• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Wake Forest University Coach Named By FBI in Bribery and Academic Fraud Scandal

I don’t understand your point. Obviously money matters. I’m saying merit should be more important than money. I thought that was a common belief.

Of course merit matters. But merit has never been the end all and be all in college admissions and that isn't new or surprising. Beyond "money" we all know there are loads of things that have ZERO to do with true "merit" that impact college admissions. It isn't merit when Asian-American student No. 101 who has significantly better test scores and grades than your kid or my kid doesn't get into XYZ elite university because the school thinks it has filled their quota of Asian-American applicants by admitting applicant No. 100. How about the kid from Minnesota who can't get into, say, Wisconsin because they have so many applicants from Minnesota and she's a marginal applicant, but breezes right through admissions at Florida (arguably a better school) because the school wants "geographic diversity". Your parents being employed at Cargill isn't "merit" - it's just luck in that instance. The University of Florida isn't really way better off for having average blonde chick from Minnetonka instead of more qualified applicant from Pensacola. Money is just yet another factor in the same parade of stuff. Someone, afterall, has to pay for all the bright shiny toys on campus and the distinguished Marlin Perkins Chair of Animal Husbandry. From the day colleges started admitting students, money has mattered.

What is news here is that there was testing fraud and the payment of bribes directly to individuals who had influence over the process without the knowledge of the universities.

Merit has never carried the day fully in college admissions and never will.
 
I don’t know why you’re saying obvious things as if they’re a revelation. This is a big deal because the methods have been exposed it shows how non-revenue sports are part of a scam.
 
I guess I should add there was also outright fraud in these applications - like boasting of extracurricular achievements that turned out to be completely bogus. Wonder if admissions departments will now be seeking proof of extra-curricular accomplishments. You claim you were the lead in the school play? Send us a letter from the school principal and a copy of the program.

A 2-8 record and a ranking of 207 in NoCal is converted into a top 50 national ranking? I presume the student applying was aware of these lies in that instance.
 
Is this really a bad thing? It groups Wake Forest in academically with Yale, Georgetown, Stanford and USC. It doesn't impact Basketball or Football. Wake is referred to as an elite institution, and people from across the country are going to know its a school that rich people want to send their kids to, so they in turn will try to send their kids to Wake.

The Volleyball coach will probably get fired, and the NCAA will take a look, but we are not going to lose any wins over this.

This is such a non-scandal, that is only getting so much attention, because it intersects the personal lives of the rich and famous and college athletics. As they guy said, this is just the side door. Rich folk have been getting under achieving children into elite institutions for a hundred years, this time they just tried to do it with fake recruiting profiles, instead of donating a building.

Good take
 
I don’t know why you’re saying obvious things as if they’re a revelation. This is a big deal because the methods have been exposed it shows how non-revenue sports are part of a scam.

I think it shows a that an employee of the university was willing to take a payoff to try and get someone admitted. That isn't an indictment of non-revenue sports. It's an indictment of an individual.

If we were indicting non-revenue sports we'd be looking more at the situation I outlined from ASU. Perhaps that pisses you off too since their decision to put the kid from China on their ice hockey team was not driven by merit but rather the fact Dad would likely end up being a big time booster to the athletic department (ASU doesn't have their own hockey arena - yet).

The issue in our case is an individual - not the school - was taking the $$ and not telling the school. The school had no expectation of any quid pro quo. They just thought they were getting a good volleyball player when in fact they probably weren't and the coach was pocketing personal change.
 
No one is indicting non-revenue sports. Stop the hyperbole. The FBI uncovered how non-revenue sports can be part of a bribery scheme. That needs to be addressed.

If the Deacon Club keeps the $50K after learning all this, they’re complicit.
 
Who should the Deacon Club give the $50K to?

A scholarship fund not associated with Wake for high achieving kids who can’t afford to go to college. Make it specifically for non-revenue sport walk-ons.
 
No one is indicting non-revenue sports. Stop the hyperbole. The FBI uncovered how non-revenue sports can be part of a bribery scheme. That needs to be addressed.

If the Deacon Club keeps the $50K after learning all this, they’re complicit.

Stop the hyperbole? You are the person who wrote "it shows how non-revenue sports are part of a scam".

And as for hyperbole, the Deacon Club is only complicit in any of this if they knew when the donation was made that the coach had accepted a personal bribe to try and get the student admitted. You can certainly take the position that to avoid any association with the coaches actions they should now return the donation. And I'd advocate for that very thing. But they aren't complicit in this mess simply because they processed a donation. Don't conflate the coach's actions with any other group associated with the university. We only have an allegation against the coach, no one else - at least for now.
 
Where did you see that about the “tennis player?”

Rafi, do you think the Deacon Club should return the donation or donate it elsewhere, like a non-Wake scholarship fund?

Return the donation to the guy charged with racketeering by the FBI? Is this a serious question?

I’m not sure what they’re supposed to do with the money, but I’m sure the feds will give them guidance.
 
So are you saying non-revenue sports are NOT part of a scam even though the FBI clearly showed they are?

Are you saying it’s bad or wrong that I said the Deacon Club is complicit if they don’t return the $50K even though you support it?

Stop arguing just to argue, DeacMan. Find another way to get beers.
 
Return the donation to the guy charged with racketeering by the FBI? Is this a serious question?

I’m not sure what they’re supposed to do with the money, but I’m sure the feds will give them guidance.

The guy charged with racketeering will be owning plenty of money to wherever the feds direct it.

Good job avoiding taking a stance though.
 
Who should the Deacon Club give the $50K to?

The school’s outside legal counsel?


Sorry, bad joke.


I don’t think the school would have any obligation to give up the 50k, assuming they didn’t know about the pay to play scheme involving the coach.

Giving up the money, however, seems like the right thing to do.
 
Sucks to be this volleyball chick, if her dad was a Chinese oligarch she'd have no problem getting in.
 
The FBI uncovered how non-revenue sports can be part of a bribery scheme. That needs to be addressed.

The FBI uncovered absolutely nothing new. The FBI discovered a crime. They do it everyday. It was committed by an individual. You aren't going to stop individuals from committing crimes. And individuals are associated with institutions. Schools are not going to stop asking coaches from asking to have student athletes admitted. They may do more diligence on the athletic merits of the student athletes the coach wants admitted. They may seek to try and track financial transactions (but cash still exists).

And it all brings me back to my ASU example. Ice hockey is a low revenue sport at Arizona State. Are you outraged the school knowingly admitted a kid who probably can't help the team much with full knowledge Dad is a billionaire likely to fund their athletic department? Is that ok? Would you feel differently if the coach had not been bribed but still came to the admissions office and said "hey, Mary is only a so-so player who would really have to work to get much playing time. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm just being realistic. But let's note that her Mom is a big time athletic booster and I think we'd be well served to see if we can get her into school because we'll likely get loads of donations." I'm not saying Wake would go for this. But would that be easier to swallow? If so, then your beef is with the bullshit coach, not "non-revenue sports".
 
The FBI uncovered absolutely nothing new. The FBI discovered a crime. They do it everyday. It was committed by an individual. You aren't going to stop individuals from committing crimes. And individuals are associated with institutions. Schools are not going to stop asking coaches from asking to have student athletes admitted. They may do more diligence on the athletic merits of the student athletes the coach wants admitted. They may seek to try and track financial transactions (but cash still exists).

And it all brings me back to my ASU example. Ice hockey is a low revenue sport at Arizona State. Are you outraged the school knowingly admitted a kid who probably can't help the team much with full knowledge Dad is a billionaire likely to fund their athletic department? Is that ok? Would you feel differently if the coach had not been bribed but still came to the admissions office and said "hey, Mary is only a so-so player who would really have to work to get much playing time. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm just being realistic. But let's note that her Mom is a big time athletic booster and I think we'd be well served to see if we can get her into school because we'll likely get loads of donations." I'm not saying Wake would go for this. But would that be easier to swallow? If so, then your beef is with the bullshit coach, not "non-revenue sports".

Wake, and many other schools, have been going for this for decades. The two things universities care about are artificial rankings (recruiting rankings aren't the only thing easily influenced) and fundraising/endowment. At the end of the day Hatch, Wellman and others can point to "we raised ____________ dollars for this initiative", and that's how they are judged. So of course they cut corners for the children of people who will boost that number, get them raises/bonuses, and keep them employed. Duh.

Universities are a business first. Some are worst than others, but they all play the game. I mean they literally brag about how big their savings account is. Could there be a bigger red flag.
 
Last edited:
- The booster clubs and universities had no idea this was going on. That’s how and why the scam worked.
- As Singer said, there are 3 ways to get into elite colleges: the front door (academics), the back door (make a huge donation), or the side door, which he designed (bribe a coach so he/she goes to bat for your kid).
- I would guess this all traces back to USC. That’s where the majority of those accused are located (including where Ferguson came from), and a lot of the families are from southern California.
 
DeacMan, why do you keep bringing up ASU? Of course I'm against that. Why would you think I'd be fine with that? What a weird "Gotcha!" attempt.
 
Back
Top