|
Post by tomclen on May 15, 2019 9:42:08 GMT -5
Mick deserves a big payday, but no matter what it is, it can not undo the damage that the USC athletic department mismanagement team did to Haley's reputation and career.
Even on Volleytalk, supposedly knowledgeable posters were buying into the whole "he's too old; players are mistreated; he can't get along with his superiors" horse-crap that was being spread by his own athletic department.
Yeah, he couldn't get along with his supervisor, because she was a f--king crook and a cheat and she was trying to screw over Mick and his team and his remarkable track record of success.
I actually feel a little sorry for Heinel. A normal person would feel disgraced and humiliated by the truth that has been revealed. I hope she can find some peace and a better path going forward.
And how the president at USC can still allow the AD to have a job is beyond me. I guess his lack of experience and his utter failure to know what was going in his department is not so important. You f--k up like that at work and you'd be fired with no severance.
But fat-cat jock-sniffing donors get to play golf with their football hero, and that's what matters.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on May 15, 2019 10:54:46 GMT -5
Mick deserves a big payday, but no matter what it is, it can not undo the damage that the USC athletic department mismanagement team did to Haley's reputation and career. Even on Volleytalk, supposedly knowledgeable posters were buying into the whole "he's too old; players are mistreated; he can't get along with his superiors" horse-crap that was being spread by his own athletic department. Yeah, he couldn't get along with his supervisor, because she was a f--king crook and a cheat and she was trying to screw over Mick and his team and his remarkable track record of success. I actually feel a little sorry for Heinel. A normal person would feel disgraced and humiliated by the truth that has been revealed. I hope she can find some peace and a better path going forward. And how the president at USC can still allow the AD to have a job is beyond me. I guess his lack of experience and his utter failure to know what was going in his department is not so important. You f--k up like that at work and you'd be fired with no severance. But fat-cat jock-sniffing donors get to play golf with their football hero, and that's what matters. Did a bit of mini research. Nikias is the guy most blame for the screwups as his term as president from 2010 until 2018.He is a lifelong academic, which may explain him being insulated from the real world. He got in trouble for the way he handled the campus gynecologist scandal, i.e.he did nothing. The interim president after they forced him to resign, Wanda Austin, is an aerospace engineer and industry person. They then hired the provost of UNC, another academic to be the new president. I thought they would have kept a management person like Wanda Austin to revamp the university. But what do I know.
|
|
|
Post by utoolity on May 15, 2019 16:32:01 GMT -5
His wealthy dad admitted bribing his way into Georgetown. Now he's suing to block expulsionThe son of a Los Angeles executive who admitted paying a $400,000 bribe to secure a spot at Georgetown for his child as a tennis recruit sued the university to prevent it from kicking him out and nullifying his college credits. Ten hours after the lawsuit landed in the federal court system early Wednesday, Georgetown University informed Adam Semprevivo, a junior at the college and the son of Stephen Semprevivo, it was rescinding his offer of admission. Semprevivo offered to withdraw from Georgetown if he could keep his credits for his work there over three years. According to the lawsuit filed in Washington, D.C., federal court, Georgetown’s legal counsel told Semprevivo on Tuesday the school would not agree to that deal. The lawsuit seeks an injunction preventing the school from expelling him. www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-georgetown-lawsuit-college-admissions-scandal-20190515-story.html Signs of the times. Lie cheat steal and get away with it
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on May 15, 2019 16:33:51 GMT -5
This just seems insane to me. We are going to send these people to prison yet we are talking about prison reform? Why not have them give a million dollars to a scholarship fund for low income kids? Only in America.
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on May 15, 2019 16:35:36 GMT -5
LYNN SWANN will be out as Athletic Director with in a year. New president starts JULY 1. well of course...someone has to be the scapegoat.
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on May 15, 2019 16:42:09 GMT -5
well of course...someone has to be the scapegoat. Mick Haley as next Athletic Director? I hate that people have to have a pound of flesh in these situations. Lynn is getting blamed because that is what we do here in America. Someone has to pay.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 15, 2019 16:52:47 GMT -5
This Georgetown case is interesting. It's one thing to rescind admission, but another thing to take away all credits previously earned. Georgetown is saying they get to keep his tuition money, but he loses all credit for everything he has done over the last three years.
Despite the general concept that if he lied during the admissions process then they have the right to expell him from the school, do they really have the right to deny him credit for work he did there? Especially if they take his credit away but keep his tuition payments?
The student's lawsuit seems to be aimed at proving that Georgetown was negligent in doing their due diligence, so it's their problem that they admitted him.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 15, 2019 17:05:36 GMT -5
This Georgetown case is interesting. It's one thing to rescind admission, but another thing to take away all credits previously earned. Georgetown is saying they get to keep his tuition money, but he loses all credit for everything he has done over the last three years. Despite the general concept that if he lied during the admissions process then they have the right to expell him from the school, do they really have the right to deny him credit for work he did there? Especially if they take his credit away but keep his tuition payments? The student's lawsuit seems to be aimed at proving that Georgetown was negligent in doing their due diligence, so it's their problem that they admitted him. Fraud or misrepresentation in a contract negotiation invalidates the contract, or at a minimum, makes it unenforceable. The student is arguing that he was completely unaware of the fraud, but I think he will have a hard time finding a sympathetic hearing for the argument that he should still benefit from the fraud, given the father's guilty plea.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 15, 2019 17:12:44 GMT -5
This Georgetown case is interesting. It's one thing to rescind admission, but another thing to take away all credits previously earned. Georgetown is saying they get to keep his tuition money, but he loses all credit for everything he has done over the last three years. Despite the general concept that if he lied during the admissions process then they have the right to expell him from the school, do they really have the right to deny him credit for work he did there? Especially if they take his credit away but keep his tuition payments? The student's lawsuit seems to be aimed at proving that Georgetown was negligent in doing their due diligence, so it's their problem that they admitted him. Fraud or misrepresentation in a contract negotiation invalidates the contract, or at a minimum, makes it unenforceable. The student is arguing that he was completely unaware of the fraud, but I think he will have a hard time finding a sympathetic hearing for the argument that he should still benefit from the fraud, given the father's guilty plea. Should Georgetown give him his tuition back then?
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 15, 2019 17:13:57 GMT -5
This just seems insane to me. We are going to send these people to prison yet we are talking about prison reform? Why not have them give a million dollars to a scholarship fund for low income kids? Only in America. Your idea of prison reform for bribery charges is: "Pay a million dollars and avoid jail?" Your moral compass needs to be re-calibrated.
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on May 15, 2019 17:16:34 GMT -5
This just seems insane to me. We are going to send these people to prison yet we are talking about prison reform? Why not have them give a million dollars to a scholarship fund for low income kids? Only in America. Your idea of prison reform for bribery charges is: "Pay a million dollars and avoid jail?" Your moral compass needs to be re-calibrated. or maybe you are not real bright. Why waste tax payer resources on white collar criminals when they could do far more good by being forced to donate heavily to others not so fortunate. Do you really think prison for 6 months is the " moral," thing to do? COME ON.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 15, 2019 17:24:10 GMT -5
Fraud or misrepresentation in a contract negotiation invalidates the contract, or at a minimum, makes it unenforceable. The student is arguing that he was completely unaware of the fraud, but I think he will have a hard time finding a sympathetic hearing for the argument that he should still benefit from the fraud, given the father's guilty plea. Should Georgetown give him his tuition back then? It's an unenforceable contract. Georgetown could offer a refund, but they're under no obligation to do so if the contract is indeed invalid. They could probably also argue that the fraud caused them to expend resources, and ask for the equivalent in tuition as compensation or damages. Obviously, the student realizes he is going to end up with three years wasted and has nothing to lose, but the idea in such an outcome/interpretation is to encourage honest negotiations and not reward dishonest ones.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 15, 2019 17:24:56 GMT -5
Your idea of prison reform for bribery charges is: "Pay a million dollars and avoid jail?" Your moral compass needs to be re-calibrated. or maybe you are not real bright. Why waste tax payer resources on white collar criminals when they could do far more good by being forced to donate heavily to others not so fortunate. Do you really think prison for 6 months is the " moral," thing to do? COME ON. So rich people can avoid prison by paying fines to society, but poor people must go to prison? If the government forcing rich people to pay money to help those less fortunate is such a good thing, shouldn't we just raise taxes on rich people? They we can get it both ways ... their money will help pay for things needed by the less fortunate, and we can still toss them into prison like anyone else if they commit crimes.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 15, 2019 17:25:28 GMT -5
Your idea of prison reform for bribery charges is: "Pay a million dollars and avoid jail?" Your moral compass needs to be re-calibrated. or maybe you are not real bright. Why waste tax payer resources on white collar criminals when they could do far more good by being forced to donate heavily to others not so fortunate. Do you really think prison for 6 months is the " moral," thing to do? COME ON. So your bright idea is to send poor people to prison because they can't pay a million dollars.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 15, 2019 17:32:25 GMT -5
Should Georgetown give him his tuition back then? It's an unenforceable contract. Georgetown could offer a refund, but they're under no obligation to do so if the contract is indeed invalid. They could probably also argue that the fraud caused them to expended resources, and ask for the equivalent in tuition as compensation or damages. Obviously, the student realizes he is going to end up with three years wasted and has nothing to lose, but the idea in such an interpretation is to encourage honest negotiations and not reward dishonest ones. I'm not disputing the law with you -- as I recall you are a lawyer. But it just fundamentally seems wrong. If they want to take away all his credits, they should have to give him back his tuition money. I guess maybe it depends on whether you think the basic contract is $$$ for education (and credits are a bonus) or whether it is $$$ for credits. I would suggest that the proliferation of free college courses on the web is an argument that colleges are willing to provide education for free, and what you pay for is the accreditation.
|
|