Discussion in 'Fencing Discussion' started by Duideed, Apr 4, 2019.
Doesn't sound as egregious as some of the stories we've been hearing. The student had good grades and a background in the sport. Maybe dad's dealings helped get the coach's attention and aid. Still not as outrageous as some of the reported scandals. It is fencing we're speaking of.
Pays $1 million for a coaches house valued at 550k, never lives in it, kids get into Harvard, sells house for 325k loss 1.5 years later.
Nothing to see here, move along.
The house was worth $500K. Father of fencer Zhou paid $900K to Peter Brand for the house. Then the younger son got into Harvard. This is the definition of pay-to-play. In the private sector you would be fired immediately because this is a BRIBE. So yes, this is really bad and it tarnishes Harvard badly.
How much does that likely letter cost In Fencing? Now we know it is yours for just $500K. Bargain price.
Are you kidding? This warrants jail-time.
Hard to support such terrible judgement in a head coach...
It was definetly a bribe. Nice increase in the standard of living for a fencing coach.....I guess coaches in several sports figured out how to supplement their income. I wonder if the NCAA will get involved at some point. They cleared kids to play sports based on fake credentials. I guess Zhao fenced, but definetly was not a top fencer. Will be interesting to see the changes in recruiting and admission going forward.
Harvard is quickly distancing themselves from Brand, choosing to focus on their committee-based admissions process, and thus claiming that the bribe had nothing to do with the kid’s admission.
Gaping hole in that theory is probably that the committee members focus on what they understand- grades, test scores, extracurriculars- and look to the head coach for the fencing bona fides. Coach gives thumbs up, says its all good, and kid gets in, even as a sub-par fencer and certainly not the best one who wanted Harvard that year...
if they fire him quickly it’s gonna hurt recruiting. Yale will struggle as well, even if they put a place holder coach in while they do a decent search.
Would've been better for Dad to keep his mouth shut about the house until AFTER his kid made the school and team.
Still would've looked odd, but would've minimized the conflict of interest.
Brand has a reputation for promising slots then pulling them...
The bribe was two years ago- the younger Zhao is a Harvard sophomore.
Harvard statement regarding Brand story
It doesn't, because Harvard is a private institution. It isn't illegal to bribe an employee of a private business, or for the employee of a private business to accept a bribe, just un-ethical. And he should be fired, and possibly sued, but it's not a crime.
Now, employees of a public school that take bribes are definitely in legal trouble. As is anyone who bribed a public official, which any employee of a public, i.e. state school, is.
I read somewhere that one of the schools quickly investigated and found four student-athletes whose records raised questions as to why they had been admitted. One of them had already dropped out because he couldn't handle the classwork. Two had transferred to other schools because they couldn't handle the classwork. Only one was still enrolled. So those considering paying sizable bribes to get their kid into a school in spite of the kid's lousy academic record, should consider that if the kid couldn't handle the high school academic load, it's likely that the kid won't be able to get a degree or at any rate will not have a grade point average that will result in a significant job offer.
That's an interesting take given the recent indictments of 3 coaches and an associate AD at (private institution) USC.
Oh please. Getting in to Harvard and other top tier schools is way, way, way harder than graduating. Grade inflation is alive and well. And lol @ GPA being a major factor in job offers.
Hmmm. I wasn't aware that the University of Southern California was a private institution, but now I see that it is. They're being charged with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure what the precedent for the mail fraud charges are. Would what they did not be illegal if they hadn't mailed anything?
I was basing my take on the college basketball scandal, where assistant coaches and shoe company representatives were paying players, or relatives of players. Only public school coaches were being indicted because it apparently wasn't a crime if they weren't public employees.
This is quite an interesting article on it: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/business/ncaa-coaches-payments.html
It's effectively fraud because you're denying someone else a potential place. There is also seemingly an "right of honest services" law, but I'm not familiar enough with what the obligations there would be.
Separate names with a comma.