Yale women’s soccer involved in admission fraud

Discussion in 'Women's College' started by Glove Stinks, Mar 12, 2019.

  1. chch

    chch Member

    Aug 31, 2014
    some of you are missing the part that UCLA is a public university and parents in CA are pissed enough when their kids can't get into UCs, so the admin needs to be sensitive to stuff that pisses of their funders (taxpayers) .
  2. Collegewhispers

    Oct 27, 2011
    Columbus Crew
    Cromwell will be fortunate to get away from this unscathed. And this will follow her now for the rest of her career. I would think the UCLA administration will take action against her for this.
    WACySOCCERWORLD repped this.
  3. SoccerTrustee

    SoccerTrustee Member

    Feb 5, 2008
    Everton FC
    Nat'l Team:
  4. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006

    Keep in mind this quote from former Nevada coach Jerry Tarkanian.

    We are talkin P5 here folks, nothing to see... move along.
  5. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I have my fingers crossed for Amanda Cromwell and two words: Cooperating Witness
  6. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    The only way she comes away unscathed is if she was part of a sting on Salcedo. Just turning states evidence doesn’t do it.
  7. kolabear

    kolabear Member+

    Nov 10, 2006
    los angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If listing Isackson on the roster, assigning her a number, and putting her bio/profile on the website was all part of playing along as part of the investigation, that should go a long ways to exonerating Cromwell. Right now, what we know is consistent with it.
  8. SpeedK1llz

    SpeedK1llz Member

    Aug 15, 2016
    San Jose Earthquakes
    The timeline is completely off for this to be true. The feds knew nothing about this until May of 2018 when another subject in an unrelated case dropped the dime on Meredith at Yale to save his own hide.
    kolabear repped this.
  9. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    We don’t know very much.

    Equally consistent is she was bamboozled by Salcedo Into doing him a favor figuring he would return it in case she ever needed a slot for her team.
  10. keeperparent

    keeperparent New Member

    Nov 29, 2015
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Correct. This investigation is only 1 year old and started on the East Coast. No way she was cooperating when this admission/walk-on would have gone through the system.
  11. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    #111 Cliveworshipper, Mar 24, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2019
    Good news, folks.

    No, not that the the scandal was a big mistake.

    But you can now keep track of it on Wikipedia.


    Alll the names of schools, coaches, administrators , parents , some children, and a list of the instances where there were irregularities in the ACT and SAT testing services

    Also included is a running tabulation of where the jurisdictions are and who the judges and prosecutors are.

    Gaps to be filled at Harvard, Northwestern, and Cal.

    Thus far there is one unindicted co- conspirator, Tobin Morris, the parent in the Yale case.
    ytrs repped this.
  12. upprv

    upprv Member

    Aug 4, 2004
    I’m curious how UCLA will protect her. Ideas:

    UCLA admitting a “friend of the program” isn’t a big deal and AC wasn’t doing anything that other coaches and programs do. UCLA will say “we will review our admittance procedure and make necessary changes.”

    UCLA fires or disciplines an administrator who “pressured AC into admitting and fostering the girl.”

    UCLA puts it all on Jorge (this would be tough as AC had to admit and roster the girl)

    UCLA blames a former assistant for pressuring AC into taking the player. Former assistant is gone, UCLA “will review and make any changes to the admittance procedure.”

    I think they will do one of the above.
  13. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    Let’s take these one at a time.

    1) If admitting a Friend of the program is normal at a State supported institution, please tell us what statutes support the practice.
    I think it goes against admission rules unless there is public posting of the rules that allow it. Otherwise it’s stealing money from the taxpayer.even if admitting a friend of the program is legal, it surely isn’t for personal gain.

    2)if they fire an administrator, they still need to show AC wasn’t compliciit.

    3) all on Jorge doesn’t fly and I think you know it. Somebody else had to make it happen, whether by being complicit or by not doing their job. Either way, they are gone.

    4) the only assistant gone during the timeline listed is Luciano Fusco.
    Fusco left after the 2016 season.. the wire taps are in June 2017. ( see post#45)

    I imagine when AC gets back from her camp in Costa Rica, there will be questions. She seems in no hurry to get back from a country with no extradition.
  14. ytrs

    ytrs Member

    Jan 24, 2018
    Playing devils advocate to your #1 response Clive, how do you reconcile that it is legal to admit those whose family's donated significant money to the university? We all agree that is unethical (though apparently not illegal), but it is an ongoing practice at so many institutions. How is that different from admitting a friend of the program? This is not meant as argumentative. Just legit asking because I am curious.
  15. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    #115 Cliveworshipper, Mar 24, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2019

    Do the kids of these donor families take admissions spot for athletes? They don’t generally go anywhere near the athletic department. In the couple cases I know of, they don’t make much of a run through the admissions process. ( see G.W.Bush and Yale, that guy was dumber than a post)
    Is our Chillin learnin? Warm body is the test for big donors. That goes through graduation.

    This whole scam isn’t a back door big donor scandal. It’s a side door just kinda rich person too poor to make a donation scandal.
    And there was no donation to the university. The donation was to Salcedo
  16. ytrs

    ytrs Member

    Jan 24, 2018
    I understand all of what you said. Thank you. But, this Isakkson woman did not take a spot from a UCLA athlete. UCLA is not limited to a specific recruiting number, like Yale is, for 'admission support' slots.

    So I guess my curiosity is about how buying your child into a college through a big public donation is different 'legally speaking' than admitting a friend or niece of someone high up. Trust me. I think it is all b.s. And, of course Salcedo taking a bribe to do it is the biggy.
  17. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    #117 Cliveworshipper, Mar 24, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2019

    Yes, UCLA is allowed a specific number of Special admits according to a former AD who defended the practice. The quota is set for each of the schools in the UC system by the UC system regents. The AD was complaining that he needed more slots to compete with Cal.

    UCLA and Cal are on top the heap, with about 90%+- of athletes admitted as special admits. The little sisters like UC Davis and UC SanDiego are allowed fewer special admits.

    The idea that a coach of a non revenue sport could get an unlimited number of special admits is...odd.

    How those are parceled out within each school is up the the schools, but the revenue sports are the best supported there.

    There would certainly not be an open number for a non revenue sport.
  18. ytrs

    ytrs Member

    Jan 24, 2018
    I do not mean to imply they get an unlimited number. But, if they deem someone an asset to their team (i.e. recruit them), then they can get them in.

    If what you are saying is accurate, then I would suspect there is a strong likelihood that Salcedo tried to trade a future slot with women's soccer. "Let this kid in on your slot, and I will give you two in the coming years".

    And, if women's soccer did not have a need for that slot that year, one could see the benefit of the trade off. Again, nothing right about it. Just thinking out loud.
  19. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    #119 Cliveworshipper, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019

    Yeah, I think that’s what I already said. Without a transfer of money, it’s the only thing that makes sense.

    But they typically all schools in the Cal system use a uniform procedure that requires review by committee. In the couple documents I’ve seen online over the years, it’s called something like the “Student-Athlete Special Action Review Committee”
    Info on these committees show up online from time to time, then gets buried. ( must be a disclosure requirement)

    They typically include a couple profs, athletic, compliance staff, and at least one coach not from the team in question and appointed by the AD.

    <edit> I just found Sac State’s in my files. There the committee is

    Faculty Athletic Representative (Chair)
    Faculty member
    Faculty member (Learning Skills)
    Member of the Student-Athlete Resource Center (SARC)
    Life Skills Coordinator
    Coaching Staff Member not affiliated with the student-athlete’s sport (Appointed by A.D.)

    So it’s not just one rogue coach sneaking a kid through. There has to be others involved.

    The standards for these committees isn’t high. Academically, you have to be approved by the ncaa as eligible. Nothing more. That’s a 2.0 average.

    Other than that, the coach has to state he/she thinks the prospective athlete can succeed. So A.C. must have at least sent a letter.
    And how much attention the committee pays to that depends on the team not being below the 930 APR or academic probation.( 930 roughly equates to a 50% graduation rate, per the ncaa)
    As an aside, I think Jill Ellis left because her teams were several times below 930 and one year was in the 800’s . She couldn’t get special admits towards the end.

    Cromwell has done much better there.
    kolabear repped this.
  20. upprv

    upprv Member

    Aug 4, 2004
    Just to be clear I don’t think ac is blameless, I just think UCLA really really really really wants to keep her and reading between the lines of what has been released thus far seems that they are setting themselves up for a way out for her.
    I’m just speculating how they will wriggle free.

    I think she did Jorge a solid and maybe the program got a donation or something. But knowing the little I know about how athletic departments run Amanda admitted a kid who didn’t deserve it and that is fraud. Whether the law says so, the uc regents say so, the ncaa says so, the pac 12 says so or the UCLA athletic department says so, I think it is. They signed a girl in as a soccer player and she wasn’t. It’s wrong.

    I like her, think she’s an awesome coach and am a UCLA fan. But it’s wrong. And yet I think UCLA will frame this in some other way.
  21. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    #121 Cliveworshipper, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019
    I like her just because she is a better coach than Jill. And her teams have done well academically.

    But Salcedo isn’t the end of it. Somebody else is involved. Maybe her, maybe somebody above her, maybe a combination.

    If she isn’t involved, somebody must have forged a letter, I think. In that case, I bet it was a surprise when the kid showed up!

    Don’t be surprised if the FAR gets replaced.
  22. HouseofCards

    HouseofCards Member

    Nov 26, 2012
    Worth noting, the Cal State system and the UC system are two completely separate entities.
  23. espola

    espola Member+

    Feb 12, 2006
    And Stanford and USC are private entities of higher perceived value. I don't think parents who paid thousands to get a key to the side door at USC would have put up any money for guaranteed admission to Long Beach State.
  24. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006
    #124 Cliveworshipper, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019

    Yeah, but it’s pretty uniform across the state of California. The UC system is pretty much the same. They are both empowered by the State.

    The empowerment at UCLA is to the faculty senate committee on athletics (67.6) which is composed of:

    Faculty athletic representative ( non voting)
    5 faculty members
    1 undergrad student athletic representative
    1 graduate student athletic representative
    1 associate athletic director ( non voting)
    They are empowered under section 67.6 (B) (1)

    Policy towards student athletics and oversight of

    (a) progress of athletic to degree

    (b) special admissions for athletes


    So the key will be in the notes of the admissions meeting that admitted Isackson and who presented her case to the committee.

    I still haven’t found the document on admission policy, admissions criteria for special admits, and the role the committee and coaches play in admissions, but the web never dies. I’ll find it

    And you’ll find the USC official policy is also pretty similar, though it’s a not a state school. Those procedures are in the University bylaws, which are posted online.
    kolabear and HouseofCards repped this.
  25. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006

    I get that integrity doesn’t have the caché it used to in society, but deflecting to LBS doesn’t help. It just highlights they haven’t been shown to lack integrity in their admissions. Stick to the schools in the scandal.

Share This Page