Booker Nunley of Garner High School, the #2 ranked hurdler in the United States, found out on Monday that he would be ineligble for the remainder of the indoor season and all of the outdoor season. Why you ask?
Booker needed one last class to graduate during the 2007-2008 school year. At first, he thought he would go ahead and take that class, then graduate early. However, with the vast improvement he was making during the summer, he was encouraged by many to finish off a full senior year. Booker listened to those that suggested this move, thus decided to be a normal senior and complete the year. However, during the process of preparing for the school year, he only registered for two classes. Rules state that athletes must take 3 classes a semester(in a block schedule like Garner's) in order to be eligible for the next semester's athletics. This is the huge problem.
So the question becomes where was the ball dropped? It seems this is a situation that could've easily been prevented.
However, after talking with Jacqueline Nunley, Booker's mom, she informed me that a student-athlete in Goldsboro is dealing with the same
issue.
- How many athletes a year are affected by the "fine print"?
- How is this information made clear and availble to parents and students?
- Who, at your school, is responsible for making sure athletes follow the correct procedures?
- Are parents and students ultimately responsible for this?
Of course there are tons of questions left unaswered here. I'm sure you have many more.
Jacquelyn Nunley has called everyone she could think to call, the Superintendent of Wake County schools, many people in the NCHSAA, including Rick Strunk and Que Tucker. Jacquelyn has had no luck with anyone she has talked to. She has given them the full story and they have said, "It's been in writing for eleven years." There is no way to appeal this decision that has been made which truly doesn't make any sense to me. There is absolutely no way for Booker, or anyone for that matter, to plead their case to the NCHSAA adn get a decision reversed.
I have now heard back from Rick Strunk at the NCHSAA and here are a few comments from him:
"Many of our rules are on line, we publish posters that have the eligibility rules (including this one) on them and send them to all 375 high schools, the rules are in the Handbooks that go to every school and central, and then schools should go over these rules at the mandatory preseason meetings with parents (some are better about that aspect than others). Some schools even duplicate the summary that is shown on the poster for students and parents to review and sign."
"Unfortunately, it happens a couple of times a year across the state from the fall to spring semester (if you did that in the spring as a junior, for instance, you could go to summer school but schools customarily don’t let students take less than the minimum load as juniors), despite our efforts. A couple of schools have told me that they simply don’t let students take less than the minimum load (any students) to avoid this problem. That would mean, of course, if you took three you would have to pass all three. In general, there is much greater awareness in many circles of the implications of this."
"I really am sorry for Booker and his family, but on what grounds would you appeal? Our hardship rule allows appeals for illness, injury and accident, which this obviously is not. If we allowed appeals for every time an administration “dropped the ball,” to use your term, then that would always be the out. “We did not know the student was overage...we did not know that the student didn’t live with his parents and so wasn’t eligible...etc” I just don’t think that would work, and we actually have a provision in the rules that says that “ignorance of a rule by the student or the school is not sufficient grounds to set it aside.” This is also not a new rule at all but has been in place for years. We even looked at one point at some kind of “senior exception” but the school people in the state did not approve that because they said the academic provisions are not that tough to meet anyway and it would appear the rules are being relaxed and kids don’t even have to go to school half time. Keep in mind that you could be eligible to participate if you took only one course in the spring (if the school allowed that) if you had passed the minimum load in the fall."
"Keep in mind, too, that we are an organization of the member schools, who have set the rules and then agree to abide by them. Neither the school nor the school system (and the school is the constituent member of the NCHSAA) have talked about an appeal. We also have been consistent, which is an important point, and have not allowed exceptions in this situation before."
Below is part of an email that Booker's parents have written. Read it with the understanding that their entire family is very hurt at this point in time and they have strong feelings on the decision being made. This could very well be a wake up call to many around the state, so please take note.
Sabotaged Season
Going into a promising track season in this his senior year, my son had hopes of bringing home a championship in the hurdles. He started off with the 08 indoor season and currently holds the 2nd fastest times in the 55 and 60 meter hurdles in the nation. Being a stronger 110 meter hurdler, he expected to win a title in the 08 outdoor season. Low and behold due to a technicality not to his fault he is being penalized for a ruling that he knew absolutely nothing about.
My son Booker Nunley IV, a nationally ranked track athlete, who is also an honor student at Garner Magnet High School, will not be allowed to participate in this year’s outdoor track season nor finish out his indoor track season by participating in the 4A NC State Meet. Booker coming into this school year only needed one class to graduate and that was English. He was informed by his counselor that by North Carolina law he needed to take at least two courses a semester as a student in North Carolina, which he signed up for. He went to school all semester taking these two classes, which he finished with a B average in both classes for the semester. Needless to say this was not enough and at the end of the semester he was deemed ineligible. The actual fact is that he needed to take three courses the previous semester to be eligible to participate in winter and spring athletics. The question is how could Garner let this happen to an athlete of his caliber or any athlete?
Who is to blame? Could it be my wife or I? After all we were told by an official at the Wake County Public School System that even though the school did drop the ball or baton in track terms, we should have read the fine print on the physical form that stated the requirements for each athlete. I am here to state or to ask what is the percentage of parents that after reading the form once a year will remember word for word details of all the requirements. Most parents are just proud to see their kids wanting to participate in sports so they glance over it, complete the physical requirements portion, sign it and send it back. If it is our fault for not remembering word for word what we read once a year and then insuring that the school enrolled our son in three courses to be eligible to put his body on the line to participate in sports for them, then blame us. It is already giving my wife and I a sick feeling on what happened, now go ahead and put us under with an it’s your fault as well mentality. Where were the checks and balances to insure that this did not happen? We always hear when the student does not perform in class or has not been a respectable individual, but this is not the case. We are talking about a kid that did what he was told and thought he was doing what was required of him to compete. We constantly give athletes in the world chance after chance after chance to perform after they have done wrong. In this case what is the fault of the athlete? Can someone tell me? Let’s remember that this is a 17 year old who can not sign off or do anything that an adult or his counselor or teacher should sign off on. He was following only what was told to him. How now can he be the victim?
Let’s check the policy. The policy states that a student that wishes to participate in the next season’s sport must take three courses in a school that has a block format, which is what Garner falls under. He would only have needed to take two classes as a senior not participating in sports. Why are non-student athletes held to a lesser standard than student athletes? What is the point in that? He only needed one class to graduate and that was AP English. He even signed up for Physics and a Marketing class for this semester. What is the point of the extra class for a senior who only needed one class to graduate? The policy for one senior should apply for all seniors. According to the policy all athletes are subject to the rule even seniors. There is no appeals process or exceptions even though parties have acknowledged that the school was at fault for not catching the error. Even convicted murderers get appeals. This can not be fair to the student athlete. I don’t see how the rule in this kind of situation can promote fairness. Why would a school allow an athlete to go ineligible because he did not take a third course? He could have taken an extra gym class according to the NCHSAA association. Okay, let me understand this; you are going to make them take three courses but they can be space holder classes. The system is not worried about them taking classes to prepare for college. They just want them to take classes to adhere to the letter of the law. This makes you wonder why most student athletes are not prepared for college. I am not saying that every student athlete should take classes to become lawyers or doctors, but the school system should if they are going to make a rule like this make sure that the student is not just taking classes to occupy time as specified by a rule.
This policy gives responsibility and punishment to no one but the student athlete. The coach, the Athletic Director, nor the principal can be accused of wrong doing. In this world we live in, I thought that the grown-ups were responsible for what the child does and also responsible for insuring that the kid is informed of what is needed. Why is that not the case here? When student athletes attend college they will have counselors and tutors assigned just for the athletes; to insure that all athletes will know what is required of them. The only way an athlete can fail is if he or she refuses to follow direction. It’s not like Booker was told he had to take three classes and he refused to follow direction and only took two. Let’s state the obvious here; our son was never informed of the policy. As it has been felt throughout this letter the only person being held accountable here is our son Booker. I looked throughout the penalty code and there is no fine or penalty for the coach or administration for failing to give an athlete a thorough explanation of his eligibility requirements. Booker on the other hand pays the fine by becoming ineligible and in this case having to waste his senior season because of incompetence. It seems to me the rule is setup to protect the system, because it clearly states there is no appeal process for not knowing the policy. Who are they talking about should have known the policy. Did the parents or the athletes go to the mandatory coach’s seminars and meetings required by NCHSAA? Did the coaches and Athletic Directors provide this information to the athletes and parents? Did the school, the Board of Education, or the NCHSAA send literature out to athletes, students or parents pertaining to eligibility requirements? Were there even letters sent to parents inviting them to the coaches and AD meetings? I believe that is a resounding NO THEY DID NOT!!!!
What are we teaching the athletes? What benefit is this ruling to an athlete who has been a model student? Is this how Garner treats all of their student athletes? Maybe this would explain why there are so many talented athletes that flow through Garner but never make it to College or beyond. If they will allow this to happen to a nationally ranked athlete; what about the average student athlete there? How can an athlete be handcuffed and detained at school for fighting earlier in the week and allowed to be back on the field to play football in the same week. Yet my son who is a model student athlete, good grades and has never been a disciplinary problem, have his high school athletic career come to an end over him not taking 1 additional class that was not needed for him to graduate but just to fill time and space. It is no wonder so many of our Collegiate and Professional athletes find themselves in trouble. It obviously starts in high school because it appears that the athlete can have a second chance for disruptive behavior, just as long as he doesn’t commit a felony. Think about the message that this particular policy sends to the student athlete. They are already held to a higher accountability than their fellow students. Must they also be held to a higher accountability than the coaches, athletic directors and administrative staff?
Booker is very hurt and feels betrayed by his coach of 4 years who is also the Dean of Students, the Athletic Director, the Principle and all other governing bodies that are involved with the decision to punish him and declare him ineligible. My wife and I are very proud of his accomplishments in every aspect of his life. We congratulate him on what he has already achieved. It is our prayer that the system will take a look at this particular situation and have a heart, compassion and reasoning of the minds and reinstate his eligibility for the remaining season.
Sincerely,
Mr. & Mrs. Booker Nunley III