College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

[soccerobserver]

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!

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.

 

[Grow The Game]

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.

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.

 

[Dos Equis]

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.

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.

 

[End of the Line]

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.

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?

 

[Sheriff Joe]

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?

Is UCLA a private institution?

 

[Glen]

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.

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.

 

[Sheriff Joe]

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.

Does your kid play for UCLA?

 

[Lambchop]

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?

So UCLA spends a couple of years recruiting their new players every year as do most D1 schools. They know everything about their recruits, stats, tournaments, grades etc. etc. etc. They have watched videos of them playing and probably sat around debating which players to make offers too. These school add maybe 8-10 players each year give or take a couple and you expect everyone to believe that every single coach at UCLA wasn't aware of who they recruited and didn't know about this phantom player. How stupid do you think everyone is?

 

[Abdul]

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!

MAP got a new name....

 

[eastbaysoccer]

can UCLA self-impose punishment? like take away scholarships or ban them from post season play. OR could the NCAA impose this also? This happens in college basketball. Someone in the womens program needs to be punished for having a fake player on the web page.

 

[Soccer43]

can UCLA self-impose punishment? like take away scholarships or ban them from post season play. OR could the NCAA impose this also? This happens in college basketball. Someone in the womens program needs to be punished for having a fake player on the web page.

I think they are hoping if they just keep ignoring this that people will lose interest and it will go away.

 

[outside!]

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?

As a state funded university, UCLA's personnel issues are the public's business. That is why the LA Times were able to file a FOI request. The facts are that a non-player was posted on their internet roster. Somebody in the program approved this. As taxpayers, we deserve to know the full story.

 

[Glen]

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?

Issuing press releases about "personnel and student issues", but refusing to answer questions is hardly professional. It's hiding.

 

[mirage]

can UCLA self-impose punishment? like take away scholarships or ban them from post season play. OR could the NCAA impose this also? This happens in college basketball. Someone in the womens program needs to be punished for having a fake player on the web page.

Of course they can but will they is the question.

Couple of years ago, Harvard mens soccer team was caught rating the women soccer team players' attractiveness, and did so by having a website for it. Incredibly stupid but nothing compared to what has happened to the scandals herein. That said, they forfeited all of their games and ineligible for the NCAA playoffs. They were the Ivy League leader at the time in standings. One of their assistant coach left as a result, even though he had nothing to do with the problem, other than he was in charge of recruiting for Harvard mens soccer. The character of the players were the issue and they probably needed a fall guy.

Each organization, private or public, has a choice how they decide to deal with crisis situation of this kind. Often Tylenol example is used as a landmark "right thing to do". If one apply the similar stance, any university should fire their athletic director and all of the coaching staff in that sport, and suspend the program for a period of time that takes to fully investigate and put remedy in place - it happened under their watch. Clearly, this would not be fair to all the players but the university has higher integrity issue and the school needs to help place the players onto other programs/schools, if they so desire to play.

As I've watched the behavior of USC and UCLA regarding this matter, we have decided our youngest kid (boy) who is a junior in HS, will not apply to either of these schools. He has the grades (GPA 4.7, SAT 1490) but we'll send him elsewhere. He plays soccer but does not want to play in college, like his brother is doing. Taking the recruiting element out makes the school choice much easier.

At the end of the day, quality of education can be found in many. many places. We raised our kids to believe in integrity and honesty, and act accordingly. It would be in direct conflict to send him to one of these schools, given how they've dealt with this particular scandal. In particular to USC, there are too many other examples of not dealing with it quickly and directly that we would not consider it amongst private institutions we are looking, inspire of their excellent alumni network.

 

[Grow The Game]

Of course they can but will they is the question.

Couple of years ago, Harvard mens soccer team was caught rating the women soccer team players' attractiveness, and did so by having a website for it. Incredibly stupid but nothing compared to what has happened to the scandals herein. That said, they forfeited all of their games and ineligible for the NCAA playoffs. They were the Ivy League leader at the time in standings. One of their assistant coach left as a result, even though he had nothing to do with the problem, other than he was in charge of recruiting for Harvard mens soccer. The character of the players were the issue and they probably needed a fall guy.

Each organization, private or public, has a choice how they decide to deal with crisis situation of this kind. Often Tylenol example is used as a landmark "right thing to do". If one apply the similar stance, any university should fire their athletic director and all of the coaching staff in that sport, and suspend the program for a period of time that takes to fully investigate and put remedy in place - it happened under their watch. Clearly, this would not be fair to all the players but the university has higher integrity issue and the school needs to help place the players onto other programs/schools, if they so desire to play.

As I've watched the behavior of USC and UCLA regarding this matter, we have decided our youngest kid (boy) who is a junior in HS, will not apply to either of these schools. He has the grades (GPA 4.7, SAT 1490) but we'll send him elsewhere. He plays soccer but does not want to play in college, like his brother is doing. Taking the recruiting element out makes the school choice much easier.

At the end of the day, quality of education can be found in many. many places. We raised our kids to believe in integrity and honesty, and act accordingly. It would be in direct conflict to send him to one of these schools, given how they've dealt with this particular scandal. In particular to USC, there are too many other examples of not dealing with it quickly and directly that we would not consider it amongst private institutions we are looking, inspire of their excellent alumni network.

Do you really think that anybody cares about what you do with your kid’s education? I doubt UCLA or USC does. They get more applications and than anyone and their alumni do fine. Were your son’s even recruited by UCLA? With all due respect, your statement is laughable.

 

[End of the Line]

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.

It must be hard to be a nobody, and frustrating that UCLA doesn't care what you think or what information you think you're entitled to by virtue of being a "taxpayer". But it is not surprising you are a nobody based on your lack of cognitive and analytical ability. To the extent there is a scandal at UCLA, it is private corruption and UCLA was the victim. UCLA received zero benefit - either directly or indirectly - by virtue of what happened. UCLA does not benefit in any way by having an unqualified female soccer player on its roster. In the Arizona and LSU basketball scandal, on the other hand, those schools receive millions in revenue when it brings in players using unlawful bribes. You are making false equivalencies because you lack the brain power to understand what is actually happening.

What is really sad, Glen, is that you feel compelled to throw a racial comparator into this. You're like the religious zealots who fall back on god when they're losing an argument because they think that's untouchable, which is a similarly pathetic rhetorical tactic I have already mocked here as a final act of desperation in an argument. The truth is you are only "in some sad times" because you can't get past feeling sorry for yourself about much of anything and have reached the conclusion that everything in the world is rigged against you. The truth is it isn't. What you will eventually learn is that Cromwell should have been more diligent and was probably reprimanded as a result. I fully understand that you will still demand her termination because you apply a standard of "purity" to others that you don't apply to yourself. You are not Jean Valjean, and UCLA is not the corrupt French government depriving you of crumbs.

 

[Grow The Game]

Issuing press releases about "personnel and student issues", but refusing to answer questions is hardly professional. It's hiding.

Again this is laughable and I haven’t heard anything approaching proof and you clearly don’t know anything about the situation other than speculation.

 

[Grow The Game]

As a state funded university, UCLA's personnel issues are the public's business. That is why the LA Times were able to file a FOI request. The facts are that a non-player was posted on their internet roster. Somebody in the program approved this. As taxpayers, we deserve to know the full story.

Not one athletic scholarship is state funded, nor does the athletic department cost the school one cent so the public pays nothing so try again.

 

[Grow The Game]

I think they are hoping if they just keep ignoring this that people will lose interest and it will go away.

Or they know the truth and are unconcerned with the phony news out there.

 

[End of the Line]

Of course they can but will they is the question.

Couple of years ago, Harvard mens soccer team was caught rating the women soccer team players' attractiveness, and did so by having a website for it. Incredibly stupid but nothing compared to what has happened to the scandals herein. That said, they forfeited all of their games and ineligible for the NCAA playoffs. They were the Ivy League leader at the time in standings. One of their assistant coach left as a result, even though he had nothing to do with the problem, other than he was in charge of recruiting for Harvard mens soccer. The character of the players were the issue and they probably needed a fall guy.

Each organization, private or public, has a choice how they decide to deal with crisis situation of this kind. Often Tylenol example is used as a landmark "right thing to do". If one apply the similar stance, any university should fire their athletic director and all of the coaching staff in that sport, and suspend the program for a period of time that takes to fully investigate and put remedy in place - it happened under their watch. Clearly, this would not be fair to all the players but the university has higher integrity issue and the school needs to help place the players onto other programs/schools, if they so desire to play.

As I've watched the behavior of USC and UCLA regarding this matter, we have decided our youngest kid (boy) who is a junior in HS, will not apply to either of these schools. He has the grades (GPA 4.7, SAT 1490) but we'll send him elsewhere. He plays soccer but does not want to play in college, like his brother is doing. Taking the recruiting element out makes the school choice much easier.

At the end of the day, quality of education can be found in many. many places. We raised our kids to believe in integrity and honesty, and act accordingly. It would be in direct conflict to send him to one of these schools, given how they've dealt with this particular scandal. In particular to USC, there are too many other examples of not dealing with it quickly and directly that we would not consider it amongst private institutions we are looking, inspire of their excellent alumni network.

So what schools are you recommending for your child?