I guess it really cost a lot of money to build those out dated brick and mortar schools

(03-13-2019 01:29 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 09:22 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The real blame lies with officials in the athletic department. If coach x gets admissions waivers and those waivers have a high bust ratio of not even being on the team something needed to be investigated. Also, don’t see how this went down either at the beginning. I mean to approach a successful coach about such a payoff is strange to think you could pull it off.

The bust rate has always been high at Ivies especially in the sports targeted. It’s one reason why Ivies over-recruit marginal players. Coaches know that a portion of their recruits are just using the athlete advantage in admissions and aren’t terribly committed to participating on a team for four years.

That’s why the scheme went undetected for as long it did at those schools. It’s not at all unusual for kids to walk away from the team they were recruited to play for.

I’m not quite as shocked at the Ivies. The Power Five schools involved, though, are a different matter (even for non-revenue sports).

(03-13-2019 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 12:00 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-12-2019 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I notice that so far there haven't been any men's hoops or football coaches involved.

This is what happens when you give a low paid employee - like a coach of a minor sport like Crew or Tennis - a coveted organizational power, in this case the ability to admit entry to an elite university.

these coaches were making $150,000+ easy that is hardly low paid at a university that is full professor level pay at top universities

it might be crew, but it is Stanford Crew where they take that serious (well where they win a lot) and the UT Tennis coach was making $230,000 so well over what top professors make (with the exception of a few) and well over what many administrators make

Fair points. But maybe their peer-comparisons in their own mind weren't professors, but the football and hoops coaches?

It's the old line of thinking that goes "how many people turn down a raise?"

But yes, I do think some of these coaches would consider the football and basketball coaches to be their peers. They probably felt some pressure to keep up with the Joneses in their close knit athletic communities.

(03-13-2019 02:13 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 12:00 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-12-2019 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I notice that so far there haven't been any men's hoops or football coaches involved.

This is what happens when you give a low paid employee - like a coach of a minor sport like Crew or Tennis - a coveted organizational power, in this case the ability to admit entry to an elite university.

these coaches were making $150,000+ easy that is hardly low paid at a university that is full professor level pay at top universities

it might be crew, but it is Stanford Crew where they take that serious (well where they win a lot) and the UT Tennis coach was making $230,000 so well over what top professors make (with the exception of a few) and well over what many administrators make

Fair points. But maybe their peer-comparisons in their own mind weren't professors, but the football and hoops coaches?

It's the old line of thinking that goes "how many people turn down a raise?"

But yes, I do think some of these coaches would consider the football and basketball coaches to be their peers. They probably felt some pressure to keep up with the Joneses in their close knit athletic communities.

I bet most of these coaches were not making hefty salaries. Texas is known for paying well above average salaries to minor sports coaches, so the Texas tennis coach is probably an exception here.

The USC water polo coach, or the Yale soccer coach were probably making under $100,000, maybe significantly less, and living in an expensive area -- not San Francisco or Manhattan expensive, but pricey compared to many other places. They're probably already supplementing their income by running camps and/or giving private coaching lessons.

A coach in his or her 50s, with a relatively low salary, high cost of living, maybe has the expenses of raising kids, maybe has little or no money saved for retirement -- that's an A-1 target if you're looking for someone who might be open to being bribed.

(03-13-2019 01:57 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 01:29 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 09:22 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The real blame lies with officials in the athletic department. If coach x gets admissions waivers and those waivers have a high bust ratio of not even being on the team something needed to be investigated. Also, don’t see how this went down either at the beginning. I mean to approach a successful coach about such a payoff is strange to think you could pull it off.

The bust rate has always been high at Ivies especially in the sports targeted. It’s one reason why Ivies over-recruit marginal players. Coaches know that a portion of their recruits are just using the athlete advantage in admissions and aren’t terribly committed to participating on a team for four years.

That’s why the scheme went undetected for as long it did at those schools. It’s not at all unusual for kids to walk away from the team they were recruited to play for.

I’m not quite as shocked at the Ivies. The Power Five schools involved, though, are a different matter (even for non-revenue sports).

I was quite surprised that this happened at power conference members.

I wasn’t surprised by the Ivies other than by the criminality. The indictees simply took two common and legal practices, buying admission and getting admitted as an athlete with no binding obligation to participate in a sport, and added a criminal twist. Given how insanely low the odds of getting into an Ivy have become if an applicant falls outside a favored applicant group it was probably only a matter of time before this happened.

Where SAT cheating is concerned, the number of affluent families who legally game the system is already out of control. There are highly selective private schools were as many as 40% of students have mandatory test accommodations so that they get extra time to complete the SAT. Physician shopping to get the diagnoses for accommodations is routine at this point.

Another thing that gets my goat was that one of the parents falsely got their child to take the entrance test by making the child with a disability. Now, with at how at all lengths they parents do to get their children into college? This would hurt people who actually have a disability from getting in college by the spot being taken from them, and make it harder for disable to get into college. Lucky I got into Arkansas Tech through VocRehab which I got to take the test with extra time. I had instructors including my English instructors help me. Virginia Tyson and her husband Van were my late uncle's childhood friends from school. They taught at Tech. They did vouched for me because as being a family friend. I even got a package sent to me from College of the Ozarks in Point Look Out, Missouri because my great aunt was an alumi donor who donated a lot of money to the school. I think she wanted to set me up to attend college since she knew it would be hard for disabled students get accepted into college because low test scores. My English and Math were not acceptable for getting into major universities, but my science and Reading comprehension were borderline. I never got someone to take the tests for me. I got in on my own merits but had to take some remedial courses in math and English before I move on. My high school papers that I wrote had run ons and all that were bad, but taken a lot of English classes to get a degree in Creative writing? I have improved a lot, and got three poems published.

(03-13-2019 05:36 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  Where SAT cheating is concerned, the number of affluent families who legally game the system is already out of control. There are highly selective private schools were as many as 40% of students have mandatory test accommodations so that they get extra time to complete the SAT. Physician shopping to get the diagnoses for accommodations is routine at this point.

I used to temp at one of the Philly area schools’ enrollment offices. Yeah, the operation of admissions is pretty crazy to take on all of this seasonal support (and it’s common; I almost did it for another, more elite school, and the one where I am now takes on added support in admissions and specific departments for select programs). Weighting GPA’s, overall transcript value, class rank, school, test scores...it’s extremely competitive.

What angered me looking through it all was that some schools perpetuated this hype and extreme competitive environment. High schools, when they send transcripts, love to brag where their best kids have recently gone. I started really noticing how only the private schools could get kids into a place like Swarthmore. Even the really good public ones in PA and NJ didn’t seem to get a sniff (unless these schools didn’t value Swarthmore’s name the same as others in their materials). Even more than something like the “index,” some schools have additional tests of fit that really boost the pressure.

I used to live for the mission of higher ed and continuing education...now seeing how the sausage is made, I’m ready to hop off. It’s just too much. And that’s just getting there...you still have to produce once you’re in!

(03-13-2019 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 12:00 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-12-2019 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I notice that so far there haven't been any men's hoops or football coaches involved.

This is what happens when you give a low paid employee - like a coach of a minor sport like Crew or Tennis - a coveted organizational power, in this case the ability to admit entry to an elite university.

these coaches were making $150,000+ easy that is hardly low paid at a university that is full professor level pay at top universities

it might be crew, but it is Stanford Crew where they take that serious (well where they win a lot) and the UT Tennis coach was making $230,000 so well over what top professors make (with the exception of a few) and well over what many administrators make

Fair points. But maybe their peer-comparisons in their own mind weren't professors, but the football and hoops coaches?

your reply is equally fair

and really even making $150,000 or $200,000+ it is pretty hard to turn down $100,000 or much more than that for simply letting a kid in to a large school based on them playing a sport most people do not know exist much less follow

Wow, the class-action lawsuits started up incredibly fast:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...160526002/

You have to figure there's going to be some settlement where every college student over the last X number of years is going to get some kind of a check...

USFFan

(03-14-2019 10:48 AM)usffan Wrote:  Wow, the class-action lawsuits started up incredibly fast:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...160526002/

You have to figure there's going to be some settlement where every college student over the last X number of years is going to get some kind of a check...

USFFan

They got into Stanford but not USC or UCLA, and they're complaining?

(03-14-2019 02:33 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 12:00 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-12-2019 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I notice that so far there haven't been any men's hoops or football coaches involved.

This is what happens when you give a low paid employee - like a coach of a minor sport like Crew or Tennis - a coveted organizational power, in this case the ability to admit entry to an elite university.

these coaches were making $150,000+ easy that is hardly low paid at a university that is full professor level pay at top universities

it might be crew, but it is Stanford Crew where they take that serious (well where they win a lot) and the UT Tennis coach was making $230,000 so well over what top professors make (with the exception of a few) and well over what many administrators make

Fair points. But maybe their peer-comparisons in their own mind weren't professors, but the football and hoops coaches?

your reply is equally fair

and really even making $150,000 or $200,000+ it is pretty hard to turn down $100,000 or much more than that for simply letting a kid in to a large school based on them playing a sport most people do not know exist much less follow

It wasn't accepting or turning down $100K is what brought them all down, it was more the fact that the former Yale coach, Rudolph Meredith, basically went rogue and sidestepped Singer's "charity" and asked the father of an applicant, who was under a separate FBI investigation for a pump and dump, for $450K directly.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/0...story.html

https://www.justice.gov/file/1142886/download

(03-14-2019 11:40 AM)Renandpat Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 02:33 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 12:00 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-12-2019 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I notice that so far there haven't been any men's hoops or football coaches involved.

This is what happens when you give a low paid employee - like a coach of a minor sport like Crew or Tennis - a coveted organizational power, in this case the ability to admit entry to an elite university.

these coaches were making $150,000+ easy that is hardly low paid at a university that is full professor level pay at top universities

it might be crew, but it is Stanford Crew where they take that serious (well where they win a lot) and the UT Tennis coach was making $230,000 so well over what top professors make (with the exception of a few) and well over what many administrators make

Fair points. But maybe their peer-comparisons in their own mind weren't professors, but the football and hoops coaches?

your reply is equally fair

and really even making $150,000 or $200,000+ it is pretty hard to turn down $100,000 or much more than that for simply letting a kid in to a large school based on them playing a sport most people do not know exist much less follow

It wasn't accepting or turning down $100K is what brought them all down, it was more the fact that the former Yale coach, Rudolph Meredith, basically went rogue and sidestepped Singer's "charity" and asked the father of an applicant, who was under a separate FBI investigation for a pump and dump, for $450K directly.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/0...story.html

https://www.justice.gov/file/1142886/download

I understand that

your reply seems to not really be related to what Quo and I were discussing weather or not coaches making 6 figures are low paid or not

in general society and even relative to most university employees no, relative to the money sports coaches yes

and I was just saying that even a coach making $150,000 to $200,000 taking $100,000 straight up all at one time for letting in someone to take a spot for a few months on their team is probably hard to turn down

(03-14-2019 10:48 AM)usffan Wrote:  Wow, the class-action lawsuits started up incredibly fast:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...160526002/

You have to figure there's going to be some settlement where every college student over the last X number of years is going to get some kind of a check...

USFFan

Ugh. As a lawyer, I hate these kinds of nuisance suits.

This entire scandal was obviously wrong and criminal. However, the media has made this into a classic simpleton populist “the rich screwing everyone else” story to the point where they’re creating the perception that these parents were taking away admissions from the overall general population of smart hardworking kids (e.g. “*Your* kid’s spot at USC was taken away because of Aunt Becky’s bribes”). That’s NOT what happened. The entire scheme was predicated on very *specific* recruited athlete slots that were entirely separate from the general applicant pool. To the extent that someone can claim damages in this case, they would have to show that they were a top level soccer player, water polo player, etc. that got passed over because of these bribes, not just merely that they had great grades and test scores (as the top schools could just take valedictorians with perfect test scores and still reject the vast majority of them because there are more people that fit that profile than spots available). It would be like me arguing that I should have received a full scholarship from Illinois because my grades and test scores were better than most of the football players, but that argument fails because the whole point is that those scholarships are available *only* to football players. Likewise, recruited athlete admission slots are available *only* to recruited athletes.

So, there were certainly legitimate recruited athletes that might have been screwed by this scandal, but it didn’t impact the admissions of the “standard” smart hardworking kids with great grades and test scores (which is what the media is attempting to make it sound like).

They need to check the cheating that goes on the big money power program sports? How many dumb players had somebody took tests for them to get a scholarship in football? There are some questionable players like Winston at FSU, Newton at Auburn, or the whole UNC athletes that cheats in these types of scams as well.

(03-14-2019 12:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 10:48 AM)usffan Wrote:  Wow, the class-action lawsuits started up incredibly fast:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...160526002/

You have to figure there's going to be some settlement where every college student over the last X number of years is going to get some kind of a check...

USFFan

Ugh. As a lawyer, I hate these kinds of nuisance suits.

This entire scandal was obviously wrong and criminal. However, the media has made this into a classic simpleton populist “the rich screwing everyone else” story to the point where they’re creating the perception that these parents were taking away admissions from the overall general population of smart hardworking kids (e.g. “*Your* kid’s spot at USC was taken away because of Aunt Becky’s bribes”). That’s NOT what happened. The entire scheme was predicated on very *specific* recruited athlete slots that were entirely separate from the general applicant pool. To the extent that someone can claim damages in this case, they would have to show that they were a top level soccer player, water polo player, etc. that got passed over because of these bribes, not just merely that they had great grades and test scores (as the top schools could just take valedictorians with perfect test scores and still reject the vast majority of them because there are more people that fit that profile than spots available). It would be like me arguing that I should have received a full scholarship from Illinois because my grades and test scores were better than most of the football players, but that argument fails because the whole point is that those scholarships are available *only* to football players. Likewise, recruited athlete admission slots are available *only* to recruited athletes.

So, there were certainly legitimate recruited athletes that might have been screwed by this scandal, but it didn’t impact the admissions of the “standard” smart hardworking kids with great grades and test scores (which is what the media is attempting to make it sound like).

good points plus so far with the exception of USC there is no indication that any administrators were involved and thus the university having poor controls on their athletics admissions might not rise to the level of the university being liable for damages to any individuals......especially with your points in mind that regular individual students were not in the same pool of candidates

not to mention that as of now these universities are being sold as extremely competitive to get into and thus that looks better from the standpoint of the values of the degree for a regular student and I do not think lack of over-site specifically related to ATHLETES being admitted rises to the level of damages especially when it is known that most universities have a different standard of admissions for recruited athletes Vs regular students

(03-14-2019 12:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 10:48 AM)usffan Wrote:  Wow, the class-action lawsuits started up incredibly fast:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...160526002/

You have to figure there's going to be some settlement where every college student over the last X number of years is going to get some kind of a check...

USFFan

Ugh. As a lawyer, I hate these kinds of nuisance suits.

This entire scandal was obviously wrong and criminal. However, the media has made this into a classic simpleton populist “the rich screwing everyone else” story to the point where they’re creating the perception that these parents were taking away admissions from the overall general population of smart hardworking kids (e.g. “*Your* kid’s spot at USC was taken away because of Aunt Becky’s bribes”). That’s NOT what happened. The entire scheme was predicated on very *specific* recruited athlete slots that were entirely separate from the general applicant pool. To the extent that someone can claim damages in this case, they would have to show that they were a top level soccer player, water polo player, etc. that got passed over because of these bribes, not just merely that they had great grades and test scores (as the top schools could just take valedictorians with perfect test scores and still reject the vast majority of them because there are more people that fit that profile than spots available). It would be like me arguing that I should have received a full scholarship from Illinois because my grades and test scores were better than most of the football players, but that argument fails because the whole point is that those scholarships are available *only* to football players. Likewise, recruited athlete admission slots are available *only* to recruited athletes.

So, there were certainly legitimate recruited athletes that might have been screwed by this scandal, but it didn’t impact the admissions of the “standard” smart hardworking kids with great grades and test scores (which is what the media is attempting to make it sound like).

I think the attempt at claiming fraud for accepting application fees for a rigged admissions process is unlikely to hold much water. I'm not 100% sure they won't be able to convince a judge that the undervaluing of an education because of the fraudulent admissions process isn't worth letting something like this go to trial.

Then again, if Stanford wasn't named, and their degree is from Stanford, how would a fraudulent admissions process at Yale or USC impact their degree?

I also expect that this won't be the only class action suit filed...

USFFan

(03-14-2019 12:01 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 11:40 AM)Renandpat Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 02:33 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 09:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 12:00 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  these coaches were making $150,000+ easy that is hardly low paid at a university that is full professor level pay at top universities

it might be crew, but it is Stanford Crew where they take that serious (well where they win a lot) and the UT Tennis coach was making $230,000 so well over what top professors make (with the exception of a few) and well over what many administrators make

Fair points. But maybe their peer-comparisons in their own mind weren't professors, but the football and hoops coaches?

your reply is equally fair

and really even making $150,000 or $200,000+ it is pretty hard to turn down $100,000 or much more than that for simply letting a kid in to a large school based on them playing a sport most people do not know exist much less follow

It wasn't accepting or turning down $100K is what brought them all down, it was more the fact that the former Yale coach, Rudolph Meredith, basically went rogue and sidestepped Singer's "charity" and asked the father of an applicant, who was under a separate FBI investigation for a pump and dump, for $450K directly.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/0...story.html

https://www.justice.gov/file/1142886/download

I understand that

your reply seems to not really be related to what Quo and I were discussing weather or not coaches making 6 figures are low paid or not

in general society and even relative to most university employees no, relative to the money sports coaches yes

and I was just saying that even a coach making $150,000 to $200,000 taking $100,000 straight up all at one time for letting in someone to take a spot for a few months on their team is probably hard to turn down

Meredith was the women's coach at Yale. In 2014, the average salary of a woman's sport coach at Yale was $83,824. He was there since 1995, so his salary most likely was far above the average. Men's sports earned on average $123,564.

(03-14-2019 02:44 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  They need to check the cheating that goes on the big money power program sports? How many dumb players had somebody took tests for them to get a scholarship in football? There are some questionable players like Winston at FSU, Newton at Auburn, or the whole UNC athletes that cheats in these types of scams as well.

Except that Jameis wasn't book stupid, but common sense stupid. Heck, he got a 27 on the Wonderlic. Vince Young would be a better example of what you are talking about.

Back in my day...
https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/in-m...oward-taft

(03-14-2019 12:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The entire scheme was predicated on very *specific* recruited athlete slots that were entirely separate from the general applicant pool.

That was one of the two primary schemes. (The other scheme was allowing parents to purchase fraudulent test scores for their kids.) And if there are specific admission slots for "recruited athletes" at Yale or USC or wherever, then this scheme was like bribing the house manager for prime seats for a sold-out concert or Broadway show, while thousands of others can't get in because they're told there are no more tickets.

Maybe that's how admissions at these schools work anyway. Maybe there are X number of admission offers given on merit, and Y number of admission offers given to "recruited athletes" or to the children of million-dollar donors, or the children of presidents, governors, and senators, etc. Maybe this scam just got kids in through the "Y" category.