College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

No, you are. Here is what your people in Arizona think of your state. So, keep on being you with useless posts. Your limited posts with angered biased opinions that are not supported by anything are old and have no weight with anyone. I only entertain you because you respond. But, most don't because they see no value in what you do. My mistake clicking the ignore button.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...orrupt-state-doug-ducey-fact-check/620391002/

https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...arizona-has-severe-prison-problem/1337474002/[/QUOTE]
 
Supermodel56 said:
Geez... back to topic at hand...

Wasn’t there more than one CA school? UCLA, USC, and Stanford?
Click to expand...

I'd say because the UCLA Women's Soccer team seemingly has a real shot at winning a National Title, and given that they haven't yet given a clear reason to think otherwise- it looks like they are willing to risk the integrity of their program and the university, in order avoid risking that shot. Maybe if they were the the New England Patriots that might fly... but we're talking amateur athletics at a public university.

That said, I have no real idea what the truth is (as I'm really just a parent sitting in bed typing away on my computer), and people like MAP who are in a better position to know then me seem quite adamite that there is nothing nefarious happening. So I think I that should be taken into account too.
 
Supermodel56 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Wow, I'd hate to hear your hot take on the problems, or merit, as the case may be, of pay-to-play in youth soccer.
 
Supermodel56 said:
You make a great point - Cromwell has the discretion to admit anyone she wants for whatever reason - as a favor or anything else. Hopefully she didn’t accept any payments or compensation - in that case, I think while it may be a bit embarrassing for the program, she hopefully should survive this.
Click to expand...
regardless of accepting payments or compensation, she still participated in helping a student gain admission to the university under fraud. I don't think she can escape consequences for that. She was the head coach and at the end of the day had the final word on who is added to the roster. She used the separate student-athlete admissions process for a student that didn't meet that criteria.
 
Soccer43 said:
regardless of accepting payments or compensation, she still participated in helping a student gain admission to the university under fraud. I don't think she can escape consequences for that. She was the head coach and at the end of the day had the final word on who is added to the roster. She used the separate student-athlete admissions process for a student that didn't meet that criteria.
Click to expand...

I hear ya, that said, I can see how she may not have had any idea regarding the terms and just allowed the player to train, be added to the team as a favor - or it could've have been a subordinate who did everything (did Isackson even actually show up to practice?) People do favors all the time. She may not have known the mens coach was getting paid, who knows - maybe they told her some crazy story that it was a misprint and it'd get removed eventually (assuming Isackson never actually step foot on the field). But I agree, in most organizations, if you're the lead, it's your job to know and this is stuff that people in normal corporate environments get fired for all the time. Really a shame.
 
So favors are allowed is what I'm reading, and compromising integrity is just a byproduct of the favor provided, therefore not really an issue.
 
Supermodel56 said:
I hear ya, that said, I can see how she may not have had any idea regarding the terms and just allowed the player to train, be added to the team as a favor - or it could've have been a subordinate who did everything (did Isackson even actually show up to practice?) People do favors all the time. She may not have known the mens coach was getting paid, who knows - maybe they told her some crazy story that it was a misprint and it'd get removed eventually (assuming Isackson never actually step foot on the field). But I agree, in most organizations, if you're the lead, it's your job to know and this is stuff that people in normal corporate environments get fired for all the time. Really a shame.
Click to expand...
It is easier to see if you open your eyes.
 
My understanding is that the head coach has to submit the information to the student- athlete admissions process? This is a separate admission process than the regular admission process. The women’s soccer staff had to actively create this opportunity for a student to get admitted to the school in a fraudulent way. If I am speeding and just don’t know they speed limit on that road I still get a ticket - as a licensed driver it is my responsibility to know the laws and follow them and I am not given a pass because of ignorance.
 
Soccer43 said:
My understanding is that the head coach has to submit the information to the student- athlete admissions process? This is a separate admission process than the regular admission process. The women’s soccer staff had to actively create this opportunity for a student to get admitted to the school in a fraudulent way. If I am speeding and just don’t know they speed limit on that road I still get a ticket - as a licensed driver it is my responsibility to know the laws and follow them and I am not given a pass because of ignorance.
Click to expand...

Bad analogy - When you speed, you May have broken the basic speed law but even then, the officer has the discretion as to whether or not to write you a ticket. If he doesn’t give you a ticket, has he broken the law? No. He takes into account the entire situation.

You’re assuming the women’s soccer staff actually broke any rules by allowing her to join the team. If Cromwell has the authority to roster a player for whatever reason, she may not have broken any rules. Haven’t you ever seen the movie Rudy?!? In fact, let’s say it was Cromwell who approved - I’m assuming that since she was not indicted, she never took any money or got anything out of the favor. In fact, she requested transcripts to make sure the student made the minimum requirements before allowing it. She helped a kid who was qualified to get into the school to give her a chance.

Nobody knows the situation, her relationship with the person asking for the favor, how the situation was framed to her, etc... they could’ve totally lied to her and made it seem like something else - like, this kids got cancer and is gonna die, this is her make a wish...
 
Soccer43 said:
regardless of accepting payments or compensation, she still participated in helping a student gain admission to the university under fraud. I don't think she can escape consequences for that. She was the head coach and at the end of the day had the final word on who is added to the roster. She used the separate student-athlete admissions process for a student that didn't meet that criteria.
Click to expand...
Been happening for decades......
 
Supermodel56 said:
Bad analogy - When you speed, you May have broken the basic speed law but even then, the officer has the discretion as to whether or not to write you a ticket. If he doesn’t give you a ticket, has he broken the law? No. He takes into account the entire situation.

You’re assuming the women’s soccer staff actually broke any rules by allowing her to join the team. If Cromwell has the authority to roster a player for whatever reason, she may not have broken any rules. Haven’t you ever seen the movie Rudy?!? In fact, let’s say it was Cromwell who approved - I’m assuming that since she was not indicted, she never took any money or got anything out of the favor. In fact, she requested transcripts to make sure the student made the minimum requirements before allowing it. She helped a kid who was qualified to get into the school to give her a chance.

Nobody knows the situation, her relationship with the person asking for the favor, how the situation was framed to her, etc... they could’ve totally lied to her and made it seem like something else - like, this kids got cancer and is gonna die, this is her make a wish...
Click to expand...
Cancer... make-a-wish... I think somebody just found a new “side door”.
 
SpeedK1llz said:
Cancer... make-a-wish... I think somebody just found a new “side door”.
Click to expand...
UCLA statement shows there has been a side door. The spokesman for ucla stated some team members are on the roster for purposes of preparing the team for competition and may not play in games. Now I know of several girls who have not seen the field in the two years they've been there but I also know they have great soccer backgrounds. This #41 has no soccer background and the fbi agrees something shady was going on. The coach took her application to the athletic committee for approval which was granted and rostered her on her team. That's a big favor to pull and I don't believe its the mens soccer coach was the only one behind it. Is it normal for a coach of one team to present these types of requests to the committee for another coaches team? I think not. UCLA is trying to save face but the favors in exchange for $$$ scheme is coming out to light and it isn't looking good.
 
Supermodel56 said:
Bad analogy - When you speed, you May have broken the basic speed law but even then, the officer has the discretion as to whether or not to write you a ticket. If he doesn’t give you a ticket, has he broken the law? No. He takes into account the entire situation.

You’re assuming the women’s soccer staff actually broke any rules by allowing her to join the team. If Cromwell has the authority to roster a player for whatever reason, she may not have broken any rules. Haven’t you ever seen the movie Rudy?!? In fact, let’s say it was Cromwell who approved - I’m assuming that since she was not indicted, she never took any money or got anything out of the favor. In fact, she requested transcripts to make sure the student made the minimum requirements before allowing it. She helped a kid who was qualified to get into the school to give her a chance.

Nobody knows the situation, her relationship with the person asking for the favor, how the situation was framed to her, etc... they could’ve totally lied to her and made it seem like something else - like, this kids got cancer and is gonna die, this is her make a wish...
Click to expand...
I agree with this, except for one assumption you made.

The fact that no one from the program was indicted yet - doesn't mean much.

The indictment names some women's coach as an unindicted conspirator (they helped the men's coach further his crime). This happens for a few reasons, but usually because the prosecutors have suspicion and they know that person was involved, but they don't have the evidence to charge that person. It is a clear sign that they intend to see if they can find that evidence.

The most likely person they would get it from would be the men's coach...who may take time to get to a suitable agreement.

For the current women's coaches, I think a better sign for them is the the school hasn't suspended any of them yet, and the school has gathered stories....so the school likely believes they haven't done anything that warrants dismissal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top