.

Clearly, you're a champion saver. Does the fact that you're saving so much more than your peers mean you're overdoing it?

If overdoing it means saving more than is necessary to fund a comfortable retirement, then sure, it's possible you're going overboard in that sense.

Say you want to retire at age 65 on 80% of your pre-retirement salary. If you go to our What You Need to Save calculator and plug in your age and an annual salary of, say, $40,000, you'll see that the recommended savings rate is just over 9% -- and that's if we assume you haven't saved a dime to date.

Of course, you'll have to save considerably more if you want to retire early or live large after you call it a career. You can try different retirement ages and target retirement incomes using T. Rowe Price's calculator. But it's hard to imagine you'll fall short of a secure retirement at any reasonable age if you consistently save 40% of your salary a year.

Investing for retirement when you're just starting out

Ah, but is it really likely you'll be able to continue this pace throughout your career? My guess is that as you get older and take on more financial obligations like maintaining a house and raising kids, you'll find that it gets tougher to save.

There may also be periods where saving is a challenge. At some point over the next few decades, you could find yourself out of work due to a layoff or health issues or some other reason, for example.

Read the original post:
Retirement Savings: Is It Possible to Save Too Much?

At age 60, Kathy Frederick routinely put in 50 hours a week as a hospital administrator for Scripps Health Systems in San Diego. She managed a 15-person staff, and regularly took work home on week-ends -- until one day five years ago she decided enough was enough. "I wasn't ready to retire," says Frederick, "but after 18 years at that pace, I wanted a different challenge and more time for myself."

So Frederick worked with her boss to create a new role for herself at Scripps as a special-projects manager, which allowed her to gradually downshift her hours to her current two-day-a-week schedule. Frederick is thrilled with the change, which she's found reenergizing. "I'm still valued," she says, "but I get to work on my own terms."

Frederick is one of a growing number of fifty- and sixtysomethings who aren't ready to quit work but would like to cut back -- in fact, four out of 10 people 50 and older say they'd like to gradually reduce their work hours as they age, according to an AARP survey.

Some love what they do but are tired of the hectic pace and long hours. Others would be happy to bid the job adios but can't afford to give up a regular salary, benefits, or the chance to build a bigger nest egg. Employers are warming to the idea of workers phasing in retirement, too, since it allows them to save money on some of their longest-tenure (read: most expensive) staffers without losing that expertise entirely.

Sound appealing? Whether easing up at work makes sense for you depends on your finances -- Can you afford to live on less now? Will it hurt your retirement lifestyle later? -- and also on the nature of your work.

To decide, start with a clear-eyed assessment of your prospects. The challenge, if you opt to move ahead, will be to craft a new role that lightens your load without damaging your long-term security.

Know what works

Is your current job doable on a reduced schedule, or can you reinvent your role in a way that will allow you to work at a less pressured pace? And do you work for the kind of employer that will be receptive to the idea?

Those are the first questions to ask yourself. The answers will depend in part on your company's culture and on your standing within the organization -- as well as on your ability to think critically and creatively about your role.

Build on precedent. Your employer probably doesn't have a formal phased-retirement program; few do. But if the company already has other kinds of flexible work options in place -- part-time schedules, say, or telecommuting arrangements -- you can model your proposal on them. A variation on a working arrangement that managers are familiar with and know can succeed will get a better reception than a concept they've never heard of.

Originally posted here:
Retirement plan - Retire on your terms

In the midst of an economic recession, Boeing stands out as an anomaly. The aerospace giant has added more than 10,000 jobs in recent years, set several new records for airline sales to both domestic and international carriers, and this year could reclaim the title of largest commercial airplane manufacturer in the world.

Without a generation of skilled appropriators from Washington State looking out for Boeing and helping win military and government contracts, it might not have been that way: The state and the Puget Sound region might have entered the current economic downturn much earlier, in the way Michigan experienced its own single-state recession.

Now, the last member that generation of Boeing-backers, Washington Rep. Norm Dicks, is leaving the stage. After 18 terms in Congress and years before that as a top Congressional aide, Dicks said Friday he would not seek another term later this year.

"He's kind of the last of a great generation to leave," said Denny Heck, a long-time Evergreen State expert who founded TVW, the state's version of C-SPAN after serving as a top aide to Gov. Booth Gardner in the early 1990s. "We jokingly referred to him as our third U.S. Senator for decades. But it's not a joke, it was real."

Dicks began his career on Capitol Hill learning from the masters of a past appropriations era. He served as administrative assistant -- Senate-speak for chief of staff -- to Sen. Warren Magnuson in the early 1970s, at a time when Magnuson chaired the powerful Commerce Committee. Dicks left Magnuson's office to run for Congress on his own, winning a seat in 1977.

Dicks's career as a member began at the height of Washington State's power; that year, Magnuson took over the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, Sen. Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson chaired the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and then-Rep. Tom Foley, later the first House Speaker from a state west of the Rockies, chaired the House Agriculture Committee. Together, they steered billions in earmarks to Washington State, while helping Boeing secure billions more in government contracts.

After Magnuson lost in the 1980 Republican wave, Jackson died in 1983 and Foley lost his seat in the 1994 GOP landslide, Dicks was the last great Washington State appropriator. He rose to become chairman of the House Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee, a post from which he could further aid Boeing. After Rep. David Obey retired and two more senior Democrats left, Dicks became the top-ranking Democrat on the panel. As the second-ranking Democrat on the defense subcommittee when Rep. John Murtha was still alive, Dicks helped Boeing win a U.S. Air Force tanker contract that had originally been awarded to a European aerospace conglomerate.

(Had Dicks run for re-election and Democrats retaken the House, he might have been in a position to recreate Washington State's influence inside the Beltway; Rep. Adam Smith, who, like Dicks, lives in Tacoma, is the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee.)

"There were countless regional issues that united the Washington State congressional delegation over the years, and in those instances his clout was immensely helpful to the residents of Washington State," said Rob Nichols, a former communications director to the late Rep. Jennifer Dunn, R-Wash., and ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., and now CEO of the Financial Services Forum.

Dicks has other legacies, most notably the money he secured to help rebuild and revitalize downtown Tacoma and to clean up Puget Sound and the Hood Canal, projects nearly as big in scope as the cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay. On Capitol Hill, he may best be remembered for acting like the staffer he used to be -- Dicks had a reputation for calling staffers in other offices directly and either urging them to push their bosses in his direction or yelling into the phone when he didn't get his way.

Go here to read the rest:
Dicks Retirement Ends Boeing Generation

UpdatedMar 5, 2012 4:11 PM ET

Connecticut coach Jim Calhoun hasn't made any plans to retire just yet.

The 69-year-old Hall-of-Famer, a self-described gym rat, is back from a monthlong medical leave that had many questioning whether he would ever coach again.

''We started this thing, I started it, 26 years ago and I haven't made any plans to do anything else except come back,'' Calhoun said Friday. ''A few other things along the way have gotten in my way.''

And so he was at Gampel Pavilion on Saturday, less than a week after having a disk fragment removed from his spine, leading the Huskies to a 74-65 win over Pittsburgh. And on Monday, he was leading practice and getting ready to head out to Madison Square Garden for Tuesday's start to the Big East tournament, hoping to lead the Huskies on a run similar to the 11-game streak that brought them a third national title a year ago.

''Somebody said to me, `Jeez it will be great to have you there,''' Calhoun said Monday. ''I said, actually, you'd be better off having (former UConn guard) Kemba (Walker) here. ''

What happens after this season is anyone's guess, and pundits, friends, even former players and assistant coaches are doing just that.

''It's like, `OK, Jim you're 70 years old, what more do you want to prove?'' said Digger Phelps, a former coach at Notre Dame, and now an analyst at ESPN. ''He's a survivor and he's a survivor as a coach. He's at the point now where he's won three national titles. He knows what's at stake. He's gotta make that decision.''

Calhoun is a three-time cancer survivor, overcoming prostate cancer in 2003 and skin cancer twice, most recently in 2008. He has missed 29 games over his 40-year career because of various medical conditions and had to leave another 11 games for medical reasons.

See more here:
Calhoun retirement talk rekindled