College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

[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.

 

[EOTL]

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 then the pros, 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 for anything. It was just understood that it was impossible to go tot hat school. All this Singer stuff is interesting and how someone made that roster. I have no idea dude.

How funny would it be if I had a kid who was a regular on the YNT? I bet that would really get under some people’s skin, eh?

 

[dk_b]

How funny would it be if I had a kid who was a regular on the YNT? I bet that would really get under some people’s skin, eh?

Why? I mean, you are clearly showing a propensity to reading meanings that don't exist into what people are writing but why would it get under anyone's skin? Why wouldn't that be a great thing, a great accomplishment for your child? Why wouldn't people understand that you would (naturally) have pride in that achievement and sustained level of play? I know those kids sacrifice to attend camps, compete with the YNTs and maintain their schoolwork. Under my skin? Not even close. I'd be standing and applauding.

 

[espola]

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.

The fuzzy details include how the UCLA men's coach convinced the UCLA women's coach to go along with the scheme.

 

[dk_b]

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.

I'm not seeing any conspiracy. For my part, it looks something like this:

EOTL: this is how things went down. It's obvious. Duh.

DK: it may have gone down that way. Nobody really knows what happened other than the insiders. And, for emphasis, YOU MAY BE RIGHT.

EOTL: ah ha! Conspiracy theorist! You use all caps!

DK: I'm confused. What conspiracy? I said you may be right. I said none of us knows what happened. I said again that you may be right. I did ask about the confounding fact of listing the player on the roster, a fact that you don't seem to want to address. It is a fact - it happened - but how it happened is mere speculation by anyone. I'm not engaging in speculation on that b/c I just don't know.

I will say that this statement you made, "UCLA would have fired her if she had done something that deserved to get fired" is often far, far from being correct. There are many reasons why an employer, especially a public employer or any employer that is subject to strict oversight (an employer of unionized workers, for example), does not fire an employee it wishes to fire and believes deserves to be fired. I'm sure there are enough lawyers on this bulletin board who can give you example after example of employees that clients wish to fire but, for whatever reason, are never fired.

I would put this next part in all caps for emphasis but b/c I'm wounded at the accusation of being a conspiracy theorist I will only say (and hope that you actually read my words) that I do hope that that is not the case with AC and I do hope that you are correct that she was not fired b/c they determined she did nothing wrong.

 

[full90]

I can see salcedo asking Cromwell to admit and roster the girl as a favor. Maybe there was something in it for the w soccer program which isn’t illegal. Unethical yes.
maybe there was something in it for Cromwell. That would be illegal. Maybe she turned it down. Or took it and got off by giving dirt on salcedo. That’s what no one knows and is fuzzy. The rest are proven facts.

but she vouched for the kid and rostered her as a player. It’s unethical. If an administrator asked her to do it or pressured her then I’d cut her some slack but we don’t know that. W

we know Cromwell admitted and rostered a kid who didn’t deserve it. Arrested or not, fired or not, it’s unethical. She’s a good coach and the school and players like her and has had success at all her stops. Does that outweigh what she did? Apparently so.

 

[espola]

I can see salcedo asking Cromwell to admit and roster the girl as a favor. Maybe there was something in it for the w soccer program which isn’t illegal. Unethical yes.
maybe there was something in it for Cromwell. That would be illegal. Maybe she turned it down. Or took it and got off by giving dirt on salcedo. That’s what no one knows and is fuzzy. The rest are proven facts.

but she vouched for the kid and rostered her as a player. It’s unethical. If an administrator asked her to do it or pressured her then I’d cut her some slack but we don’t know that. W

we know Cromwell admitted and rostered a kid who didn’t deserve it. Arrested or not, fired or not, it’s unethical. She’s a good coach and the school and players like her and has had success at all her stops. Does that outweigh what she did? Apparently so.

In my experience, every college soccer team has a few walkons that try to make the roster even though they were not recruited. Some of them make it, most of them don't, or they are relegated to a roster spot that only allows them to practice with the team and sit on the bench in home non-conference games., never actually getting into a game. She could have been lost in the group of those non-playing players.

 

[full90]

There’s no such designation on the official ncaa roster. If a coach wants to tell someone they aren’t ever going to play and can come sit on the bench for home games they are official rostered players. She was on the official ncaa roster for UCLA. UCLA soccer got her into school, set up her rooming as an athlete (she roomed with another w soccer player). She didn’t simply decide to try out after a long club career and getting admitted to UCLA on her own. Amanda signed for her as a special admit for w soccer and rostered her on the team.

 

[EOTL]

It’s been a couple days now that Salcedo pled out. Any updates on Cromwell? Is she the only one who has a secret deal with the feds that lets her completely off the hook? Or do you think they’re holding out on an announcement until she helps them bring down the hammer on the IT guy who put Isacksen’s photo on the website?

I do have a question for the conspiracy theorists though. When you all say “time will tell”, how much time are you talking about? How long until we should probably conclude that the most logical conclusion - that she she did not deserve to get fired - is provably the right one? Or do we get to keep making up crazier stuff forever? I feel like I’m getting the hang of these conspiracy theories but I don’t want to break your rules.

 

[dad4]

It’s been a couple days now that Salcedo pled out. Any updates on Cromwell? Is she the only one who has a secret deal with the feds that lets her completely off the hook? Or do you think they’re holding out on an announcement until she helps them bring down the hammer on the IT guy who put Isacksen’s photo on the website?

I do have a question for the conspiracy theorists though. When you all say “time will tell”, how much time are you talking about? How long until we should probably conclude that the most logical conclusion - that she she did not deserve to get fired - is provably the right one? Or do we get to keep making up crazier stuff forever? I feel like I’m getting the hang of these conspiracy theories but I don’t want to break your rules.

Not watching it that closely. Nor do I think I get to find out.

Maybe she cut a deal. Maybe there is a lack of evidence. Maybe there is nothing worthy of the prosecutor's time. Maybe the announcement comes next week.

All I can say is I don't know, and I don't get to know.

(Just don't give me some bogus argument about how you "PROVED" it. )