WAG UCLA joins the college scandals

[flippin out]

https://www.latimes.com/california/s...4t6fAR6LiUcjI0

i am surprised the amount of people on Twitter that believe that since Claire is walk on that she "didn't take a spot from someone else".........I do not know a single D1 spot (scholarship or walk-on) that is NOT a recruited position that is highly sought after!!!

And yes, money didn't change hands as in bribery (at least i hope not) but money is still involved. Every program has a budget (clothing, travel expense, etc) and priority registration, tutoring, student-athlete services -----and this non-athlete is taking that away from someone else!! Meanwhile a highly qualified level 10 was rejected from this team

it was mentioned elsewhere, Do not if it applies to this kid, but in some cases, a less stringent admissions process is used for the athlete that may not have gotten into the university on their SAT and grades alone (as stated in that article only 14% of kids trying to get in to that campus actually made it). So even gen-pop kids have a right to be question and be upset about this. I'm sure there is a someone that was top of their class and had excellent test scores that didn't get into UCAL main campus just because they weren't in the top 14% of all applicants......but someone else found a way to sidestep that by having a relative to get them on as a bogus recruit

and it's not just the one case with Claire, there were the Waller kids too. Do not tell me that the level 7 or the level 10 that only did 1 event usually (scoring an average of 7.935 on one event and 7.917 on the other ) deserved to be on that team.....a team with multiple olympians and national qualifiers.

 

[3rd_time_around]

No one gets a spot on any college gymnastics team, whether D1 or D3 with just “potential” to be a good vaulter with college-Level coaching. My daughter would have done anything to even be a walk-on any where, and she had credentials, experience, and success as a level 10 gymnast. It certainly sounds shady.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

A walk-on is a walk-on. An existing student can walk-on and do. Walk-on
Positions are taken for various reasons , could be an event , grades, management , leadership skills... etc... these spots are not reserved or taken from others ....

 

[doublestrike]

People don't seem to understand that most of the former gymnasts that become managers, were admitted to the college first, then asked to be team managers. It's a lot of work, in addition to being a student at a top school. Like football team managers, these are real non-paid jobs, take a lot of time, you need to know the sport and love it. It seems the one student was the exception, but the rest are getting a bum rap. I have no problem with children of school employees getting in, it should be a perk of the job.

 

[Gymnastics_parent]

Always wondered about a level 9 commit to UCLA, no TOPS, HOPES, elite or level 10 experience...

2021-2022
Link Removed

 

[doublestrike]

That's just a verbal, but you wonder now, if that's going to happen ...

 

[Gymnastics_parent]

That's just a verbal, but you wonder now, if that's going to happen ...

Yes, a verbal but how many level 9 commits have you seen to a top program (top 5). Also, the scandal was also about admissions to schools which verbals can help. I have never seen her perform but it always seemed strange.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

I will add to anyone complaining about a walk-on and lack of criteria . “Be careful what you wish for” . More complaining and posting equals initiation of NCAA standard criteria for a walk on spot ... kind of defeats the purpose of a walk on.... ITS A WALK ON !!!!

 

[Gymnastics_parent]

100% understand and agree. Ultimately, walk-on may be the path for my daughter in the future. too much time to know the future..

I don't know if there has been anything inappropriate and don't want to imply there was because I know how hard all the athletes work.

 

[ausnat83]

Maybe we can discuss whether there should be some sort of minimum standards at public universities for coaches/athletic staff to expedite (or otherwise influence) admissions decisions or at least some requirements for transparency and accountability without gossiping about individual teenagers and speculating on who didn't deserve what? Imagine your level 9 gymnast training day after day and year after year, winning AA at regionals, committing to her dream school... and then a bunch of adults on a message board who don't know her anonymously spreading rumors & speculation that she only got that spot because of who her parents are. Let's not. I think we can discuss the rules that are in place, what rules should be in place, and the ethics of a coach using their position to do favors in the abstract without dragging specific teenagers into the mix.

 

[Gymnastics_parent]

Maybe we can discuss whether there should be some sort of minimum standards at public universities for coaches/athletic staff to expedite (or otherwise influence) admissions decisions or at least some requirements for transparency and accountability without gossiping about individual teenagers and speculating on who didn't deserve what? Imagine your level 9 gymnast training day after day and year after year, winning AA at regionals, committing to her dream school... and then a bunch of adults on a message board who don't know her anonymously spreading rumors & speculation that she only got that spot because of who her parents are. Let's not. I think we can discuss the rules that are in place, what rules should be in place, and the ethics of a coach using their position to do favors in the abstract without dragging specific teenagers into the mix.

Great point, but the process is not very transparent and there has been so much in the media about that it is difficult to not wonder. The reality is that every athlete wants fair consideration.

 

[skschlag]

Ok..Some facts

She was the niece of a friend of the coach.
She never competed gymnastics.
She was admitted to UCLA as a member of the gymnastics team.

Some speculation:
The less stringent rules were used for her admission as an athlete.

Whether she took the place of an athlete or not, she did take someone's place, someone who supposedly had to go through the more stringent rules.

I have no problem with employees' children getting admittance if they are qualified. That is fantastic. That is not the case here.

They definitely utilized a loophole here to get a friend's kid in to UCLA. Whether or not it is wrong, the optics of it do not look good for the university.

 

[3rd_time_around]

I will add to anyone complaining about a walk-on and lack of criteria . “Be careful what you wish for” . More complaining and posting equals initiation of NCAA standard criteria for a walk on spot ... kind of defeats the purpose of a walk on.... ITS A WALK ON !!!!

I respect your knowledge of all things gymnastics, but it seems like you’re trying to excuse giving a walk-on spot to a non-gymnast to help her get into college. I too think that College employees’ kids should get admission to the college their parent worlds for, but this is not that kind of situation.

 

[3rd_time_around]

Maybe we can discuss whether there should be some sort of minimum standards at public universities for coaches/athletic staff to expedite (or otherwise influence) admissions decisions or at least some requirements for transparency and accountability without gossiping about individual teenagers and speculating on who didn't deserve what? Imagine your level 9 gymnast training day after day and year after year, winning AA at regionals, committing to her dream school... and then a bunch of adults on a message board who don't know her anonymously spreading rumors & speculation that she only got that spot because of who her parents are. Let's not. I think we can discuss the rules that are in place, what rules should be in place, and the ethics of a coach using their position to do favors in the abstract without dragging specific teenagers into the mix.

I don’t think you read the article. This particular person did not train for years and years, there’s no record of her being a gymnast.

 

[ausnat83]

I don’t think you read the article. This particular person did not train for years and years, there’s no record of her being a gymnast.

I did read the article. Have you read through this entire thread? Someone had raised the topic of another UCLA commit, who absolutely is a gymnast and verbally committed after what appears to be a fantastic level 9 season. That poster was questioning whether that commit was legit, and I disliked the direction that was going. I'm pretty sure that's the topic coachp was addressing as well.

The situation of the true non-gymnast is different. If Val & the athletic staff lied about the student's past to justify the walk-on, there's a pretty obvious problem. Coming up with fake athletic achievements & backgrounds is clearly unethical.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

I respect your knowledge of all things gymnastics, but it seems like you’re trying to excuse giving a walk-on spot to a non-gymnast to help her get into college. I too think that College employees’ kids should get admission to the college their parent worlds for, but this is not that kind of situation.

I understand but again a walk on is not a limited spot. Meaning they can take a bunch of walk on if they want too. So they aren’t leaving anyone out . If Val wants a bunch of walk on kids she can do it. She chooses kids based what she wants or needs. Hope that makes sense

 

[ausnat83]

I understand but again a walk on is not a limited spot. Meaning they can take a bunch of walk on if they want too. So they aren’t leaving anyone out . If Val wants a bunch of walk on kids she can do it. She chooses kids based what she wants or needs. Hope that makes sense

That's pretty much how I feel about it in general. Is it super fair? Probably not. But if a level 9 or 10 (or 7 or 8, I don't care) wants to walk on to or be a manager for a top-tier team (often one in their home state, a parent's alma matter, a dream school, a school with top-tier academics, etc.) knowing they'll never make the competition lineup instead of aiming for a competition spot on a lower-tier school or losing touch with gymnastics altogether... that's between the program and the student.

The issue of *faking* athletic achievements or pretending that the athlete is a higher-level recruit in order to assist with a student's application to the school is a separate thing to me. As is money or other consideration changing hands. An employee of a publicly funded school helping to falsify a candidate's application to the school is a problem. That's something that should be investigated and addressed, but by people in a position to know whether the employee even played (or will play) a role in the athlete's admission.

 

[skschlag]

I understand but again a walk on is not a limited spot. Meaning they can take a bunch of walk on if they want too. So they aren’t leaving anyone out . If Val wants a bunch of walk on kids she can do it. She chooses kids based what she wants or needs. Hope that makes sense

I thought rosters were limited? This girl, because of the way she was admitted, had to be on the roster for her first year...if I am reading correctly.

I agree, allow as many to participate as you can handle.

And allow kids to come in and be managers. But managers are not usually on the team or in the university with the athletic rules.....

And as hard as it is for these kids to get recruited; the emails, the videos, the instagram, the constant communication; it does seem odd to me. This kid had no videos to show...unless they were of her standing back tuck. Hard to believe that is what she needed.

Now, if she knew the kid, and wanted her for a manager, fantastic! the kid goes through the process, gets admitted to UCLA and then becomes the team manager.

 

[ausnat83]

I thought rosters were limited?

As far as I understand the rules, there are limits to scholarship spots in D1 (12 per team) and limits to how many athletes you can have on the floor of a competition at a given time (though this seems to be a loosely unenforced rule), but not limits on roster spots themselves. I know some schools limit the number of students per year that each sport can play the "athlete admission criteria" card for (Ivys are the ones I know do this, I'm sure there are others), but I don't know if that's regulated above the individual school level.

 

[Flyaway]

Even if walk-on spots are unlimited, the number of seats in UCLA's freshman class is not. If this student was given acceptance to UCLA via "less strigent" athletic requirements when the student is not, in fact, an athlete - then this student DID take a seat from another qualified UCLA applicant. I'm less concerned about the gymnastics roster as I am the fact that admission standards were potentially compromised.