Joe Montana’s sons attended De La Salle High School (a Catholic school with a strong football tradition), though the younger one transferred to Oaks Christian School.
The younger one was considered pro-style quarterback prospect of significant interest in 2010: https://247sports.com/Season/2010-Football/RecruitRankings/?InstitutionGroup=HighSchool&Position=PRO
"then a coach with a lot of pull (say one with multiple national championships) could pick up a slot or two for extra income purposes and no one would necessary be the wiser’
Only the rare, stupid, greedy, self-serving coaches who do not value the benefit of working for a first class University, would even THINK that they could get away with the fraudulent recruiting of non athletes.
MOST colleges coaches, thankfully, would not stoop so low.
Because the subsequent blow-back of illegal activity is always greater than they anticipated
Illegal activity eventually gets exposed. Especially with re : college admissions .
“March 2019: This man absolutely revolutionized college admissions. Even if your children are substandard students, that no problem for Rick. I’m proud to say, because of Rick’s help, my daughter now plays nosetackle for the men’s football team at Stanford, even though frankly, she isn’t much of an athlete. His tactics are just THAT good. Low SAT or ACT scores? That’s no problem. You can expect to boost those scores several hundred points. Basically, whatever score you want, tell Rick, and he’ll make it happen. (We aced them both…not a single wrong answer). Do yourself a favor and get this book. Highly recommended. A pillar of the educational community.”
“my daughter now plays nosetackle for the men’s football team at Stanford”
wow
just wow.
its amazing and frightening that ANYONE could be so dumb AND desperate enough to hire this charlatan, but I guess there are all kind of stupid, rich parents out there…
Pretty amusing! There are a few more joke comments as well on Amazon, but this one is the best so far.
I agree the parents were enticed into doing something illegal that they otherwise wouldn’t have done. There was a college advising firm which sued parents of a foreign student they got into a fancy prep school and Dartmouth with donations for not paying the second half of the $1.5M. So they are pretty much opening providing that service.
Aside from big donations to get in students way below the level of the school, alumni can make donations every year. Also, the waiting list is generally a hint that a donation would make the difference.
A large portion of students have some kind of hook, even if they are in range academically. I was asked at interviews a long time ago about my political connections. I had them, but did not know big national politicians. Presumably many of the prep school admits have an advantage due to assumed background and connect
I would assume that the students who Singer helped get into UCSD were well below UCSD level. I helped a student get 780 on the math SAT. He was in all AP classes, but his grades and AP exam scores weren’t that good. He wound up getting accepted only by UCSD and Miami Ohio.
I would assume that colleges will look more closely at athletic admits. Probably admissions personnel are selected for being incorruptable and are closely watched.
@privatebanker “It’s a mistake to make sweeping indictments around groups of society vs. this one greedy college advisor and these poorly misguided and criminal parents. It is however, perfectly ok to make those same indictments against all of those involved. Federal indictments, in fact.”
I’m not making sweeping indictments and for all I know everyone except those named in this scandal and the previous U. Penn scandal are upright and honest. However, I view this like I do when some hapless assistant basketball coaches get caught by the NCAA for giving money to coveted players to get them to play for their school. Does anyone believe they are lone actors who are the only ones directing payments to recruits or arranging for their families to get nice apartments in college towns? It is the system that both enables and incentivizes this corruption. And not looking at that system (in that example that these basketball players are very valuable to a college but must be seen as amateur student-athletes) and just pretending that it is only the ones who get caught who did wrong seems to turn a blind eye. Especially if there is something about the system that seems off.
Entrapment, huh? What is your basis for assuming this?
I actually picture those parents seeking out the corrupt ‘counselor’ in order to get their under-achieving kids into an elite school.
The parents are criminals, not victims. IMO
There is a big difference between an enticing offer and entrapment in the legal sense. In entrapment, law officers create a situation that would not have occurred without their intervention. It could only be entrapment if the FBI directed Singer to make these offers, and he was not already going around making these offers on his own. Sure the parents found these offers very enticing, and maybe they would not have thought of committing fraud unless Singer had suggested it. But if the main mover here is Singer and not the FBI, it isn’t entrapment. Most sting operations involve something enticing.
My strategy is quite simple. In knowing the major alone, I have a pretty good idea of the caliber of the student. I don’t need to worry about how the student got in- front door, back door or side door.
Some programs are “difficult” because they are too popular. Too many wanted in and the school has to restrict numbers (e.g. an elite commerce program). Other programs are “difficult” because the nature of the subject is difficult (e.g. physics). While my kids were strong enough to be accepted by the former, I would never in a hundred years have them compare candle power with those in engineering physics, for example, even though in their school, engineering physics was probably easier to gain admittance.
Iow, getting accepted is one thing; graduating in the specific field of study is another.
Enticing or no enticing, you still know it’s morally, ethically and legally wrong. You say yes, you are a willing partner in crime. Not a victim.
“For every cockroach you see, there are 10 you don’t.”
In reviewing Karabel’s book, The Economist said the following:
*the concept of meritocracy itself is strategic and flexible, and often in outright conflict with egalitarian aims. "Those who are able to define ‘merit’,"he writes, “will almost invariably possess more of it, and those with greater resources–cultural, economic, and social–will generally be able to ensure that the educational system will deem their children more meritorious.” *
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
I’ll thank you not to lump the College Confidential moderators in with Rick Singer.
Any advice that a mod gives on this site regarding a particular user or user’s child are his/her opinions, which is the case for every user who posts. I would hope that any user asking for suggestions does not erroneously assume that the mods have any special superpowers.
Wait @skieurope are you crushing my dream to apply to be a CC mod with the hopes of making thousands (or even millions) in kickbacks from parents who want me to help them get into elite schools?
Geesh. That’s harsh.
UCLA women’s soccer team caught up in college admissions scandal…
https://abc7.com/ucla-womens-soccer-caught-up-in-college-scandal/5209430/
It is so absurd I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. The process/the cost/the loans/the inequality…it has been smoke and mirrors for years. College Admissions has become the original “Fake News”. The imaging of some schools to make them seem “elite” such as our “state related” schools here in Pennsylvania…it is all nuts.
Auditor General DePasquale Says Penn State Shows Some Progress Since Sandusky Scandal; Background Checks Still Missing, Tuition Growth Outrageous…
https://www.paauditor.gov/press-releases/auditor-general-depasquale-says-penn-state-shows-some-progress-since-sandusky-scandal-background-checks-still-missing-tuition-growth-outrageous
The state flagship gives preferential admissions treatment to non residents…why…because they are willing to pay more for tuition…crazy. So much for educating your residents…again…it is all about the money.
For a family of very average means, having their kids go to the local community center for free ACT study group(we can’t afford to pay for private lessons), have kids earn a 24-25…its a joke. Non minority, middle class, no aid available other than loans in this state. Our state flag ship has 24 branch campuses that cost $27,000 or more to attend. After two years…you have a chance to go to the flagship at the cost of $35-37,000/year. The state legislature is controlled by graduates of this flagship and continues to fund the 24 branches(most are basically community colleges) yet complain and cut funding to the actual state system that allows a much more affordable 4 year experience to a kid that falls into this category.
The old adage is true…“In Pennsylvania, what do you have between the cities of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia? Well it is Alabama”.
I apologize for the rant but things need to change. This scandal might be the best thing to happen to college admissions/equality in decades…or perhaps it is the beginning of the end of higher education as we know it? Time will tell.
I have some other questions for people who know a lot about athlete admissions.
The USC Athletic Director Swann claimed that the admissions office just signed off on the academic credentials of a list of candidates, so no one knew anything except the one person who was adding names to the list.
Question 1: Do the admissions officers look at the athletic profiles in the applications presented by the coach?
Question 2: Do the admissions officers evaluate whether the athletic profiles are generally consistent with the level of the team?
Question 3: Do the admissions officers make an attempt to verify whether the athletic profiles are truthful?
@bester1 This same thing happens in CA. In state students who aren’t at the top 7% of their class likely won’t be admitted to the UC system. Out of state kids with out of state dollars don’t have to be as competitive to gain admission.
Snowplow parent!
https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2019/03/20/how-bad-parenting-created-college-bribery-scandal/QehTgDxBOcj9fqtEtoX7QN/story.html
“Later, when the victims of snowplowing — the kids — try to figure things out as adults, they discover they can’t handle even the most minor challenges. Psychologists are now dealing with an entirely new kind of patient who can’t cope with normal setbacks, like losing a job or being unable to afford the latest gadget. What’s worse, these formerly overprotected adults sometimes exhibit self-mutilation and other violent and/or anti-social behaviors. Hara Estroff Marano, a longtime editor-at-large at Psychology Today, was compelled to issue this warning: “Wake up America.” Marano’s 2008 manifesto “A Nation of Wimps: The High Cost of Invasive Parenting” documented a nationwide epidemic of immaturity and emotional fragility.”
@Plotinus There are variations in how Athletic admissions are handled differently among schools, conferences, divisions, sports. There are some generalities that can be applied across the board.
Question 1: Generally often/sometimes. Depends on the size of the admissions staff and how much power the coach has.
Question 2: Generally no. That’s up to the coaching staff to determine if an athlete meets their needs/standards.
Question 3: Generally no. Again, that’s the coaching staffs role and admissions are generally relying on them.
These parents made choices, made decisions. There are enticements every day in life. We choose whether or not we want to be enticed by them.