College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

Dos Equis said:
The article reads like genuine news, not an opinion piece -- how refreshing. While there is no reference to Cromwell, it does make it clear UCLA was aware as early as 2014 of coaches helping non-athletes gain admissions through the athletic process by committing to large donations to the school/program. The coaches were willingly and knowingly gaming the system ("violating policy") and, in some cases, engaging in deceptive acts (false rosters) to hide their activity.

UCLA's recommendation, when this was discovered, was to "educate" the coaches about policy, since no law was broken. No money was returned by UCLA, no parents or students held accountable, no coaches removed/disciplined. As a comparison, Stanford fired their sailing coach for violating their "values" for essentially similar acts, even before he pled guilty to racketeering (the payments were directly linked to the fraudulent business of Singer). There is no evidence he personally gained from any payments, news reports it all went to the sailing program.

We can all have an opinion on what UCLA's response to these violations says about UCLA as an institution. They are using our tax dollars, therefore we also should expect more from them. While the acquiescence of the women's soccer staff in the admissions process and roster fraud may not break any law, borrowing the words of their athletic director, it is "disturbing and unacceptable."
Click to expand...

Stanford is a private entity, so their employment contracts (and employment litigation history) may be considerably different from those of UCLA. Stanford could also just pay off an employee (such as "how much will it cost us for you to just go away") whose behavior has embarrassed the institution without it becoming a public record.
 
espola said:
Stanford is a private entity, so their employment contracts (and employment litigation history) may be considerably different from those of UCLA. Stanford could also just pay off an employee (such as "how much will it cost us for you to just go away") whose behavior has embarrassed the institution without it becoming a public record.
Click to expand...

While I realize you like being devil's advocate, are you really suggesting any disciplinary action for engaging in fraudulent activity (someone produced and approved the fake roster and media guides, that is a fact) might have been appealed based on their employment contracts, therefore UCLA decided to do nothing? That does not improve my view of UCLA's response here. These are not tenured professors, coaches are typically at will employees.
 
Dos Equis said:
While I realize you like being devil's advocate, are you really suggesting any disciplinary action for engaging in fraudulent activity (someone produced and approved the fake roster and media guides, that is a fact) might have been appealed based on their employment contracts, therefore UCLA decided to do nothing? That does not improve my view of UCLA's response here. These are not tenured professors, coaches are typically at will employees.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying UCLA can't (or won't eventually) fire the women's socccer coach over this, but pointing out a difference between how the institutions operate.
 
Someone in the UCLA women's program at the time knew. They had to. Mahybe they don't work there anymore, maybe they still do, maybe several people knew. I would think that if it was as simple as this persosn knew, they are no longer with the program, UCLA would have made that announcement already. Someone on the Women's side has to take the fall. They can't blame Salcedo and move on. He did not have the power to have a player rostered, in the media guide, etc... Someone did a favor and has to take the fall. UCLA needs to name the person on the women's side.
 
Sons of Pitches said:
Someone in the UCLA women's program at the time knew. They had to. Mahybe they don't work there anymore, maybe they still do, maybe several people knew. I would think that if it was as simple as this persosn knew, they are no longer with the program, UCLA would have made that announcement already. Someone on the Women's side has to take the fall. They can't blame Salcedo and move on. He did not have the power to have a player rostered, in the media guide, etc... Someone did a favor and has to take the fall. UCLA needs to name the person on the women's side.
Click to expand...

"needs"?
 
Grow The Game said:
I noticed that innocence wasn’t one of your speculative options. Would you be upset if nothing happens?
Click to expand...

So her name and picture appeared on the roster spontaneously? No one asked her to pose for a picture, no one assigned her a uniform number, no one published her profile in the media guide? It was elves? Notre Dame has a Leprechaun, not UCLA.

Someone in the soccer program participated.
 
Dos Equis said:
So her name and picture appeared on the roster spontaneously? No one asked her to pose for a picture, no one assigned her a uniform number, no one published her profile in the media guide? It was elves? Notre Dame has a Leprechaun, not UCLA.

Someone in the soccer program participated.
Click to expand...

That’s pretty funny but not a fact. The sports information department is in charge of the media guide so no, not elves. For all of the actual evidence that has been presented it could be you!

Regardless of the entertainment that you get by speculating. And in spite of how satisfying it might be to you personally to have something happen to the coaching staff there, nobody has anything and the emails will prove it. That is why they are sitting tight and doing what innocent people do. They go about their business and let the peanut gallery feed the elephants.

Hey if you get your rocks off by wishing people ill I think there are much better targets. But carry on if you wish, just don’t be pissed off at the team because your speculation was for naught.

Have a great day!
 
Grow The Game said:
That’s pretty funny but not a fact. The sports information department is in charge of the media guide so no, not elves. For all of the actual evidence that has been presented it could be you!

Regardless of the entertainment that you get by speculating. And in spite of how satisfying it might be to you personally to have something happen to the coaching staff there, nobody has anything and the emails will prove it. That is why they are sitting tight and doing what innocent people do. They go about their business and let the peanut gallery feed the elephants.

Hey if you get your rocks off by wishing people ill I think there are much better targets. But carry on if you wish, just don’t be pissed off at the team because your speculation was for naught.

Have a great day!
Click to expand...
GrowTG, I am a fan of the Bruins. As such it pains me greatly to write that USC has set the example of how innocent parties handled the issue of phantom players on the wsoccer roster. USC Athletic Director Lynn Swan explained to the LA Times that an administrative individual put the fake players on the roster that was presented to his admissions committee. Then after the fake player was admitted, the USC administrator took the player off the list of admitted players that was sent to the USC coach. Makes sense.

Moreover, if you read the complaint filed by the Feds, when new USC wsoccer coach McAlpine did eventually see a fake player on one of his lists, Coach McAlpine emailed her to demand to meet her since he did not know her. After the fake player failed to respond to McAlpine, he emailed the fake player and cc'd other USC officials renouncing her and stating he had no idea who she was and therefore would not count her in his numbers. I am sad to say that if UCLA had nothing to hide then they would proffer a similarly easy to understand explanation and thereby clear the smoke in the air.
 
soccerobserver said:
GrowTG, I am a fan of the Bruins. As such it pains me greatly to write that USC has set the example of how innocent parties handled the issue of phantom players on the wsoccer roster. USC Athletic Director Lynn Swan explained to the LA Times that an administrative individual put the fake players on the roster that was presented to his admissions committee. Then after the fake player was admitted, the USC administrator took the player off the list of admitted players that was sent to the USC coach. Makes sense.

Moreover, if you read the complaint filed by the Feds, when new USC wsoccer coach McAlpine did eventually see a fake player on one of his lists, Coach McAlpine emailed her to demand to meet her since he did not know her. After the fake player failed to respond to McAlpine, he emailed the fake player and cc'd other USC officials renouncing her and stating he had no idea who she was and therefore would not count her in his numbers. I am sad to say that if UCLA had nothing to hide then they would proffer a similarly easy to understand explanation and thereby clear the smoke in the air.
Click to expand...

Is that how you think that it should go? You have no idea what happened behind the scenes so you are just speculating and placing your opinions out there. Does this affect you? Did your daughter lose a spot because of anything that went on? Why do you care? USC did what they did to cover their collective asses due to an extreme lack of institutional control. That is nowhere close to what happened at UCLA which is why the Feds are doing nothing. The only people reaching out to the players and staff (and parents) are media people looking for some clickbait for people like yourself that aren’t involved.

Please post some proof of all your speculation or just let it go. Absolutely nothing is going to happen and you can quote me on that.
 
Grow The Game said:
Please post some proof of all your speculation or just let it go. Absolutely nothing is going to happen and you can quote me on that.
Click to expand...

The proof was posted for the world to see online in their roster and media guide. Do not hide behind the sports information department, are you claiming the coaching staff never saw this information? Post your proof -- so far all you have mentioned are some phantom emails.

I am not indicting the team -- the players and likely most coaches had nothing to do with this, and some may indeed have believed she was some sort of recruiting mistake, injured player, etc. I would be fine if no one gets fired, but some explanation is warranted, given this is a public institution using our tax dollars to pay these individuals. They should lift the cloud of suspicion, I would want it done if I was an innocent on the coaching staff.

Please do not insult our intelligence, and that of AC, by suggesting she never saw this player nor knew this was wrong.
 
soccerobserver said:
GrowTG, I am a fan of the Bruins. As such it pains me greatly to write that USC has set the example of how innocent parties handled the issue of phantom players on the wsoccer roster. USC Athletic Director Lynn Swan explained to the LA Times that an administrative individual put the fake players on the roster that was presented to his admissions committee. Then after the fake player was admitted, the USC administrator took the player off the list of admitted players that was sent to the USC coach. Makes sense.

Moreover, if you read the complaint filed by the Feds, when new USC wsoccer coach McAlpine did eventually see a fake player on one of his lists, Coach McAlpine emailed her to demand to meet her since he did not know her. After the fake player failed to respond to McAlpine, he emailed the fake player and cc'd other USC officials renouncing her and stating he had no idea who she was and therefore would not count her in his numbers. I am sad to say that if UCLA had nothing to hide then they would proffer a similarly easy to understand explanation and thereby clear the smoke in the air.
Click to expand...

Why is it so hard to accept that UCLA would have fired Cromwell if Cromwell deserved to get fired?

If you are trying to compare USC favorably to UCLA in a discussion of how to handle corruption, you lost that argument even before you started typing. You should read the LA Magazine article "How USC Became the Most Scandal-Plagued Campus in America". How quickly people forget Olivia Jade learned she'd been caught while partying on the USC board president's yacht. That the 3rd ranking member of USC's entire athletic department was involved in the scandal, plus an assistant soccer coach and two other staff members. That USC Singer clients were "recruited" for at least eight different sports involving more than a dozen students compared to 1 at UCLA. Also don't forget that USC is still dealing with the repercussions of the medical school scandal in which it allowed its former coke-sniffing, prostitute-using alcoholic dean to get away with operating on people drunk because he was a great fundraiser and all around fun guy. That the med school is facing 3 dozen lawsuits alleging one of its doctors was sexually assaulting them. Oh, and Reggie Bush's family got a free house. I'd say USC handled things differently than UCLA because it had no choice. USC is a cesspool of institutional corruption that is losing millions in donations because it can't get out of its own way. UCLA had a rogue employee whom it fired, and probably some others who should have been more diligent but deserve (and probably received) lesser punishment.

If I were McAlpine, I'd be pissed too if I had to give up a roster spot without getting a cut of the bribe money. I do have one question about that, however. If Swann was being truthful that the USC administrator was taking the player off the list of admitted players before they were even sent to the coach, why did McAlpine even think she was on the team and know to send her self-serving emails and then publicly "renounce" her? Could it possibly be because one of them is lying and you're a sucker who'd rather take lies at face value than accept UCLA's professional approach of not holding press conferences to discuss personnel and student issues that are none of your business?
 
End of the Line said:
Why is it so hard to accept that UCLA would have fired Cromwell if Cromwell deserved to get fired?

If you are trying to compare USC favorably to UCLA in a discussion of how to handle corruption, you lost that argument even before you started typing. You should read the LA Magazine article "How USC Became the Most Scandal-Plagued Campus in America". How quickly people forget Olivia Jade learned she'd been caught while partying on the USC board president's yacht. That the 3rd ranking member of USC's entire athletic department was involved in the scandal, plus an assistant soccer coach and two other staff members. That USC Singer clients were "recruited" for at least eight different sports involving more than a dozen students compared to 1 at UCLA. Also don't forget that USC is still dealing with the repercussions of the medical school scandal in which it allowed its former coke-sniffing, prostitute-using alcoholic dean to get away with operating on people drunk because he was a great fundraiser and all around fun guy. That the med school is facing 3 dozen lawsuits alleging one of its doctors was sexually assaulting them. Oh, and Reggie Bush's family got a free house. I'd say USC handled things differently than UCLA because it had no choice. USC is a cesspool of institutional corruption that is losing millions in donations because it can't get out of its own way. UCLA had a rogue employee whom it fired, and probably some others who should have been more diligent but deserve (and probably received) lesser punishment.

If I were McAlpine, I'd be pissed too if I had to give up a roster spot without getting a cut of the bribe money. I do have one question about that, however. If Swann was being truthful that the USC administrator was taking the player off the list of admitted players before they were even sent to the coach, why did McAlpine even think she was on the team and know to send her self-serving emails and then publicly "renounce" her? Could it possibly be because one of them is lying and you're a sucker who'd rather take lies at face value than accept UCLA's professional approach of not holding press conferences to discuss personnel and student issues that are none of your business?
Click to expand...
Is UCLA a private institution?
 
Grow The Game said:
Is that how you think that it should go? You have no idea what happened behind the scenes so you are just speculating and placing your opinions out there. Does this affect you? Did your daughter lose a spot because of anything that went on? Why do you care? USC did what they did to cover their collective asses due to an extreme lack of institutional control. That is nowhere close to what happened at UCLA which is why the Feds are doing nothing. The only people reaching out to the players and staff (and parents) are media people looking for some clickbait for people like yourself that aren’t involved.

Please post some proof of all your speculation or just let it go. Absolutely nothing is going to happen and you can quote me on that.
Click to expand...

So people shouldn't care about public corruption unless people are directly impacted by that public corruption? Should people not care about the poor treatment of minorities because they are not minorities? It's extremely odd to argue that people shouldn't care about curtailing bad behavior because it doesn't impact them personally.

And if federal prosecution is the bar set for the UCLA coaching staff's behavior (which seems consistent with Arizona and LSU's recent basketball decisions), we are in some sad times.
 
Grow The Game said:
Is that how you think that it should go? You have no idea what happened behind the scenes so you are just speculating and placing your opinions out there. Does this affect you? Did your daughter lose a spot because of anything that went on? Why do you care? USC did what they did to cover their collective asses due to an extreme lack of institutional control. That is nowhere close to what happened at UCLA which is why the Feds are doing nothing. The only people reaching out to the players and staff (and parents) are media people looking for some clickbait for people like yourself that aren’t involved.

Please post some proof of all your speculation or just let it go. Absolutely nothing is going to happen and you can quote me on that.
Click to expand...
Does your kid play for UCLA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top