INDIANAPOLIS – The Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee has upheld the NCAA staff decision to deny the eligibility extension request for University of Cincinnati football student-athlete Ben Mauk. 

“Our review of the facts as presented and possible mitigating factors for this eligibility request was extensive and thorough, exhausting all avenues in the administrative procedures and ensuring a fair process for this student-athlete,” said Carol Iwaoka, NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee chair and associate commissioner of the Big Ten Conference. “Even after reviewing the latest information, the committee was unable to identify compelling factors that might be viewed as beyond the control of the student-athlete and the University of Cincinnati.”

NCAA rules indicate that a Division I student-athlete can complete his or her four seasons within five years from initial full-time enrollment. Based on legislation adopted by NCAA member institutions, a member college or university must demonstrate the student-athlete was denied at least two participation opportunities for reasons beyond the control of the student-athlete or the institution in order to have an extension of this time period.

Although the university was able to establish the 2006-07 season was a denied participation opportunity when Mr. Mauk was granted a hardship waiver, Cincinnati was unable to establish a second denied participation opportunity. Based on exhaustive review of all the information, the committee determined that the student-athlete was not incapacitated due to medical reasons, and was unable to identify other compelling factors to grant an extension of time under the five year rule.

The NCAA student-athlete reinstatement staff considered the matter three times, after two requests for reconsideration from the University of Cincinnati based on new information. Institutions may appeal staff denials to the committee. In this latest appeal, the committee reviewed the information submitted by the university and provided Mr. Mauk with the opportunity to speak directly to the committee. The committee considered in total the original appeal information, all new information submitted during the latest review and statements made during the teleconference appeal.

-30-