Nova Loses Omari Spellman for year

[Cheesehead]

The NCAA has ruled Villanova freshman Omari Spellman ineligible for the 2016-17 season.

Spellman will sit out the season as an academic redshirt and have four seasons of eligibility remaining.

According to Villanova's announcement, the NCAA determined that Spellman did not complete his initial eligibility requirements in time. Spellman was a fifth-year high school senior last season.

"We are extremely disappointed for Omari," coach Jay Wright said in a statement. "While we don't agree with the NCAA's decision, we are members of the association and respect it. We understand why the NCAA felt it had to rule this way.

"We will make a positive out of this for Omari. He will concentrate on his academics and individual development this season. In the long run, Omari will be a better student and player for this experience."

Spellman, a 6-foot-9 power forward from St. Thomas More School in Connecticut, was ranked No. 18 and considered a five-star prospect in the 2016 class.

Without Spellman, Wright will rely more on senior forward Darryl Reynolds and freshman big men Tim Delaney and Dylan Painter.

Wright and athletic director Mark Jackson, who met with the media alongside Spellman on Friday afternoon, said the issue was when Spellman's freshman year of high school began.

Spellman enrolled at Middletown High School, a public school in New York, as a freshman but stayed just two months before transferring to the Hoosac School, a private school also in New York. At the private school's recommendation, Wright said, Spellman enrolled at Hoosac as an eighth-grader. Wright said the decision to change grades was for academics, not athletics.

An NCAA source explained to ESPN.com that Spellman got caught up in what is referred to as the core course timetable limitation. By NCAA rule, once an athlete begins his freshman year of high school, he then has four years to complete his 16 core courses. Spellman did complete his coursework, but by dropping back to the eighth grade he essentially took longer than the allowable four years. Though he did not even finish a semester as a ninth-grader at Middletown, the time there counted and started his eligibility clock.

Because he ultimately completed all 16 core courses in good standing he is considered an academic redshirt, under an NCAA distinction just going into practice this year. Spellman can enroll at Villanova, practice with the Wildcats and sit on the bench during home games.

"Once he started his freshman year, his clock started,'' Wright said. "So we get it. We know the rule. We understand the process. We don't necessarily agree with the decision, but we accept it. We just want to move on in a positive way.''




Wright said the Villanova athletic staff noticed the discrepancy immediately upon recruiting Spellman and brought it to the NCAA's attention, beginning the lengthy and laborious appeals process. The university, he said, worked with the eligibility center, the initial eligibility waiver committee and even appealed to Oliver Luck, the NCAA's vice president of regulatory affairs. The school also hired an outside consulting firm to help with the appeal.

But the appeal was denied multiple times.

"After the first appeal, when that was denied, I broke down in tears,'' Spellman said. "I didn't know how to handle it. Two days ago when they told me again [that the final appeal was denied], it was hard but it was more manageable. I'm going to turn it into a positive. Life goes on and I'm just going to keep on working.''

Information from ESPN's Dana O'Neil was used in this report.

[X-band '01]

It does hurt for Villanova given that Spellman did complete all his core courses (albeit in a 5-year timespan), but at least he will have 4 seasons of eligibility in front of him.

Is this the first year they've used the term "academic redshirt" for situations like this one?

[mohr5150]

I have to say this is utter BS by the NCAA. The kid finished what he needed to finish. If it took him an extra year, who the hell cares.

[X-band '01]

I would have called it BS had he been docked a year of eligibility like a non-qualifier. I do see the logic of giving him time to acclimate to college academics and at least allowing him to practice and sit with his team during games this year.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I agree with this, basically the NCAA is saying that a 5 year HS student now becomes a 5 year college student.


I have to say this is utter BS by the NCAA. The kid finished what he needed to finish. If it took him an extra year, who the hell cares.

[GoMuskies]

So basically Spellman will be a top 5 pick in the '17 draft without ever playing a minute of college basketball? Sucks big time for Nova.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Let's say he plays 4 years at 'Nova, he was a 5 year HS student so he will arrive at 19 years old. He won't play until he is 20, so basically he will be Myles and Jalen.

[paulxu]

An NCAA source explained to ESPN.com that Spellman got caught up in what is referred to as the core course timetable limitation. By NCAA rule, once an athlete begins his freshman year of high school, he then has four years to complete his 16 core courses. .

That shows you just out of touch I am with all this. I thought there were all kinds of kids who went to 4 years of HS, then weren't quite over the hump academically, so they went off to prep school for a year...essentially taking 5 years to finish HS. Guess they were all in prep school in their 4th year.

[XUFan09]

That shows you just out of touch I am with all this. I thought there were all kinds of kids who went to 4 years of HS, then weren't quite over the hump academically, so they went off to prep school for a year...essentially taking 5 years to finish HS. Guess they were all in prep school in their 4th year.
I think they graduated after 4 years but then went to a prep school for a year to take care of other requirements.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[novachap]

That shows you just out of touch I am with all this. I thought there were all kinds of kids who went to 4 years of HS, then weren't quite over the hump academically, so they went off to prep school for a year...essentially taking 5 years to finish HS. Guess they were all in prep school in their 4th year.

Obviously I am biased.... so lets get that out of the way.

1. The crazy thing is the rule (complete the core hs courses in 4 years) was instituted after he started high school-shouldnt there be a grandfathered approach here?

2. He started public high school and after he transferred to a private school 2 months later for what they say was academics, the school recommended to the family he go back to 8th grade to get caught up. So the ncaa says the clock started with that first publuc school even though it was for academic reasons.

3. Nova became aware of it in the recruiting process and SELF REPORTED that this might need to be looked at to the letter of their rule.

It just smacks of nonsense and lack of common sense. Again, i fully acknowledge bias. The shame of it is he wont play with Hart which changes Hart's role back to rebounding and less leaking out (which would have help him more at the next level). Anyway, i still think we are pretty good and challenge for anything.

If Spellman does play next year and does not go pro, we can look at it as Samuels 4*, Crosbee Roundtree 4*, Spellman 5* and hopefully either walker 5* and or morsell 4* as the class to replace hart jenkins and reynolds.

There is however a pretty pissed off fan base as to the lack of commin sense on this one. Hell, even jay bilas thinks its ridiculous!

[XUFan09]

I don't know if some of the NCAA administrators get the concept of "grandfathering in." Myles Davis took classes his junior year of prep school with some seniors who were future D1 players. A year later, they were fully eligible but then in the middle of that year, the NCAA decided that their prep school no longer counted for academic requirements. Myles was a senior with no alternatives possible that late in the year, so you think they would have grandfathered in for the exact same classes that were fine for current college freshmen. Nope.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[xubrew]

Obviously I am biased.... so lets get that out of the way.

1. The crazy thing is the rule (complete the core hs courses in 4 years) was instituted after he started high school-shouldnt there be a grandfathered approach here?

2. He started public high school and after he transferred to a private school 2 months later for what they say was academics, the school recommended to the family he go back to 8th grade to get caught up. So the ncaa says the clock started with that first publuc school even though it was for academic reasons.

3. Nova became aware of it in the recruiting process and SELF REPORTED that this might need to be looked at to the letter of their rule.

It just smacks of nonsense and lack of common sense. Again, i fully acknowledge bias. The shame of it is he wont play with Hart which changes Hart's role back to rebounding and less leaking out (which would have help him more at the next level). Anyway, i still think we are pretty good and challenge for anything.

If Spellman does play next year and does not go pro, we can look at it as Samuels 4*, Crosbee Roundtree 4*, Spellman 5* and hopefully either walker 5* and or morsell 4* as the class to replace hart jenkins and reynolds.

There is however a pretty pissed off fan base as to the lack of commin sense on this one. Hell, even jay bilas thinks its ridiculous!

I'm not saying this isn't shitty, but just to clarify something....

I'm pretty sure the rule of needing to graduate with your class has always been the rule. As far as I know it's been the rule for at least ten years, and probably much longer than that. The only new rule is that players are now allowed to do what's called an academic red shirt, which means they can come to school, practice, receive a scholarship, and play four seasons, but must red shirt that first year. The "old rule" was that you were simply a non-qualifier, which meant you weren't eligible to do any of those things. You couldn't practice or receive aid and you lost a year of eligibility. It essentially meant you were going the juco route.

Yes, Nova caught it. Yes, Nova reported it. Had they not done that they would have had to vacate every single game he played in, had he played in tournament games they'd have had to pay back all the NCAA Tournament money, had it been during the season they would have been given a postseason ban for that year, and Spellman would have been instantly ineligible and probably not allowed to play NCAA ball again. So, it's good that you caught it. He can still play four years (not that he will, but he can). He can still graduate in four years and go on to earn either a second degree or a master's degree if he chooses. He just can't play this year. It sucks, but it's a much better deal than what it used to be, and it's far better for Nova that they caught it than had they not.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I am with you on the stupidity of this rule, however, self reporting a violation doesn't and shouldn't mitigate the violation.


3. Nova became aware of it in the recruiting process and SELF REPORTED that this might need to be looked at to the letter of their rule.

[Emp]

I am with you on the stupidity of this rule, however, self reporting a violation doesn't and shouldn't mitigate the violation.

It may be a distinction without a difference, but it's not so much a violation as a failure to qualify for eligibility.

I agree generally that it seems punitive in this example. And yet......the ultimate purpose of academic institutions is the education of the students, not the separate success of basketball teams. Prioritizing the academic preparation of a student over eligibility, just my opinion, is a reasonable NCAA priority. A student who takes 5 years to finish high school raises a red flag for me. Same for having to take a prep school year. Sitting out while retaining scholarship benefits does no seem unfairly punitive.

The implied "failure to accommodate" the academically challenged One and Done student athlete also does not trouble me. The athlete who has no intention of ever acquiring or completing a college course of study essentially want to use a school's team to obtain the promotional benefits of coaching, TV and media exposure, free room, board, medical coverage. That the NCAA doesn't specially accommodate these few borrower students with special rules is no unfairly discriminatory. The hundreds of thousands of bona fide student athletes who want and pursue a degree should be as academically qualified and prepared as non athete students.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I see the point. For a guy like Spellman though, you are really punishing him with a year of downtime (unless he is not as advertised). He most likely won't be a four year player anyway. This cuts a year of experience out for him.


It may be a distinction without a difference, but it's not so much a violation as a failure to qualify for eligibility.

I agree generally that it seems punitive in this example. And yet......the ultimate purpose of academic institutions is the education of the students, not the separate success of basketball teams. Prioritizing the academic preparation of a student over eligibility, just my opinion, is a reasonable NCAA priority. A student who takes 5 years to finish high school raises a red flag for me. Same for having to take a prep school year. Sitting out while retaining scholarship benefits does no seem unfairly punitive.

The implied "failure to accommodate" the academically challenged One and Done student athlete also does not trouble me. The athlete who has no intention of ever acquiring or completing a college course of study essentially want to use a school's team to obtain the promotional benefits of coaching, TV and media exposure, free room, board, medical coverage. That the NCAA doesn't specially accommodate these few borrower students with special rules is no unfairly discriminatory. The hundreds of thousands of bona fide student athletes who want and pursue a degree should be as academically qualified and prepared as non athete students.

[Roadlife]

It may be a distinction without a difference, but it's not so much a violation as a failure to qualify for eligibility.

I agree generally that it seems punitive in this example. And yet......the ultimate purpose of academic institutions is the education of the students, not the separate success of basketball teams. Prioritizing the academic preparation of a student over eligibility, just my opinion, is a reasonable NCAA priority. A student who takes 5 years to finish high school raises a red flag for me. Same for having to take a prep school year. Sitting out while retaining scholarship benefits does no seem unfairly punitive.

The implied "failure to accommodate" the academically challenged One and Done student athlete also does not trouble me. The athlete who has no intention of ever acquiring or completing a college course of study essentially want to use a school's team to obtain the promotional benefits of coaching, TV and media exposure, free room, board, medical coverage. That the NCAA doesn't specially accommodate these few borrower students with special rules is no unfairly discriminatory. The hundreds of thousands of bona fide student athletes who want and pursue a degree should be as academically qualified and prepared as non athete students.
One of the best posts of the year.