College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

[EOTL]

get over what exactly? And what does GDA have to do with it? Have I advocated for GDA? Is that supposed to slay like your “duh”? You are clearly taking this personally and all I’ve said is that none of us really knows. We speculate based on what’s out there and what’s not. But we don’t know and we can’t know. And if you read what I have written, I don’t take issue with your points only your certainty based on those points. But you really have that “duh” down now. That shows power and great intelligence. You have me positively cowering in the corner. And I’m sure others are a bit intimidated as well.

I’ve never internetted well because I’d rather not call people names or say someone’s points or conclusions are stupid and I’d rather simply discuss points of disagreement instead of trying to ridicule. I also try not to speak (or write) in black and white unless I know something as a fact. The analysis is the fun part - and your analysis makes a lot of sense to me. But it does not resolve a key point - the lengths to which UCLA soccer went to mislead re the presence of a player on the roster. If it is no big deal, why the deception (and there is no question there was deception)? We know AC still has her job (I’m glad) but we don’t know why she emerged publicly unscathed. Again, it’s not knowable.

But a socially distant toast to your certainty, your patent obviousness and your use of “duh”. It will be an enjoyable nightcap. Cheers!

Gosh, maybe you are right. Maybe a youth soccer forum in which anonymous people regularly assert conspiracy theories and make defamatory accusations about a college soccer coach should be taken more seriously. Maybe all of you deserve more respect for the important speculative speculation that you speculate about.

I’m sorry it isn’t any fun that UCLA investigated all of this and determined she did nothing to merit termination. That the LA Times did not find her correspondence to be newsworthy. That Singer didn’t implicate her although his cooperation agreement required him to do so. That the Isacksens also didn’t implicate her although their full cooperation was a condition of their plea agreement. That your “taxpayer status” doesn’t give you any right to any information from UCLA.

It is certainly more fun to accuse her of taking bribes and conspiring with UCLA to help her beat the rap with the feds by, among other things: (1) implementing a cone of silence; (2) fighting the LA Times FIOA request and then destroying documents implicating her; (3) Dan Guerrero taking the fall to protect Cromwell (did I get that right @full90?); (4) the Isacksen’s secret grandma Annenberg (who knew?) donating 10s of millions of dollars when Isacksen was in middle school to build the soccer stadium in exchange for admission just in case the hundred million she gave to USC wasn’t enough to get her in there. I’m not kidding about that last one. @Soccer43 actually speculated that all by himself.

So what ever happened with that class action lawsuits that you speculated ECNL/GDA players and taxpayers would file against schools for denying kids roster spots in exchange for coaches taking bribes?

 

[EOTL]

If you watched the documentary on HBO called "The Scheme". A FBI investigation into a basketball corruption scandal led to the arrest of executives at Adidas and assistant coaches at major college programs. FBI wanted Christian Dawkins to rat on getting NCAA Rick Pitino.

The UCLA's case, the FBI wanted Salecedo and they pressured Cromwell for information. That's the way the FBI works and Cromwell gave the FBI what they needed to build a stronger case.

Yes this makes a lot of sense. I do have some questions though. If Christian Dawkins still went to prison and still lost his job, how on earth did Cromwell manage to avoid that herself? Do you think maybe it was because she didn’t do anything that was either criminal or deserved getting fired? And how on earth did the feds manage to convince the state of California to not do anything when fed immunity deals have no effect on state law crimes or employment? I’m so confused.

 

[dad4]

Gosh, maybe you are right. Maybe a youth soccer forum in which anonymous people regularly assert conspiracy theories and make defamatory accusations about a college soccer coach should be taken more seriously. Maybe all of you deserve more respect for the important speculative speculation that you speculate about.

I’m sorry it isn’t any fun that UCLA investigated all of this and determined she did nothing to merit termination. That the LA Times did not find her correspondence to be newsworthy. That Singer didn’t implicate her although his cooperation agreement required him to do so. That the Isacksens also didn’t implicate her although their full cooperation was a condition of their plea agreement. That your “taxpayer status” doesn’t give you any right to any information from UCLA.

It is certainly more fun to accuse her of taking bribes and conspiring with UCLA to help her beat the rap with the feds by, among other things: (1) implementing a cone of silence; (2) fighting the LA Times FIOA request and then destroying documents implicating her; (3) Dan Guerrero taking the fall to protect Cromwell (did I get that right @full90?); (4) the Isacksen’s secret grandma Annenberg (who knew?) donating 10s of millions of dollars when Isacksen was in middle school to build the soccer stadium in exchange for admission just in case the hundred million she gave to USC wasn’t enough to get her in there. I’m not kidding about that last one. @Soccer43 actually speculated that all by himself.

So what ever happened with that class action lawsuits that you speculated ECNL/GDA players and taxpayers would file against schools for denying kids roster spots in exchange for coaches taking bribes?

UCLA investigated and that proves something? Are you telling me you’ve never heard of a big university deciding to ignore problems when the coach is winning?

Don’t post trash like that. Think, man.

 

[MacDre]

Yes this makes a lot of sense. I do have some questions though. If Christian Dawkins still went to prison and still lost his job, how on earth did Cromwell manage to avoid that herself? Do you think maybe it was because she didn’t do anything that was either criminal or deserved getting fired? And how on earth did the feds manage to convince the state of California to not do anything when fed immunity deals have no effect on state law crimes or employment? I’m so confused.

Because it was a Federal investigation and not a joint task force with State law enforcement.

 

[dk_b]

Remember, the top college coaches spend hours and hours scouting recruits. They study videos, check their transcripts, attend showcases, sit around a table and debate which player will fill their needs on the field. Anyone who says they don't know who is on their roster is lying, period. If you believe they don't know, by the way it is their job to know, I have a diamond mine I would like to sell you really cheap and you don't even have to check it out.

you’re asking those rhetorically, right? Because I agree with you. And that’s what I meant by the deception in rostering this player.

 

[espola]

Gosh, maybe you are right. Maybe a youth soccer forum in which anonymous people regularly assert conspiracy theories and make defamatory accusations about a college soccer coach should be taken more seriously. Maybe all of you deserve more respect for the important speculative speculation that you speculate about.

I’m sorry it isn’t any fun that UCLA investigated all of this and determined she did nothing to merit termination. That the LA Times did not find her correspondence to be newsworthy. That Singer didn’t implicate her although his cooperation agreement required him to do so. That the Isacksens also didn’t implicate her although their full cooperation was a condition of their plea agreement. That your “taxpayer status” doesn’t give you any right to any information from UCLA.

It is certainly more fun to accuse her of taking bribes and conspiring with UCLA to help her beat the rap with the feds by, among other things: (1) implementing a cone of silence; (2) fighting the LA Times FIOA request and then destroying documents implicating her; (3) Dan Guerrero taking the fall to protect Cromwell (did I get that right @full90?); (4) the Isacksen’s secret grandma Annenberg (who knew?) donating 10s of millions of dollars when Isacksen was in middle school to build the soccer stadium in exchange for admission just in case the hundred million she gave to USC wasn’t enough to get her in there. I’m not kidding about that last one. @Soccer43 actually speculated that all by himself.

So what ever happened with that class action lawsuits that you speculated ECNL/GDA players and taxpayers would file against schools for denying kids roster spots in exchange for coaches taking bribes?

Has UCLA made any statement about any investigation they may have done on their own?

(I apologize for my ignorance if this is already common knowledge - when issues like this stretch out love months it is hard for me to remember all the details)

 

[dk_b]

Gosh, maybe you are right. Maybe a youth soccer forum in which anonymous people regularly assert conspiracy theories and make defamatory accusations about a college soccer coach should be taken more seriously. Maybe all of you deserve more respect for the important speculative speculation that you speculate about.

I’m sorry it isn’t any fun that UCLA investigated all of this and determined she did nothing to merit termination. That the LA Times did not find her correspondence to be newsworthy. That Singer didn’t implicate her although his cooperation agreement required him to do so. That the Isacksens also didn’t implicate her although their full cooperation was a condition of their plea agreement. That your “taxpayer status” doesn’t give you any right to any information from UCLA.

It is certainly more fun to accuse her of taking bribes and conspiring with UCLA to help her beat the rap with the feds by, among other things: (1) implementing a cone of silence; (2) fighting the LA Times FIOA request and then destroying documents implicating her; (3) Dan Guerrero taking the fall to protect Cromwell (did I get that right @full90?); (4) the Isacksen’s secret grandma Annenberg (who knew?) donating 10s of millions of dollars when Isacksen was in middle school to build the soccer stadium in exchange for admission just in case the hundred million she gave to USC wasn’t enough to get her in there. I’m not kidding about that last one. @Soccer43 actually speculated that all by himself.

So what ever happened with that class action lawsuits that you speculated ECNL/GDA players and taxpayers would file against schools for denying kids roster spots in exchange for coaches taking bribes?

You may be confusing me with someone else. I have no idea. But the only thing I am questioning is the degree of certainty you have. Evidently you are in the know but b/c I have not seen other sourcing, I will only speak for myself - I'm an outsider so I have no idea. I have no idea what the FOIA request yielded (you may be right that it was nothing incriminating). I have no idea what negotiations may have occurred between the Feds and Singer or between AC and the Feds or between the Feds and Salcedo (but you may be right that it was nothing to implicate AC). I have no idea that the Isacksons implicated or did not implicate AC (you may be right that they certainly didn't). You may be right about all of it. But your conclusions based on the absence of information is simply speculation - even speculation with a logical thread is speculation. You don't want to address the clear deception re listing the player on the roster (her soccer credentials were complete bullshit but maybe that's just a laughable oversight and maybe my use of "deception" is unfair b/c it was simply an innocent favor. I can't say "you may be right" here b/c you have not addressed this point). I have not accused AC of taking bribes - and I am hopeful she did not - nor did I accuse her of conspiring with UCLA. If you are going to use hyperbole in a response to me, your point is more interesting and certainly more valid if you can show where I have done that.

In the end, I will 100% support your argument and stand right behind the certainty if you can show the proof beyond your logical speculation.

And I certainly don't remember ever speculating about ECNL/GDA players filing class actions. Way back in the early thread, we may have discussed what possible "damage" someone could claim but b/c it is very difficult to show that any one player was denied a highly coveted spot, I cannot imagine that such a suit would succeed. So while I don't remember, it is certainly possible. I doesn't sound like me to say "ECNL/GDA players and taxpayers" but I could just be foggy at my age. But I will play with the line: "what ever happened?" Here's my speculation: if a group of families or even taxpayers sought advice from a plaintiffs' lawyer, they were probably told that the likelihood of success is small and the cost of mounting such a case may be quite large. And for what end? What is the relief for the class that, in a given year, the 28th player would have been someone else? So, what happened? It probably fizzled.

 

[EOTL]

Because it was a Federal investigation and not a joint task force with State law enforcement.

I see. Cromwell admitted committing a bunch of crimes to the feds, but the feds hushed it up so the state would never find out and then use it to terminate Cromwell’s employment and charge her under state laws. So the feds were part of the conspiracy too, eh? Along with the LA Times killing the story? This really does go to the highest levels.

 

[EOTL]

You may be confusing me with someone else. I have no idea. But the only thing I am questioning is the degree of certainty you have. Evidently you are in the know but b/c I have not seen other sourcing, I will only speak for myself - I'm an outsider so I have no idea. I have no idea what the FOIA request yielded (you may be right that it was nothing incriminating). I have no idea what negotiations may have occurred between the Feds and Singer or between AC and the Feds or between the Feds and Salcedo (but you may be right that it was nothing to implicate AC). I have no idea that the Isacksons implicated or did not implicate AC (you may be right that they certainly didn't). You may be right about all of it. But your conclusions based on the absence of information is simply speculation - even speculation with a logical thread is speculation. You don't want to address the clear deception re listing the player on the roster (her soccer credentials were complete bullshit but maybe that's just a laughable oversight and maybe my use of "deception" is unfair b/c it was simply an innocent favor. I can't say "you may be right" here b/c you have not addressed this point). I have not accused AC of taking bribes - and I am hopeful she did not - nor did I accuse her of conspiring with UCLA. If you are going to use hyperbole in a response to me, your point is more interesting and certainly more valid if you can show where I have done that.

In the end, I will 100% support your argument and stand right behind the certainty if you can show the proof beyond your logical speculation.

And I certainly don't remember ever speculating about ECNL/GDA players filing class actions. Way back in the early thread, we may have discussed what possible "damage" someone could claim but b/c it is very difficult to show that any one player was denied a highly coveted spot, I cannot imagine that such a suit would succeed. So while I don't remember, it is certainly possible. I doesn't sound like me to say "ECNL/GDA players and taxpayers" but I could just be foggy at my age. But I will play with the line: "what ever happened?" Here's my speculation: if a group of families or even taxpayers sought advice from a plaintiffs' lawyer, they were probably told that the likelihood of success is small and the cost of mounting such a case may be quite large. And for what end? What is the relief for the class that, in a given year, the 28th player would have been someone else? So, what happened? It probably fizzled.

Things do tend to fizzle when they have no basis. That is probably the real lesson to be learned.

I do like your argument that I should stop speculating that the stuff about which you speculated is just speculative, so you can carry on with more speculation.

 

[dk_b]

Things do tend to fizzle when they have no basis. That is probably the real lesson to be learned.

I do like your argument that I should stop speculating that the stuff about which you speculated is just speculative, so you can carry on with more speculation.

Um . . . you don't see the difference, do you? That you are stating your points as FACT - "patently obvious", etc. I'm saying you MAY BE RIGHT (maybe you missed that part but I really do mean that YOU MAY BE RIGHT) but unless you're an insider you can't know, just like none of us knows. I am saying we all speculate. I am not criticizing speculation - hey, I have called your thought thread LOGICAL - but I'm calling it speculation. You have framed your conclusions as OBVIOUS fact.

But riddle me this: is it plausible that the coaching staff had zero idea or thought "no harm, no foul" about a fake profile for a player on the roster? I mean, that DID happen though we don't know what led to it or who knew about it. But you don't seem to want to touch that one part.

I hope your beliefs turn out to be 100% accurate on this one.

 

[EOTL]

Um . . . you don't see the difference, do you? That you are stating your points as FACT - "patently obvious", etc. I'm saying you MAY BE RIGHT (maybe you missed that part but I really do mean that YOU MAY BE RIGHT) but unless you're an insider you can't know, just like none of us knows. I am saying we all speculate. I am not criticizing speculation - hey, I have called your thought thread LOGICAL - but I'm calling it speculation. You have framed your conclusions as OBVIOUS fact.

But riddle me this: is it plausible that the coaching staff had zero idea or thought "no harm, no foul" about a fake profile for a player on the roster? I mean, that DID happen though we don't know what led to it or who knew about it. But you don't seem to want to touch that one part.

I hope your beliefs turn out to be 100% accurate on this one.

Whoa. All caps. The sure sign of a conspiracy theorist.

 

[dad4]

Whoa. All caps. The sure sign of a conspiracy theorist.

He used all caps because you were repeatedly and deliberately misrepresenting what he said.

It's obnoxious. Stop.

 

[goldentoe]

Cool if Isacksen’s family donated money to the school. Good for taxpayers saving money in cool stuff that was paid for by private donation instead of taxpayer dollars. Good for students who benefit from the donations. Everybody wins except for @ElleJustus’ kid, whose spot as a practice cone was pulled out from under her.

Umm, that’s not what happened. They gave the money to Singer who then bribed the old USC womens’s coach to bribe the UCLA men’s coach to find a way to get Lauren admitted. Somehow she magically ends up on the soccer roster and the Isackson’s 600k bribe is complete. Cromwell never touched the money so was in the clear.
this story is old so the Details are a bit fuzzy, but this is how I remember it.

 

[Ellejustus]

Good to compare stats to see what it took to make a big time D1 roster for girls soccer the old way. My oldest bro went to UCLA ((water polo stud)) when the Legend from Westwood was roaming the campus. He has been disappointed with a few things to be honest. He knows about his little niece and he's not all too happy with how some who can pay to get a spot and those who are dam good with no money are turned away in 8th grade by some club docs and coaches before they actually speak to these coaches. That was the old days btw. I had three Docs back in 2018 & 2019 trying to find out where my goat wanted to play college ball. I said, "not now, she's too young, back off Jack!!!" "But, but all the scholarship money will be all gone" they would say. I finally sat down to get the low down by two of them. What a joke to me and my dd. Nothing special at all!!! Dudes both ask us in different ways but with the same message, "where do you want to go to college?" ((8th grader)) and before a word comes out of her mouth both say, "And please don;t say UCLA" I was shocked!!! They both said everybody wants that school and if your not on the YNT List and have zero money to pay, forget about it pal. Plus, those players are so good she might not play until her Sr year, if that. I said, "Oh really," "then why did you tell me this and that about my goat. I was not so happy with that response. We got up and left and said it's too early for all this sh*t. He did say maybe 100% here or there and if she's willing to live in the snow and play back East, Cali kids can get most of it paid in full.

Tale of the Stats
Player A ((Parents are super rich))
High School/Club
Honorable mention All-WBAL selection in 2014 … Team captain for Woodside Soccer Club from 2012-16 … Selected Team MVP in 2015.

Personal
Full name is LA … Born in Hillsborough, Calif. … Parents are Bxxxx and xxxina ..ackson … Lists becoming the champion of her hoseback riding division two years in a row as her greatest athletic thrill … Psychology major.


Player B ((Parents have no money to pay))
High School/Club
Co-Offensive Player of the Year Sunset League 2020. OC Strikers Player-Forward and plays wherever coach needs her. ECNL Conference Player Selection 2020 ((half of season only because of Corona)). Skipped 2018-2019 season for the most part.

Soccer Achievements- Cal South State Cup Champ 2015. Far West Regional Champs with Surf FC 2017. Leading scorer at FWR, miracle goal and scored 5 goals in Semis finals 2017. US Youth Naty in 2017 and scored first goal. Beat #1 GDA Team 04 Earthquakes 2-0 and scored both goals. Helped her HS make playoffs after losing top YNT player to injury before 2020 season. No one gave us a chance to make CIF but we did. As her daddy, I think that was her greatest soccer accomplishment by far

Personal
Full name is A Elle E....Born in Riverside, Calif.... Parents have been struggling to make ends meat and have zero money and live check to check when they come. List becoming a US Youth Soccer Champion in 2017 as her greatest athletic thrill...Undecided what she wants to do with her life but for sure wants to educate herself more and also have fun with her friends and play soccer and hopefully win a college cup some day.

 

[EOTL]

Umm, that’s not what happened. They gave the money to Singer who then bribed the old USC womens’s coach to bribe the UCLA men’s coach to find a way to get Lauren admitted. Somehow she magically ends up on the soccer roster and the Isackson’s 600k bribe is complete. Cromwell never touched the money so was in the clear.
this story is old so the Details are a bit fuzzy, but this is how I remember it.

Be careful what you say. Some people here get very upset when you don’t accuse Cromwell of being part of a CONSPIRACY that included not only Singer BUT ALSO Dan Guerrero and the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT itself.

It makes no SENSE that Cromwell didn’t do anything to merit termination because HOW CAN YOU HAVE A CONSPIRACY if she actually got fired, and then what would we have to SPECULATE about? In other words, the FACT that SHE did NOT get FIRED is PROOF that SHE deserved TO get FIRED.

 

[EOTL]

My oldest bro went to UCLA ((water polo stud)) when the Legend from Westwood was roaming the campus. He has been disappointed with a few things to be honest. He knows about his little niece and he's not all too happy with how some who can pay to get a spot and those who are dam good with no money are turned away in 8th grade by some club docs and coaches before they actually speak to these coaches.

So, wait a second, SoCal Blues are part of the Singer conspiracy too? Singer bribed Salcedo, Salcedo paid Cromwell, Cromwell paid Blues to steer clear of your kid because she feared Blues might make her so great UCLA would have to give her an offer without bribery? And the feds covered it all up by making secret cooperation agreements and plea deals with Singer, Salcedo, the Isacksens and the Blues staff? And the LA Times buried the story, probably because the Isacksens are so connected?

 

[EOTL]

He used all caps because you were repeatedly and deliberately misrepresenting what he said.

It's obnoxious. Stop.

I haven’t said a single thing that one of you conspiracy theorists hasn’t already suggested, although I do admit making the occasional embellishment for the purpose of mocking the ridiculousness of your “theories” and to help you the rest of the way down the rabbit hole.

 

[dad4]

Be careful what you say. Some people here get very upset when you don’t accuse Cromwell of being part of a CONSPIRACY that included not only Singer BUT ALSO Dan Guerrero and the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT itself.

It makes no SENSE that Cromwell didn’t do anything to merit termination because HOW CAN YOU HAVE A CONSPIRACY if she actually got fired, and then what would we have to SPECULATE about? In other words, the FACT that SHE did NOT get FIRED is PROOF that SHE deserved TO get FIRED.

“the fact that she did not get fired is proof that she did not deserve to get fired”?

This is the same argument you gave earlier, just repackaged and in caps.

It still stinks as an argument. There are dozens of examples of schools that protected a problematic coach while he/she was winning.

 

[Ellejustus]

So, wait a second, SoCal Blues are part of the Singer conspiracy too? Singer bribed Salcedo, Salcedo paid Cromwell, Cromwell paid Blues to steer clear of your kid because she feared Blues might make her so great UCLA would have to give her an offer without bribery? And the feds covered it all up by making secret cooperation agreements and plea deals with Singer, Salcedo, the Isacksens and the Blues staff? And the LA Times buried the story, probably because the Isacksens are so connected?

First of all, please don;t even try to figure out the scoop, Jackson. Buzz off. My dd wanted to play on the National Team in the Olympics, remember? It goes like this I was told. Make YNT at 13 or 14, hopefully Top D1 school and then the pros then get big call up for first cap at 23? My hope and hers was an interest from my favorite school ((not hers yet but she does like to please her old man)) and still fav school when she's JR. At 13, we were going for the YNT, then college as Jr and then the pros after degree, that's what I was told was the process. This has nothing to do with the club you are talking about. These Docs were actually being very honest with me and as I look back on all this I appreciate it more today. No Doc said anything bad or wrong with me. They just gave me the low down and I was upset with the system and the recruiting process. Not one Doc or D1 coach approached me or my dd because we didn;t email them. No email, no talk on the phone I was told and that was 100% true. It was just understood that it was impossible to go to that school in the old system. All this Singer stuff is interesting and how someone made those rosters though.

 

[EOTL]

“the fact that she did not get fired is proof that she did not deserve to get fired”?

This is the same argument you gave earlier, just repackaged and in caps.

It still stinks as an argument. There are dozens of examples of schools that protected a problematic coach while he/she was winning.

Learn to read and then try again. I admit that all caps makes it a little harder, but that was actually the point, specifically that nut job conspiracy theorists use all caps, and both the theories they espouse and the manner in which they do so is completely incomprehensible.

In short, I was summarizing ya’lls assumption that there must be a conspiracy because she didn’t get fired. Because you just can’t believe the incredibly obvious, which is that UCLA would have fired her if she had done something that deserved to get fired.