Admissions scandal

Joe Fan said:
"I don't really care about school"

Click to expand...

Secretary knocks on door, "The next job applicant, Olivia Jade, is running late for her interview. She graduated with a 2.15 GPA in Third World Studies and the social media check found this interesting video ..."
 
Chop said:
Secretary knocks on door, "The next job applicant, Olivia Jade, is running late for her interview. She graduated with a 2.15 GPA in Third World Studies and the social media check found this interesting video ..."
Click to expand...
bystander said:
I'm gonna' have to sit with my 15-year old daughter and talk to her about how not to be vapid, narcissistic, entitled, out of touch and pathetic.....My daughter is a very cute young lady. Has the look. She goes to a private school full of white-bread rich kids. She has told me that sometimes she cringes at how all the girls act, including herself. I'm going to cultivate that cringe...
Click to expand...

The "I dont care about school" bribery girl is already pulling in more social media income than most of her USC classmates will earn. And USC benefitted as well with many of her videos being shot from inside her dorm with plenty of product placements. I sarcastically suggested above the school should have paid her to go to school there instead of the other way around, but there is a legitimate business argument for it.

"... The channel has over 2 million subscribers as of 2018 and has accumulated over 180 million views so far. It is able to get an average of 450,000 views per day from different sources. This should generate an estimated revenue of around $800 per day ($300,000 a year) from the ads that appear on the videos.

YouTubers get paid between $2 – $5 per 1000 monetized views after YouTube takes its cut. Monetized views range from 40% – 60% of the total views. All these are influenced by several factors like device played on, the location of the viewer, ad inventory, how many ads there are on a video, how many people skip the ads, ad engagement etc.

There is also a program known as Google Preferred where deep-pocketed companies can target ads on the top 5% most popular content. The ad rates here are higher than normal. Apart from ads, YouTubers also generate extra from YouTube Red viewers who pay a monthly fee to view premium content on YouTube plus watch videos without ads. Here they get paid based on watch time on their videos. The long the viewers watch their videos, the more money they earn...."​

How Much Money Olivia Jade Makes On YouTube - Net Worth - Naibuzz

And that is just Youtube income. She has probably monetised other social media platforms as well (Insta and maybe Twitter or Snapchat)

Here she is showing off her USC dorm room in Teen Vogue -- what was this worth to USC?
MS473537.JPG
 
Autullo just shot any credibility he may have had (if any) with his statement about Cogdell's fee. Pretty sure Dan will charge over $200 if he doesn't have to go to trial.

Hoping the trial will be in Houston, which I doubt, so I can go watch the second biggest *** kicking since Leon Fuller limited Barry to 5 first down & a hundred yards total offense in '79.
 
SabreHorn said:
Autullo just shot any credibility he may have had (if any) with his statement about Cogdell's fee. Pretty sure Dan will charge over $200 if he doesn't have to go to trial.

Hoping the trial will be in Houston, which I doubt, so I can go watch the second biggest *** kicking since Leon Fuller limited Barry to 5 first down & a hundred yards total offense in '79.
Click to expand...

The AAS guy added this -----
Part of me would not mind Patterson getting caught up in this. While it would be a horrible look for the school, I would like to see Patterson pay some price for what he did.
 
Joe,

I did not notice that Mark Riddell is part of this deal. That is huge and has wide sweeping implications, some of which could change recruiting around the country. Reminiscent of Baylor & Joe Thomas
 
What's interesting to me at this point of the fiasco is that the mainstream press is still referring to it as "...the biggest college admissions scandal in history..." or the like.

IMHO, it is only marginally involved with academia.

This story is about how rich elite fat cats freely threw millions of dollars at an institution (in this case academia, or more precisely employees in key positions in academia via a scam charity) to benefit their children over others more worthy of opportunities supposedly protected by federal and state laws. (Edit): Additionally, this does not suggest that academia, for all its faults, is corrupt, nor that anything needs to be done to correct current admission policies. If some crooks out there are paying $10,000 for example to doctor photos of their kids and have a ringer take admission tests for their kids to get a better grade, that's on the crooks, not the school. Find them, charge them, prosecute them, lock them up --- the word gets out that this isn't a smart thing to do --- and the problem is corrected, for a while.

Maybe the narrative will change as the story goes on.

Another interesting slant on all of this; when it first broke and "Texas" was listed as a participant in this, I immediately thought this could not be the typical college athletic recruiting scandal. I mean, on this BBS there are on the order of 50 posts a day on the recruiting board, giving great detail on prospective athletes' size, speed, quickness, knowledge of the game, etc., and these players are also being tracked similarly by dozens of top programs around the country.

Would be near impossible for, say Tom Herman, to be linked to this story by allegations of signing a 5'8", 220 pound sloth, with a 6.4 40-yard dash, who gets winded after 15 seconds of wind sprints. (Edit):...who happens to be a movie star's child.

Tennis? Rowing? Yeah, possible, but even with those, the scandal involves trading DOWN to sign on athletic losers, not blue chips.

So I didn't worry too much early on when this story broke. Sounded like just pure, plain old graft and corruption, not really a recruiting scandal.
 
Last edited:
Horn6721 said:
Washington Beacon reported most of the 50 revealed gave to Dems. They reported only 1 ,the husband of the actress Lori Loughlin,gave to Rubio and Boehner as well as to Dems.
Interesting.
Click to expand...

How about things happen, and you don't instantly frame them in a R vs D framework?
Not picking on you, but it seems like the thought process these days is:
1. Someone does something bad.
2. Are they on "my side"?
a. Yes - Well obviously that has nothing to do with it.
b. No -- See! Everyone on the other side is bad.

If you're fair, you'll find bad people everywhere, not just where you're looking hard to find them.
 
Anyone have connections with LHN? It would be great if they televised Gogdill's defense live. After all, it does involve Longhorn Sports. It could be the highest rated show ever on LHN.
 
This IMG Academy appears to basically be a charter school for athletes, complete with a "really smart" administrator (Riddell) to take SATs/ACTs for their 'student athletes'... Said institution's days have got to be numbered.
 
Twisted moral to this sad story: if you're well-to-do or even a bit rich, you can't illegally bribe your kid's way into a good college. If, however, you're very rich, you can still legally bribe by donating $10 million to a good college and ensure your idiot kid's (and grandkids') admission. You also might get your name on a building as a bonus...

Either way takes the same space from a more deserving applicant.
 
Last edited:
Chop said:
Twisted moral to this sad story: if you're well-to-do or even a bit rich, you can't illegally bribe your kid's way into a good college. If, however, you're very rich, you can still legally bribe by donating $10 million to a good college and ensure your idiot kid's (and grandkids') admission. You also might get your name on a building as a bonus...
Click to expand...
The other interesting twist to that is that many, if not most, of the people who are rich enough to do that became that rich through hard work, not handouts. Wonder what makes them later on want to just provide a handout for their kids or grandkids.
 
horninchicago said:
The other interesting twist to that is that many, if not most, of the people who are rich enough to do that became that rich through hard work, not handouts. Wonder what makes them later on want to just provide a handout for their kids or grandkids.
Click to expand...
Interesting point. I oppose the death tax, so there's (inheritance) a legitimate way to do a hand-out to your issue that hurts no third parties. So is paying for your kids'/grandkids' education at colleges they got into legitimately. Gaming public school admissions is different--innocent third parties are harmed.

I would also argue kids/grandkids admitted based on parental 'bribes' can also be harmed by attending colleges they are unqualified for (struggle just to not flunk out in easy majors, feel out of place, etc.).
 
Last edited:
EDT said:
It is a very good thing that soon to be ex coach Center has some cash to pay his atty.:thumbup:
Click to expand...
With close to 20 years, he has a hefty State retirement account that he could also take the tax hit on and close out into cash. Although that may be necessary to pay for the divorce attorney that is next up on the To-Do list...
 
horninchicago said:
The other interesting twist to that is that many, if not most, of the people who are rich enough to do that became that rich through hard work, not handouts.
Click to expand...

Bill Clements, founder of SEDCO, at one time the largest offshore drilling company in the world

Steve Jobs, co-founder Apple

Bill Gates, founder Microsoft

Michael Dell, founder Dell Computers


I could go on. What do they have in common?

All dropped out of college, went on to become Billionaires in rather technical fields, energy production and computers.

Of course these are exceptions, not the rule; but there are also thousands upon thousands of Americans who either never stepped into a college classroom, or either attended for a short while and didn't finish, only to go on to be successful, productive individuals.
 
What does $.5M get you at Texas?
Your name cut into a brick in a wall or perhaps a paving stone?

 
They don't make a bag strong enough for that, BUT if she does it for you, I want a truckload of whatever you're taking
 
I'll just say it:

Our universities are brainwashing our children to be compliant little socialist drones who approve of wealth redistribution by the federal government while simultaneously running a capitalistic money making cartel that resembles the abuses of an early 20th century trust monopoly as the education industrial complex has rigged the game to force our children to seek an education without an option though the appearance of choice is provided through the many universities across the US. The cost of education has risen solely because of greed while the faculty and administration all hide behind the message of virtue signaling.

There is not one educator or actor that I will take seriously from the Left. Not one. Ever again. I will never watch an awards show and I can't wait until my kids graduate from college so we can distance ourselves from the sewer.
 
Last edited:
Bystander,

You nailed it.

The backdrop of all of this is a very long term societal change, some good, some not.

Let's go back in the Wayback Machine to the 1880s. The U.S./the world was mostly an agrarian population but the industrial revolution was beginning to have its huge effect. A number of farmers' kids began moving to the big cities where there were manufacturing jobs, as compared to farming a bit more predictable with regard to planning a future. The "man" paid you as long as you did your work. After 40 years you get a gold watch and can retire somewhat comfortably.

But the technologies that flowed out of the industrial revolution (transportation went from foot to horse to carriage to locomotive to automobile to airplane; communication went from town crier to newspaper to telegraph to telephone to radio to television; medical care went from folklore to vaccination prevention to antibiotics to organ transplants and orthotics) required more out of the ordinary person --- a qualification more than a strong back and eagerness, to do some of the work needed. A qualification immediately recognized without much background check --- the college degree.

So it became the accepted ticket and the accepted phrase: "You need a college degree to get anywhere today." So it was until recently.

Now, in the information age, the poorest of kids in 3rd world country can find access to any information they want via the internet. Of course primary school fundamentals are critical so that those kids have the basic tools so that they are able to learn advanced things. So it's now almost gotten to be that the "You need a college degree to get anywhere today" has changed to "Getting a college degree mostly indicates that you have the tenacity or patience to pursue and complete a 4 year program of dealing with an institution and following their rules to a project completion." This may be of value to getting the low-level administrative jobs common to very large institutions such as government, academia, large corporations, military.

It seems that the traditional "non-technical" jobs, let's say a welder or an automobile mechanic today require a lot of training to both enter and stay current with the technologies that they deal with today compared to 50 years ago.

But the "technical" job requirements seem to be changing to less and less requiring a 4 year engineering or science degree since in a large population (e.g. the U.S. of 300+ million) more specialization occurs and hiring companies want someone who is very knowledgeable in their specific field so they can benefit from the new hire right now, not invest 20 years into developing them. Technologies are changing too fast to use the old employer/employee 40 years and gold watch approach.

An example would be batteries --- 100 years ago essentially all wet acid-lead or dry zinc-carbon. Now there are many more efficient varieties, lithium-ion, solar cells, ultracapacitor, etc., and more to come. A kid with a high school education, a couple of years of community college to get a bit more of the chemistry and math needed, a PC with a home internet connection, and the 20-year old can bypass sitting in college classrooms learning a whole bunch of other stuff they're not interested in and will never use. And the free market will place a high value on these kids to prospective employers who need them RIGHT NOW to help them with further development of their cutting edge improvements. You see a lot of this with coding by non-4-year-college degreed kids being gobbled up by companies because, well, they can write code that they need. No talk of a 4-year degree in computer science.

But back to the topic of the day, the admissions scandal, it does make one scratch their heads why the elite, who can bequeath to their kids millions rather than the kids needing to get a 4 year degree to --- do what with it? I guess just to buy prestige. I mean the degrees these pampered offspring were to get certainly would not be in engineering, hard science, business administration, nursing, medicine, or law.

Just to have their kid be able to one day say "Hey, I got a degree from Yale."

Over time that is becoming less and less important than being able to say: "Hey, you know when you put your ATM card in the slot? I wrote the subroutine that verifies the validity of your card with VISA and Mastercard."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top