I agree that that’s what has people in an uproar. The UCLA women’s coach did a favor and helped some one get admitted to UCLA by giving them the special admission process reserved for athletes to a non athlete. It went to the athletic commission and passed so either the committee was fooled or they turned a blind eye. These types of favors taint someone’s credibility.
College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach
- Thread starter Dos Equis
- Start date
Dos Equis
GOLD
Every head coach at a major/top university understands the value and importance of the "golden ticket", what most call a preferential athletic admission with or without a scholarship. The Universities' entrust their athletic programs, specifically the coaches, to safeguard these assets and spend them as agreed upon on deserving athletes, not anyway they see fit.
The best defense she has is claiming she delegated recruiting responsibilities to a coach (who has since left), and she was ignorant of the situation (a bit difficult given the roster and media guide, but it happens). That would imply she exercised poor oversight of her program, and poor judgement in people. Perhaps they can then justify a reprimand or some sort of probation, since they likely want to keep her.
Claiming she did not know better, or was taken advantage of by a friend asking for a favor, should both end in her termination.
The best defense she has is claiming she delegated recruiting responsibilities to a coach (who has since left), and she was ignorant of the situation (a bit difficult given the roster and media guide, but it happens). That would imply she exercised poor oversight of her program, and poor judgement in people. Perhaps they can then justify a reprimand or some sort of probation, since they likely want to keep her.
Claiming she did not know better, or was taken advantage of by a friend asking for a favor, should both end in her termination.
Supermodel56
SILVER ELITE
Not really, we live in a society where we so easily disqualfy someone (others of course, never ourselves) because they make one mistake when otherwise they’re actually the best person for the job. She’s a phenomenal soccer coach. She did someone a favor, that doesn’t reduce her ability to coach and build nationally winning teams. Will she go unpunished, no. But based on your logic, because of this, does that mean she no longer should be allowed to coach anywhere? And if not at UCLA, where?
It’s ridiculous. The standard and scrutiny we hold leaders to are frankly unachievable because no one is perfect and at some point they’ll make a mistake. But that mentality is how we end up with leaders who are pathological liars only good at creating and maintaining a fake persona. Those are the real ones we have to worry about - the ones that are too squeaky clean and always say all the right things only what we want to hear.
If she didn’t get any personal benefit out of this and truly did it as a favor to help a kid out because she was lied to, I don’t think this should be career ending. It’d be foolish for UCLA and would really be a shame. Chalk it up to a lesson learned, close some of the loopholes on athletic admissions, increase oversight, etc... I can guarantee you she’s learned her lesson and it won’t happen again...
goldentoe
SILVER
What attitude are you referring to? Don't mistake my joke as some sort of exhoneration for UCLA. Early in this thread I made my stance very clear. The Feds have confirmed a UCLA Women's soccer coach rostered Isackson as part of her admission to the university. They've also confirmed 250,000 were paid by her parents to Singer for making this happened. That's it. It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds. I think the whole thing is ridiculous, and the program should be held responsible.
Well... that this story has been front page news across the country indicates to me that most people disagree with your assessment. So with that said it seems pointless to argue with you anymore, so I guess I'll just leave it up to individual readers in here to decide for themselves.
Oh, one last thing. Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!! (I'm going to watch that movie tonight)
Last edited:
Sheriff Joe
DA
Follow the money.
I completely agree with you. I believe more information will be coming out. These coaches know how hard true soccer players work to make a coveted spot on their roster--I don't believe for a second that it was done as a "favor".
Speaking of media guide, I wonder if any parents noticed this girl? I don't have a player in college, but I would think I would be interested in seeing the media guide and I would ask my kid about players. I would like to think I would become familiar with the players after watching a few games and speaking to my daughter. Someone must have noticed!
We expect people in these coaching positions to have a level of integrity - and as I have mentioned before, because the coaches know all to well how hard the real athletes work to try to get a spot on one of their coveted rosters....To then treat an open roster spot so frivolously as to let a kid on as a "favor" and the coach then receives no gain? We are suppose to buy that? We should hold these coaches to a higher standard because we are talking about our kids. This was no careless mistake on their end. They knew it was wrong yet they did it anyway. And if they didn't know it was wrong....well, then I don't know what to say.
Messi>CR7
GOLD
Most would agree it's a fire-able offense. My employee's handbook has a huge section on ethics. Even if you just categorize it as a stupid mistake, I can tell you stupidity is a fire-able offense at every place I ever worked.
In any case, you're somewhat arguing the wrong point. The real question is after weighing the pros and cons, does UCLA "want" to fire her.
I'm pretty sure if the same scenario (coach personally received zero $, the team did not get any competitive advantages) occurred but with Chip Kelly, he would absolutely not be fired.
soccerobserver
GOLD
Here is a kid who claimed Singer solicited her Mom to participate in the scheme to get admitted into the side door of USC. The USC student called Singer a "slimy salesman"...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colleg...c-student-says-rick-singer-solicited-her-mom/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colleg...c-student-says-rick-singer-solicited-her-mom/
oh canada
GOLD
Most college teams have team managers--some with a lot of soccer experience and others with very little. UCLA makes it easy for anyone to see the rosters going back sometime: https://uclabruins.com/roster.aspx?roster=83&path=wsoc Prior managers include Amy Rodriguez's younger sister. AC has the right to give her manager spots to anyone she wants...as long as there is not a quid pro quo--money exchanged, express promise to donate to soccer team, etc. #41 got one of those spots. AC not charged in the indictment because Prosecutor doesn't have proof that the spot was given away in return for something else. It's that simple. Now, is there an oversight/management problem? Very possible, but that's not criminal.
What I CAN'T figure out is why anyone would spend $100K+ to bribe their non-athlete into UCLA or USC? Neither really known for their academic prowess. At least the Yale/Stanford/Georgetown parents swung for the fences. Kudos for the chutzpah.
What I CAN'T figure out is why anyone would spend $100K+ to bribe their non-athlete into UCLA or USC? Neither really known for their academic prowess. At least the Yale/Stanford/Georgetown parents swung for the fences. Kudos for the chutzpah.
Have you ever seen the NCAA Compliance Handbook for DI...it’s over 400 pages. I’m sure somewhere in that book it states a Coach shouldn’t commit fraud. I’m sure someone on the women’s side got paid.
Supermodel56
SILVER ELITE
I agree that true soccer players work their ass off to make the roster - but at the end of the day, if she wasn't going to fill that spot, it doesn't matter how hard your kid worked, they wouldn't have made the team. She already had her team.
Dos Equis
GOLD
1) She was listed as a player in the roster and media guide and represented as such to admissions, according to the indictment. Amy Rodriguez's sister is listed as a team manager, and has no assigned position nor uniform number.
2) Where do you get the information that UCLA coaches have the right to get chosen team managers preferential admissions? That would be quite an indictment of the entire UCLA admissions process, given this is a public university. Might even be an NCAA violation if it is used for siblings to to entice players to commit
3) Very few are claiming illegal activity on the part of AC. The front page spotlight of the story is because of the unethical nature of a student being admitted under false pretenses, and the written proof for all the world, including the coaching staff, to see.
Supermodel56
SILVER ELITE
I agree with you. in most organizations, they have to fire the person - anything otherwise, it would send the wrong message that this is okay and you can get away with it. For that reason alone, her getting fired is definitely not out of the question. I'm just saying given her pedigree, if she truly didn't break any rules and had good intentions doing a favor for a colleague, it would behoove UCLA to figure out a way to keep her.
oh canada
GOLD
I stand corrected on this point..."A student-athlete admissions committee at the school required Isackson to play for at least one year, according to an indictment."
So, in order to get into UCanLeverageAdmissions, she had to "play". Would be interesting to know what "play" means from the admissions committee. Practice juggling in your dorm room and jog a few field-lengths at a practice? There are 27 other players who all know what she did to "play" that year. With this requirement, AC cannot claim ignorance re the player's lack of soccer ability.
Supermodel56
SILVER ELITE
At the end of the day, while it is absolutely insulting to the players who busted their ass to make it on the team - and for those who worked their ass off to get in academically... most people wouldnt have $250k-500k to pay anyways and if they did, it may actually not be worth the ROI depending on their future career plans and alternative college options they had.
College as it is these days is not worth it (depending on your major and if you stick with it) nor necessary to be successful and earn a decent living. Olivia Jade would’ve done fine without college with her YouTube business leading into an acting career, etc...
Sorry to be late on this thread but am I the only one that see this as its unfair and unfortunate but it happens....
First let me acknowledge that the whole value system we hold dear and close to our hearts of fairness is the basic fabric and the core of being Americans. That said, its totally understandable that many are upset but step back for moment and think about this. The wealthy and affluent families throughout the world have had advantage of placing their offsprings into better education and social establishments.
The fact that the there was a middleman/conduit benefiting by enabling the wealthy to get their kids into better schools says he saw an opportunity to make a buck (illegal but much needed service, depending on your perspective), so service provided.
Lets separate the private and public schools first. Clearly, public school needs to be more accountable and equitable to all tax paying people who actually fund the schools. Private schools, however, can do whatever they want to in accordance to their governance and their business model. While they are all not for profit schools, it does not mean that they don't make money. Just the opposite. Just look at the endowments at these universities.
In most countries, the affluent expect their children to attend the best school. For an example, British royalty all attend Cambridge. All Chinese Communist Party leaders and the 6 families attend Tsinghua. Many middle eastern royalties also attend Cambridge and Oxford. Do you think they all got in on their own merit and hard work?
The fact that they used athletic recruiting simply says these universities are willing accept less than their normal student population qualification for athletes. Athletes are exceptions to the schools because its a way for them to make more money via boosters, TV revenues and attract support without lowering their educational standings. Yes I know soccer and most are not revenue generating but football and basketballs are and NCAA doesn't make separate rules for revenue generating vs non.
All the corrupt coaches, proctors and alike on the take, really speaks to peoples character and effect of easy money on them. They need to do a better job of doing background checks and character references than already do before they are hired.
So my point is, I get that it sucks and is not right but its also not surprising and I'm sure that similar back door entrance exist in other ways. What is surprising to me is that the parents named spent 2x, 3x, 4x or more than the total tuition costs for some of these schools to get their kid accepted into them. I mean, both UCLA and USC are fine schools but neither is worth that.
As for all those student athletes that did not get into the school because of this, well okay, I bet everyone of those who would have been at these schools fond another school to attend and play sports with. If one is good enough to be recruited by these schools, then they clearly were recruited to multiple schools.
First let me acknowledge that the whole value system we hold dear and close to our hearts of fairness is the basic fabric and the core of being Americans. That said, its totally understandable that many are upset but step back for moment and think about this. The wealthy and affluent families throughout the world have had advantage of placing their offsprings into better education and social establishments.
The fact that the there was a middleman/conduit benefiting by enabling the wealthy to get their kids into better schools says he saw an opportunity to make a buck (illegal but much needed service, depending on your perspective), so service provided.
Lets separate the private and public schools first. Clearly, public school needs to be more accountable and equitable to all tax paying people who actually fund the schools. Private schools, however, can do whatever they want to in accordance to their governance and their business model. While they are all not for profit schools, it does not mean that they don't make money. Just the opposite. Just look at the endowments at these universities.
In most countries, the affluent expect their children to attend the best school. For an example, British royalty all attend Cambridge. All Chinese Communist Party leaders and the 6 families attend Tsinghua. Many middle eastern royalties also attend Cambridge and Oxford. Do you think they all got in on their own merit and hard work?
The fact that they used athletic recruiting simply says these universities are willing accept less than their normal student population qualification for athletes. Athletes are exceptions to the schools because its a way for them to make more money via boosters, TV revenues and attract support without lowering their educational standings. Yes I know soccer and most are not revenue generating but football and basketballs are and NCAA doesn't make separate rules for revenue generating vs non.
All the corrupt coaches, proctors and alike on the take, really speaks to peoples character and effect of easy money on them. They need to do a better job of doing background checks and character references than already do before they are hired.
So my point is, I get that it sucks and is not right but its also not surprising and I'm sure that similar back door entrance exist in other ways. What is surprising to me is that the parents named spent 2x, 3x, 4x or more than the total tuition costs for some of these schools to get their kid accepted into them. I mean, both UCLA and USC are fine schools but neither is worth that.
As for all those student athletes that did not get into the school because of this, well okay, I bet everyone of those who would have been at these schools fond another school to attend and play sports with. If one is good enough to be recruited by these schools, then they clearly were recruited to multiple schools.
Have you ever heard of Jim Harrick? He won the last NCAA Championship for the Bruins in Basketball. The following year he was gone for NCAA rules violations. It doesn’t matter what kind of “Pedigree” AC has...if she is found to be compromised, UCLA will send her and her staff packing. The school has a reputation that is bigger then the women’s soccer program. And believe me UCLA is still a Basketball School.