In college scandal, rowing was the ideal sport for stowaways, cheating

[SummerMadness]

In college scandal, rowing was the ideal sport for stowaways, cheating

William "Rick" Singer had a trusted scam, one he described in federal court last month: He bribed college coaches and administrators to recruit his clients' children as student athletes. He drew on a number of sports. His clients' children played water polo, tennis, volleyball, football, basketball, soccer; they sailed, ran track, competed in the pole vault — at least on paper.

But one pastime was particularly suited to Singer's scheme. According to court documents, when it came to helping Giannulli and Loughlin, he turned to a sport with large rosters, little fan or media scrutiny, and wide latitude in recruiting female athletes — as well as one position that requires little physicality.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In some ways I wish that there was a way for the rich to openly "cheat". Take their money and put it to good use. For example if they could pay the full cost of the students to a university then they should be allowed to enter their kid. They would more than make up for the space that they took by doing that. This latest sort of cheating only helped the person abusing the system.

 

[archer75]

In some ways I wish that there was a way for the rich to openly "cheat". Take their money and put it to good use. For example if they could pay the full cost of the students to a university then they should be allowed to enter their kid. They would more than make up for the space that they took by doing that. This latest sort of cheating only helped the person abusing the system.

The full cost of all students, you mean?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The full cost of all students, you mean?

No, of course not all students. But any student that goes to a university has a good deal of his education subsidized even if that student does not get financial aid. That is why I would require the full cost, both subsidized and tuition, for ten other students.

 

[bèlla]

My daughter was a competitive rower. It is widely understood that its a great avenue for securing a full scholarship. Women's rowing is an NCAA sport and unlike others the competition is much smaller. Rowing facilities and equipment is very expensive. Most programs hail from notable private and independent schools.

The coxswain position is the lone one where they aren't physically rowing but most are well adept at rowing nonetheless. It requires a person of small stature with strong leadership skills. They're the eyes and ears for the others.

College participants are limited to 20 hours of practice (this was the rule when she entered). This does not include time in the gym. That's additional and isn't on the clock to keep them compliant. Most teams begin at 4:00 AM on the water and have additional drills after class.

Aside from rowing, lacrosse and equestrian sports are noted for their limited access and stronger opportunities for scholarships.

 

[Nithavela]

My daughter was a competitive rower. It is widely understood that its a great avenue for securing a full scholarship. Women's rowing is an NCAA sport and unlike others the competition is much smaller. Rowing facilities and equipment is very expensive. Most programs hail from notable private and independent schools.

The coxswain position is the lone one where they aren't physically rowing but most are well adept at rowing nonetheless. It requires a person of small stature with strong leadership skills. They're the eyes and ears for the others.

College participants are limited to 20 hours of practice (this was the rule when she entered). This does not include time in the gym. That's additional and isn't on the clock to keep them compliant. Most teams begin at 4:00 AM on the water and have additional drills after class.

Aside from rowing, lacrosse and equestrian sports are noted for their limited access and stronger opportunities for scholarships.

I don't think lacrosse would be favorite for people just trying to swindle their way into college. You need some actual guts to play that. No surprise, it's basically a slightly tamed native american war game.

 

[variant]

In some ways I wish that there was a way for the rich to openly "cheat". Take their money and put it to good use. For example if they could pay the full cost of the students to a university then they should be allowed to enter their kid. They would more than make up for the space that they took by doing that. This latest sort of cheating only helped the person abusing the system.

We should simply be building more, and better colleges and universities so that the achievement needed to enter them was not sharply increasing so severely as to outpace the ability needed to actually do well in the education process.

 

[bèlla]

I don't think lacrosse would be favorite for people just trying to swindle their way into college. You need some actual guts to play that. No surprise, it's basically a slightly tamed native american war game.

My statement was not in relation to difficulty. It's a numbers game. Many target sports with smaller levels of participation or whose expense is prohibitive for most.

 

[bèlla]

We should simply be building more, and better colleges and universities so that the achievement needed to enter them was not sharply increasing so severely as to outpace the ability needed to actually do well in the education process.

I thought community colleges served that role. Are you saying we should build facilities with lower admission criteria?

 

[variant]

I thought community colleges served that role. Are you saying we should build facilities with lower admission criteria?

I am saying we should not be ramping up admissions criteria past what it actually takes to succeed in the programs.

It's an economics question. The reason for the high selectivity of the best colleges is because there are only so many spots, not because more people would not be able to thrive there.

The idea that someone who competes in rowing should have a better chance at attending USC should be ludicrous on its face. That's what we're actually talking about here. People pretending they like to competitively row boats because they want to enroll in college. Or further, people who paid consultants to make it look like they rowed boats competitively so that their children will have a better chance to succeed.

The absurdity of this should be so striking that pause should be taken at the idea that you CAN hire a consultant, whose job it is, is to make you look like you row boats so you can attend the college of your choice. So, it is my opinion, that something else in this system is a bit broken.

We should be building more and developing more high end schools so that more people have the skills they are teaching, then there would be no incentive to cheat.

People who go to such exclusive and expensive schools do better on average by a lot, and on average the already rich are better at positioning their kids in such schools (even without all the cheating). The answer is to not have them be so exclusive and simply build more. The price goes down, more people get a better quality education, there is more highly skilled labor, and we don't have an educational class system develop but rather, actual meritocracy.

 

[bèlla]

It's an economics question. The reason for the high selectivity of the best colleges is because there are only so many spots, not because more people would not be able to thrive there.

They are forecasting the probability of the applicant's performance, success, and likelihood of future support.

We should be building more and developing more high end schools so that more people have the skills they are teaching, then there would be no incentive to cheat.

Can the institutions you're proposing survive on government resources or is fundraising required? Where will the money come from?

The answer is to not have them be so exclusive and simply build more. The price goes down, more people get a better quality education, there is more highly skilled labor, and we don't have an educational class system develop but rather, actual meritocracy.

Is it your belief that the people who've benefited from the new institutions you're proposing will be inclined to send their children to similar institutions. Or is the probability of them looking to more selective places more likely?

In other words, how often do people work hard to better themselves only to hold their children to the same with no provocation for moving beyond their accomplishments? I don't know many people who fall in that category.

Most schools are dependent on financial contributions to offset the cost of expense. Are you willing to commit to providing funding for an institution if your idea were put in motion? Can you foresee assigning a portion of your assets to a school for the greater good?

 

[variant]

In some ways I wish that there was a way for the rich to openly "cheat". Take their money and put it to good use. For example if they could pay the full cost of the students to a university then they should be allowed to enter their kid. They would more than make up for the space that they took by doing that. This latest sort of cheating only helped the person abusing the system.

The rich already have all the advantages they will ever need in this regard. The people the rich are cheating out for these spots are also more than likely slightly less rich people.

The idea here is that if you row boats competitively you have a better chance to attend USC.

What sort of high schools do you think have great rowing teams? Inner city schools?

 

[variant]

They are forecasting the probability of the applicant's performance, success, and likelihood of future support.

And they have to reject qualified candidates.

Can the institutions you're proposing survive on government resources or is fundraising required? Where will the money come from?

For profit colleges are already a thing. State schools work too. Get the funding wherever needed. Get it from businesses that need the qualified job candidates. Get it from states and municipality's that want to elevate the number of educated people. Get it from alumni and charitable organizations.

Is it your belief that the people who've benefited from the new institutions you're proposing will be inclined to send their children to similar institutions. Or is the probability of them looking to more selective places more likely?

In other words, how often do people work hard to better themselves only to hold their children to the same with no provocation for moving beyond their accomplishments? I don't know many people who fall in that category.

I think having more resources available for everyone will make it more likely that their children will succeed regardless of what they want to do.

Most schools are dependent on financial contributions to offset the cost of expense. Are you willing to commit to providing funding for an institution if your idea were put in motion? Can you foresee assigning a portion of your assets to a school for the greater good?

I already do.

 

[bèlla]

And they have to reject qualified candidates.

As do employers. Does that mean we should build more businesses to accommodate rejected applicants or are they expected to try elsewhere?

I think having more resources available for everyone will make it more likely that their children will succeed regardless of what they want to do.

We aren't lacking good schools. We have a segment of society who desires to attend selective universities for the academic, financial, and social benefits that decision will yield. No one needs to go to Harvard.

 

[variant]

As do employers. Does that mean we should build more businesses to accommodate rejected applicants or are they expected to try elsewhere?

We aren't lacking good schools. We have a segment of society who desires to attend selective universities for the academic, financial, and social benefits that decision will yield. No one needs to go to Harvard.

If we aren't lacking in good schools then why are admissions standards and expenses rising so much?

 

[bèlla]

If we aren't lacking in good schools then why are admissions standards and expenses rising so much?

Price is a reflection of many things which includes demand. If I create a product and limit its availability (and market it in a fashion where the value is desirable by many) I've created demand and will be able to charge significantly more than others lacking the prestige and interest I've achieved.

Competition is a part of life and no two items are accorded the same value based on principles. Altruism may be the creato'rs aim but if the market doesn't agree and isn't willing to support its production he fails.

Your idea requires patronage as do most worthy goals. You haven't communicated how its investors will benefit from your suggestions. And benefit they shall. That's how it works.

 

[variant]

Price is a reflection of many things which includes demand. If I create a product and limit its availability (and market it in a fashion where the value is desirable by many) I've created demand and will be able to charge significantly more than others lacking the prestige and interest I've achieved.

Competition is a part of life and no two items are accorded the same value based on principles. Altruism may be the creato'rs aim but if the market doesn't agree and isn't willing to support its production he fails.

Your idea requires patronage as do most worthy goals. You haven't communicated how its investors will benefit from your suggestions. And benefit they shall. That's how it works.

Sure I have. These are things we already value, we're just falling short on the side of actually getting it done. There would be more opportunity, a better business climate, less competitive college admissions process (so quality of life for teenagers) more people with better education.

Also, instead of investing in simply getting your own kids into the right college via some nefarious scheme, there's the idea of getting larger groups together to donate and patronize the formation of newer and better colleges.

 

[bèlla]

Sure I have. These are things we already value, we're just falling short on the side of actually getting it done. There would be more opportunity, a better business climate, less competitive college admissions process (so quality of life for teenagers) more people with better education.

Are you a business owner? Have you encountered other owners who feel the same and are willing to hire from the group of people you're referencing?

Also, instead of investing in simply getting your own kids into the right college via some nefarious scheme, there's the idea of getting larger groups together to donate and patronize the formation of newer and better colleges.

I don't support using illegal methods to gain admission to a university. Nor am I opposed to competition. Our gifts and talents have a range and there are always others who excel in places we don't.

Most parents aren't trying to bend the rules. They are providing their children with opportunities to showcase their talent and excel academically. And for most the gains are the result of the parent's sacrifice and characteristics they've nurtured in their children.

Have you encountered groups who are willing to support your idea? And since we're referencing Christ in all of this. Why don't you present the idea to your church?

 

[variant]

Are you a business owner? Have you encountered other owners who feel the same and are willing to hire from the group of people you're referencing?

The business owners I know are constantly looking for qualified people for high skill positions.

They aren't always all that easy to find.

There are plenty of business programs already poking around or fully into the idea.

See:
https://www.spartnerships.com/funding-multitude-sources-boost-campus-construction-2019/

I don't support using illegal methods to gain admission to a university. Nor am I opposed to competition. Our gifts and talents have a range and there are always others who excel in places we don't.

Most parents aren't trying to bend the rules. They are providing their children with opportunities to showcase their talent and excel academically. And for most the gains are the result of the parent's sacrifice and characteristics they've nurtured in their children.

Have you encountered groups who are willing to support your idea? And since we're referencing Christ in all of this. Why don't you present the idea to your church?

It's one of the many things I pursue with my limited resources. I'm agnostic though. I haven't referenced religion a bit. But it is one thing that religious people HAVE in fact done in the past. Build quality places of learning.

 

[bèlla]

The business owners I know are constantly looking for qualified people for high skill positions.

You aren't speaking from the position of an owner. Your livelihood isn't dependent on creating a product and generating sales. Thus, you are limited to the opinions of others but lack the experience and knowledge of the challenges they face.

Earlier you provided numerous steps business owners and leaders could undertake. But you're not included in that statement. You're making proposals about resources that don't belong to you. Other people's money.

Money you've neither earned or have the capacity to make at present. And unless you're within a demographic wholly dependent on its survival through creative pursuits and product development. You don't have a right to say what we should do.

If you've had the comfort of receiving an income from an employer and haven't forgone necessities or comforts in pursuit of a business and its success. If you've never worked without compensation and don't have the benefit of unemployment or other government programs to bail you out. You can't speak for us. You haven't walked in our shoes. You don't know what our autonomy costs.

You don't have a right to our resources or someone else's. Or the right to pledge them to an idea or project. You don't own them. Nor do I have a right to speak for yours and I would never do so.

It's one of the many things I pursue with my limited resources. I'm agnostic though. I haven't referenced religion a bit. But it is one thing that religious people HAVE in fact done in the past. Build quality places of learning.

You will gain the respect and ear of patrons when you've demonstrated a willingness to take steps on your own. When you've shown work and actions which reveal the depth of your seriousness and commitment to the project. No one is funding a dream that doesn't speak to them.

I wouldn't and I can't name a soul who would.