College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

Have any UCLA coaches in any sport ever been implicated in unethical recruiting behavior in the past? If so, what happened to that sport (or those sports)?
Sam Gilbert in the early 80's cast a shadow over the Wooden era and then coach Larry Brown. UCLA was give a 2 year probation, no post season play in 1982 and vacated the 1980 runner-up finish in the national title game. While no coaches were ever directly implicated it was assumed that they knew about Gilbert, they knew he was paying recruits, and they did nothing to stop it.
 
I don’t believe that narrative at all. I just think that’s what UCLA will sell to keep Cromwell and hope the public buys it while they vilify the other major players.

What i think happened is Jorge told Amanda hey I’ve got a friends kid who really wants to get in. Her parents are loaded and can help with your program financially. Could you use her as a manager for a year? Amanda said ok and admitted her as a w soccer player and then rostered her. Never at any time did anyone think the girl would actually suit up at practice or any other time.

To what degree admitting a kid as an athlete when they are not deserving of the special admit is illegal (law wise, ncaa wise or school policy wise) we will see. And who the axe ultimately falls on.
Yes but... In the criminal indictment, it clearly stated that Singer forwarded the transcript and test scores to a "UCLA women's soccer coach". Then on June 28, 2016, the UCLA Student-Athlete Admissions Committee granted "provisional student athlete admission" to Isackson, provided she met certain requirements. One of those was "participating on the UCLA team as a student-athlete for a minimum of one full academic year".

upload_2019-3-20_9-4-8.png

So, the key questions are

1) Does a "team Manager" meet the definition of "student-athlete"?
2) Are team managers issued uniforms?
3) Is it normal/acceptable for someone who is considered a "team manager" to be listed on the team's web site and in their media guide as a player at the position of "Midfielder"?
 
Well, the question is, what devalues the school/program/degree more? Getting rid of Cromwell or keeping her and finding a way to make this go away? If I were an alum, I’d want to move on from this as quickly as possible and stay out of the headlines as much as possible. Firing Cromwell would be huge and. They’d likely start seeing a lot of transfers...

If I were UCLA, I find out if anyone else took payments and if so, they’re gone, no question. As for the rest, all admissions and recruits would have to go through the admissions committee with more oversight and rules around practice squad players, etc...

On the flipside, given there is demand, I can see Universities set up supporter programs where parents can donate to the school and get priority for their kids, students still have requirements to meet and are not guaranteed - perhaps allot a certain number of spots. This way school programs are funded and it ensures in one way or another each student/parent is contributing to the university whether academically or financially. As an applicant, you now have multiple ways to get into the school of your choice.

Nice well thought out response. Although I have to ask... did you see they put #41 on the cover of the N.Y. Post today too? A couple days ago I could see possibly saying wait to see which way this goes, but not any more. UCLA is becoming the face of this whole thing.

Sweeping the scandal under the rug and hoping the courts clear the University’s name at this point just means every hungry young reporter and member of the NCAA who is looking to make a name for themselves is going to come calling. The University needs to get ahead of the outrage by being proactive about protecting their name or it’s going to get worse.
 
Last edited:
Have any UCLA coaches in any sport ever been implicated in unethical recruiting behavior in the past? If so, what happened to that sport (or those sports)?
ooops, forgot Jim Harrick was fired as basketball coach in 1997 for taking two players to dinner, paying the bill and falsifying the expense report. Claimed it was his wife and someone else at the table, not the two players. This amounted to an improper benefit.

Seems to me that paying for dinner and falsifying an expense report is trivial compared to what the women's soccer program condoned in this instance.
 
College Admissions Scandal
Published 28 mins ago
UCLA student had no business playing for top soccer program: report



lauren-isackson.jpg

Lauren Isackson supposedly played midfielder for UCLA. (UCLA)

A UCLA student whose parents are wrapped up in a nationwide college admissions scandal involving dozens of parents and prominent universities was listed on the university's 2017 women’s soccer team that finished as runner-up to the national champions -- even though she reportedly lacked playing experience.



Lauren Isackson’s 2017 roster profile showed she made the honorable mention team in the West Bay Athletic League in 2014, but prosecutors alleged she never played competitive soccer prior to joining the Bruins, the Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday.


WERE LORI LOUGHLIN AND OTHER COLLEGE ADMISSIONS SCANDAL PARENTS DRIVEN BY THIS BEHAVIORAL DISORDER?

Isackson was part of a recruiting class that was touted by experts as the second-best in the nation, the newspaper reported. Her teammates included Hailie Mace, who went on to make the U.S. national team, and Anika Rodriguez, who was second on the team in points and goals, and Ashley Sanchez, who had participated in U.S. National team camps before joining the Bruins in 2017.


There were no statistics listed for Isackson for the 2017 season despite being listed as a midfielder. Prosecutors said Isackson had no competitive soccer experience before going to UCLA, according to the Los Angeles Times.

“Some team members are on the roster for the purposes of preparing the team for competition, and may not play in games,” UCLA Tod Tamberg told the newspaper Monday, adding that Isackson was no longer on the soccer team, but was still a student at UCLA.

Bruce Isackson and his wife Davina allegedly began conspiring with William “Rick” Singer, who pleaded guilty to several charges of racketeering and money laundering last week, in 2015. Isackson’s fake athletic profile was sent to UCLA men’s soccer coach Jorge Salcedo, according to the newspaper. Salcedo then reportedly passed the teen’s test scores and transcripts to an unnamed coach on the women’s team.

The Isacksons allegedly gave Singer more than 2,100 Facebook stock shares in the form of donations to the Key Worldwide Foundation, the Los Angeles Times reported, citing an affidavit. Singer reportedly used the charity to pay Salcedo and Ali Khosroshahin, a former USC coach who allegedly passed Isackson’s profile to Salcedo.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Salcedo was the only person from UCLA indicted in the scheme and was placed on leave. The scandal has swept up other high-profile individuals, including Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman
 
Since this is a soccer forum the portion of this that would seem to most concern us is what happened at UCLA. I agree that it does not look good for Cromwell. She either knew about this or should have known. While the players must have known something was strange, it would be almost impossible for a D1 soccer player to question the coach. It is very sad for the players to go through this turmoil.
The kids on the teams are victims. Greed by adults who they trusted.

On another thread a parent said that the speculation is off-base....so we will see. If this is the case the school needs to aggressively push back ASAP, as the national media now has this story and is running with it.
 
It seems clear from the direction the school spokesman is going that they intend to see if the men's coach can absorb all of the blame.

Reading between the lines from what he said in this article, the story the school would be pitching would be something like this:

1. Men's coach submitted a falsified athletic profile to the womens coaches...suggests that the player will be able to help the team and doesn't require any scholarship money. Women's coaches agree based on strong recommendation from men's coach without seeing her play.
2. Student gets admitted as a recruited non-scholarship athlete.
3. At some point (could have been back in step 1, or after the women's coaches realize the the girl is not an athlete nor a soccer player), the women's coaches classify the girl as a practice player. This is well after the admission, and she may have already started at the school.
4. Given the options at this point, the women's coaches decide to just let it be and not raise the issue back to the school (and report on the men's coach). It is just for a year and they didn't knowingly do anything wrong.

I agree Gflnk, and the Bruin spokesman laid out the defense:

"UCLA spokesman Tod Tamberg said he was barred from discussing individual students, citing student privacy laws.

But he said teams at UCLA were composed of “student-athletes with varying levels of athletic achievements.”"

Translation: Exactly...varying levels of talent...please move along, nothing to see here folks...

If no money was exchanged by the women's coaches then I think they are all clear. Also, Salecedo could have concocted a lie to the women's side to grease the deal. We don't know. If there is a reprimand for the women's coach it can be handled internally and privately. Cromwell has a great reputation, seems beloved by her players, and has taken the team to the highest levels, which is important at UCLA.
 
I agree Gflnk, and the Bruin spokesman laid out the defense:

"UCLA spokesman Tod Tamberg said he was barred from discussing individual students, citing student privacy laws.

But he said teams at UCLA were composed of “student-athletes with varying levels of athletic achievements.”"

Translation: Exactly...varying levels of talent...please move along, nothing to see here folks...

If no money was exchanged by the women's coaches then I think they are all clear. Also, Salecedo could have concocted a lie to the women's side to grease the deal. We don't know. If there is a reprimand for the women's coach it can be handled internally and privately. Cromwell has a great reputation, seems beloved by her players, and has taken the team to the highest levels, which is important at UCLA.

No college has a better PR staff than UCLA, except maybe USC.
 
.............which is important at UCLA.
That's the part I'm not 100% sure. How important is one women' sport compared to UCLA's overall reputation in the grand scheme of things? We, the people on this forum, value the accomplishment of the women' soccer team. But I can honestly tell you I can't name another UCLA head coach other than the men's football and basketball coaches.

In any case, I agree UCLA needs to move quickly to get out of the spotlight so they can hire Rick Pitino soon :).
 
No college has a better PR staff than UCLA, except maybe USC.
Tod Tamberg said, " Some team memebers are on the roster for the purpose of preparing the team for competitiion, and may not play in games." How in the heck can you say this is a GREAT PR statement. Please explain to me what purpose Lauren Isachson could have possibly served in helping the team prepare for competition. She had no soccer talent or experience. Did she ride a pony around the field to try and distract players? Did she regale them with stories of her most memorbale athletic acheivement, jusmping horses over rails? What function did she serve to help prepare the team. please Mr. Tamberg enlighten me.
 
Tod Tamberg said, " Some team memebers are on the roster for the purpose of preparing the team for competitiion, and may not play in games." How in the heck can you say this is a GREAT PR statement. Please explain to me what purpose Lauren Isachson could have possibly served in helping the team prepare for competition. She had no soccer talent or experience. Did she ride a pony around the field to try and distract players? Did she regale them with stories of her most memorbale athletic acheivement, jusmping horses over rails? What function did she serve to help prepare the team. please Mr. Tamberg enlighten me.

I agree... these sorts of non-answers are just going to make people even madder. Did anyone read the comments left on the UCLA article in the LATimes? I just don't get the feeling this isn't just going blow over with a two sentence response about how they can't talk about the issues because of rights of the people who gamed the system.
 
I understand UCLA is one component to this. But, what about the other Cali school in question? I realize the coach isn't there anymore, but will they face sanctions? Or any of the other schools for that matter? Yale? Same thing. Coach left, but what are the ramifications in this train wreck?
 
The narrative can change very quickly on UCLA. Better clean the house now. As investigators and the news said. “We are at the tip of the iceberg”.

Fact - a student involved in the scandal finds herself on the UCLA women’s soccer team.

Fact - Cromwell is in charge of the women’s soccer team/roster.

Conclusion- Cromwell added a non soccer player to the team which aided in her admittance to UCLA. IMO she was doing someone a favor and thought it was harmless.

Hey just offer Tiffany Roberts 250k and a national powerhouse team and she will take the job. She took over for Cromwell at UCF and has similar credentials and success.
 
Just amazing how money can quickly strip one of their morality. Reminds me of similar occurrences when it came to club soccer (and probably every other pay-to-play sport). Leaving a few spots on the roster just in case a cash cow came along and could help the team, the coach or the club even though little Susie would have a rough time making the roster on the C or D team. Winning Surf Cup (or whatever is the big to do nowadays) and just being in the team picture with a trophy or getting accepted into a prestigious school, it is all about the picture and not about having what it takes, (wouldn't be surprised to see classes being passed due to favors). Which is worse, the fact that there are those that are willing to spend the money or those that see the demand and thus are willing to provide the service?

Kind of miss the good ole days on the forum.
 
I understand UCLA is one component to this. But, what about the other Cali school in question? I realize the coach isn't there anymore, but will they face sanctions? Or any of the other schools for that matter? Yale? Same thing. Coach left, but what are the ramifications in this train wreck?
Have to think as this situation dives deeper in to the investigation they will uncover more which will lead to further investigations across the country to prominent universities. This is not a California problem but one that is more than likely larger. So to throw disparaging comments that the culture in California, as so many have, to direct blame is so easy and without merit. What is done here is done else where. It's just magnified, but none the less happens.
 
Have to think as this situation dives deeper in to the investigation they will uncover more which will lead to further investigations across the country to prominent universities. This is not a California problem but one that is more than likely larger. So to throw disparaging comments that the culture in California, as so many have, to direct blame is so easy and without merit. What is done here is done else where. It's just magnified, but none the less happens.

Wow, you are a moron.
 
Back
Top