College Entrance Scandal: UCLA Soccer

[Unregistered]

He should have been fired immediately.

I’m waiting to see the fate of women’s coach. She rostered a non soccer player. What’s her culpability if she was complicit but didn’t take money herself?

But she did take money, and more of it (the men's coach supposedly took $200K). I'd expect her resignation no later than COB today. Should have happened at least a week ago.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-charged.html

A student who had reportedly never played competitive soccer was named on UCLA's elite team alongside members of the U.S. and Canadian national side after her parents allegedly transferred Facebook shares worth $250,000 to get her into the school.

Lauren Isackson was given jersey No. 41 in 2017 on a team of all star players and required to stay on the side for at least one year, an indictment says.

But she made no appearances and played zero minutes during the season after her side included five U.S. youth national players and a member of the Canadian national team, Kennedy Faulknor. Her side finished second to national champions Stanford in the 2017 season.

Prosecutors say her parents, Davina, 55, and Bruce, 61, spent more than $600,000 to get Lauren and her sister into UCLA and USC with fake athletic credentials.

The California couple are said to have handed over 2,000 Facebook shares - worth around $251,249 - and donations to college admissions scandal mastermind Rick Singer.

While her teammates at UCLA were playing for their state or national teams Lauren's roster lists her as team captain for Woodside Soccer Club from 2012-16.

Prosecutors say she did not even play competitive soccer - for a team or in a league - before joining UCLA.

[Unregistered]

I've lived in seven countries, speak 5 languages, and have worked 31 countries.

I work as a headhunter specializing in connecting arms dealers with despotic leaders and warlords. Not the most rewarding of work, but I meet very ambitious people.

Sounds like a movie with Nicholas Cage. You should have gotten a piece of the backend.

[Unregistered]

But she did take money, and more of it (the men's coach supposedly took $200K). I'd expect her resignation no later than COB today. Should have happened at least a week ago.

I have not read anywhere that she has been definitely accused of taking money. I read that the player in question was set up and taken care of through the men's coach, not the women's.

The women's coach was not indicted, the men's was.

Has new info emerged?

[Unregistered]

I have not read anywhere that she has been definitely accused of taking money. I read that the player in question was set up and taken care of through the men's coach, not the women's.

The women's coach was not indicted, the men's was.

Has new info emerged?

It’s dirty however you look at it. She brought the player in, did someone a favor. It doesn’t look good and doubt she will survive.

[Unregistered]

It’s dirty however you look at it. She brought the player in, did someone a favor. It doesn’t look good and doubt she will survive.

I agree. Can’t see how she survives even if she doesn’t get indicted. That’s will be a significant vacancy in women’s NCAA soccer.

[Unregistered]

I have not read anywhere that she has been definitely accused of taking money. I read that the player in question was set up and taken care of through the men's coach, not the women's.

The women's coach was not indicted, the men's was.

Has new info emerged?

HE doesn't place players on the women's team. AC does. And she did.

[Unregistered]

HE doesn't place players on the women's team. AC does. And she did.

I understand....I assume if she took money or if there was proof she took money I should say...then she would have been indicted. Maybe she will be in the future.

This is why I posted..."what's her culpability if she was complicit but didn't (or can't be proven that she did) take money herself?"

I think it will be moot anyway, I can't see how it will be concluded that she was clean in the process and will survive further investigation.

[Unregistered]

I understand....I assume if she took money or if there was proof she took money I should say...then she would have been indicted. Maybe she will be in the future.

This is why I posted..."what's her culpability if she was complicit but didn't (or can't be proven that she did) take money herself?"

I think it will be moot anyway, I can't see how it will be concluded that she was clean in the process and will survive further investigation.

She is a fairly new coach at UCLA and was at UCF before. The player was added in 2017. The head men’s coach or a university official could have pulled a fast one on her and said that the ‘special’ player was already through the recruiting efforts before she arrived and she was expected to add that player to her roster.

[Unregistered]

She is a fairly new coach at UCLA and was at UCF before. The player was added in 2017. The head men’s coach or a university official could have pulled a fast one on her and said that the ‘special’ player was already through the recruiting efforts before she arrived and she was expected to add that player to her roster.

Hardly likely at a school which competes at this level. The fact that the kid never kicked a ball in her life and was wasting a roster spot would have been noticed right away.

[Unregistered]

Hardly likely at a school which competes at this level. The fact that the kid never kicked a ball in her life and was wasting a roster spot would have been noticed right away.

devil's advocate:

she wasn't wasting roster spot. she had no scholarship.

is there a limit as to the number of players a school can keep "rostered?" how many "practice players" or team mangers can a school have?

she just used the recruit loophole for admission. i can't see where it hurt the team or their competitiveness at all. i guess she might have gotten some free ucla soccer gear as a manager.

[Unregistered]

I understand....I assume if she took money or if there was proof she took money I should say...then she would have been indicted. Maybe she will be in the future.

This is why I posted..."what's her culpability if she was complicit but didn't (or can't be proven that she did) take money herself?"

I think it will be moot anyway, I can't see how it will be concluded that she was clean in the process and will survive further investigation.

Well the parents definitely paid for a spot and they're on the indictment list. It's certainly possible because the women's HC was new that the player was slipped on to her roster. All depends on the timing and if any large payments hit her bank account around then ;)

[Unregistered]

devil's advocate:

she wasn't wasting roster spot. she had no scholarship.

is there a limit as to the number of players a school can keep "rostered?" how many "practice players" or team mangers can a school have?

she just used the recruit loophole for admission. i can't see where it hurt the team or their competitiveness at all. i guess she might have gotten some free ucla soccer gear as a manager.

not the poster and I've advocated that stance before. Coaches for the most part aren't limited on their roster size. It doesn't cost the coach much of anything to carry "practice" players and they do it all the time. They're not getting scholarship money and they almost never even travel with the team. I'm not saying what these pretend athletes did is right. But they most likely didn't take a spot from another athlete (if a coach had a player he really wanted he or she would still take them regardless if their roster is 28 or 29). They did certainly take an admissions spot from another applicant.

[Unregistered]

She is a fairly new coach at UCLA and was at UCF before. The player was added in 2017. The head men’s coach or a university official could have pulled a fast one on her and said that the ‘special’ player was already through the recruiting efforts before she arrived and she was expected to add that player to her roster.

True true. Plus a new coach rarely cuts from the existing roster until they've had a chance to see what they've got to work with. As said above it's all about the timing, who knew what, when, and if payments were or weren't accepted.

[Unregistered]

Needless to say the scandal has given comedians a plethora of material. Today Ben Stiller said his daughter got a full scholarship to play football at Yale, where she'll be majoring in Photoshop :)

[Unregistered]

I understand....I assume if she took money or if there was proof she took money I should say...then she would have been indicted. Maybe she will be in the future.

This is why I posted..."what's her culpability if she was complicit but didn't (or can't be proven that she did) take money herself?"

I think it will be moot anyway, I can't see how it will be concluded that she was clean in the process and will survive further investigation.

I'm not saying she took money. Let's think good thoughts and believe she didn't.

But allowing this girl to take a spot on her roster completed the transaction. If she didn't get in through the soccer program, she may have gone to another college. Didn't this all come about because USC bounced the applicant's information? Like you said, how can it ever be concluded that she was clean in the process? It's a red flag and she should have stopped it not played along. It only begs the question, how many other times were blinders used by the coaching staff?