FBI accuses parents, incl celebrities, in college bribe sche

[mccallister84]

Mar 12, 2019 21:27:34 GMT -5 wildrice said:

Mar 12, 2019 20:43:56 GMT -5 cleo29 said:

I feel like it would have to be someone on the inside, because i am agree with you, i am not sure how a proctor would be able to adjust the test score right there, in the moment. Or do they have a test already filled out and swap out the tests??

I don't know, but where would they even get the test? This stuff is on serious lockdown. There are not extras, and filled out tests with correct answers aren't just laying around! It makes no sense to me. 

I guess having someone smart sit for the test, or even take a look at the test afterward, is possible. But my impression is that the proctors don't even hang onto the tests themselves for long after it's done. Maybe I'm wrong about that. 

But it’s not. I mean yea Joe Smith off the street can’t walk in to a building and get a test but if you proctor or are an SAT site coordinator you have access. Collegeboard is super strict about making sure the count out matches the count in, etc but once it leaves their hands and is ina test site there’s not much they can do. And like Phave said if you’re in a group with a read aloud accommodation there will be an extra copy of the exam provided for the reader. Those groups tend to be very small - sometimes just one kid. I don’t think it would be too hard to get people in the right spot to adjust scores.

[wise_rita]

I proctored for an English language exam and they fingerprint every test taker who comes through the door.

I'm surprised that hasn't been picked up for other tests.

[turnipthebeet]

I’ve been obsessing over this for the last two hours.

I am in burn it down mode. Take away diplomas that have been handed out. Expel students who are currently enrolled. Sorry, if you don’t deserve to be there, you don’t get the reward. Them’s the breaks, and let it be a lesson to anyone else considering a similar scheme.

Honestly, worse things could happen to these current/former students. I can’t imagine any of them winding up on the street.

[sent]

Can someone explain to me why the FBI is the one taking them all down? When I hear FBI, I think "Homeland." This seems like rich people being egregiously rich and breaking the rules of private test companies and being grossly unethical with mostly private schools. Is it because they wrote the checks to the scam foundation?

[eclaires]

Mar 12, 2019 22:38:28 GMT -5 sent said:

Can someone explain to me why the FBI is the one taking them all down? When I hear FBI, I think "Homeland." This seems like rich people being egregiously rich and breaking the rules of private test companies and being grossly unethical with mostly private schools. Is it because they wrote the checks to the scam foundation?

Aren’t they being charged under the racketeering and mail fraud statutes? I didn’t read closely but it crossed state lines which tends to involve to the FBI. FBI does all domestic federal crimes right?

Also I thought homeland was CIA.

[mssaint]

I used to tutor kids in Potomac and Bethesda MD for the SATs in the late 90s/early 2000s. More than one parent joked with me that I should make more money by taking the test for their kid, haha! I deflected pretty well, but some of them had clearly thought about details (taking the test near their beach house, fake ID, etc). This really doesn’t surprise me but I’m really glad they all got caught.

[goldengirlz]

Mar 12, 2019 22:38:28 GMT -5 sent said:

Can someone explain to me why the FBI is the one taking them all down? When I hear FBI, I think "Homeland." This seems like rich people being egregiously rich and breaking the rules of private test companies and being grossly unethical with mostly private schools. Is it because they wrote the checks to the scam foundation?

There was one article I read that said the FBI kind of stumbled on this accidentally while investigating a totally unrelated case. Which is also crazy. And I can see it being too juicy to pass up.

[cville]

Mar 12, 2019 22:38:28 GMT -5 sent said:

Can someone explain to me why the FBI is the one taking them all down? When I hear FBI, I think "Homeland." This seems like rich people being egregiously rich and breaking the rules of private test companies and being grossly unethical with mostly private schools. Is it because they wrote the checks to the scam foundation?

FBI investigates federal crimes and performs intelligence gathering in the US.

CIA performs international intelligence gathering and doesn't investigate federal crimes, per se. Homeland is CIA.

Understandably, the more globalized the world is, the fuzzier the line between the two on some issues.


In this case, sounds like criminal fraud and racketeering are afoot, so the FBI makes sense.

[bronxgirl]

Mar 12, 2019 22:45:26 GMT -5 eclaires said:

Mar 12, 2019 22:38:28 GMT -5 sent said:

Can someone explain to me why the FBI is the one taking them all down? When I hear FBI, I think "Homeland." This seems like rich people being egregiously rich and breaking the rules of private test companies and being grossly unethical with mostly private schools. Is it because they wrote the checks to the scam foundation?

Aren’t they being charged under the racketeering and mail fraud statutes? I didn’t read closely but it crossed state lines which tends to involve to the FBI. FBI does all domestic federal crimes right?

Also I thought homeland was CIA.

All of this is correct.

[goldengirlz]

There are so many Bay Area residents involved that it’s practically a local story here. The hubris of these people is appalling.

And I agree with heyjude. Looking at these names, and these familiar tony suburbs, and thinking about the economic disparities that are already so stark here ... it’s sickening.

[bronxgirl]

The humor is not lost on me that implicated in this illegal scam are the star of American Crime ( Huffman) and the star of Shameless (Macy). Maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised.

[sent]

Thanks guys. Homeland is CIA, I forgot. I also watch Shameless and keep thinking how ironic this is.

Regardless, very interesting case. This can't be the only college admissions agency operating in a shady manner.

[CheeringCharm]

I liked this NYT OP ed by Frank Bruni: Bribes to Get Into Yale and Stanford? What Else Is New?

While I understand it is legal for a private institution to accept a large donation as a bribe to accept a student, I wonder if this scandal will make schools think twice about Jared Kushner situations.

***

The wrinkle here is that the schemes were actually criminal and will apparently be prosecuted, and for once the colleges’ administrators were in the dark about them. But they’re versions of routine favor-trading and favoritism that have long corrupted the admissions process, leeching merit from the equation.

It may be legal to pledge $2.5 million to Harvard just as your son is applying — which is what Jared Kushner’s father did for him — and illegal to bribe a coach to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, but how much of a difference is there, really? Both elevate money over accomplishment. Both are ways of cutting in line.

It may be legal to give $50,000 to a private consultant who massages your child’s transcript and perfumes your child’s essays, and illegal to pay someone for a patently fictive test score, but aren’t both exercises in deception reserved for those who can afford them?

And while ghostwriting, whether by consultants or parents, may not be detectable or at least provable, it happens all the time and contributes to applications as bogus as the ones that came to federal prosecutors’ attention.

What a message it sends to the children: You’re not good enough to do this on your own. You needn’t be. Your parents and your counselors know the rules, and when and how to break them. Just sit back and let entitlement run its course.

.
.
.

When struggling Americans seethe at “the elite,” they mean parents who exploit their station to try to guarantee it for their kids. They mean the self-regarding colleges that allow that to happen.

When they say that the system is rigged, they have this kind of wrongdoing — and the widely accepted and entirely legal shenanigans that are none too far from it — in mind. Our country’s best schools are supposed to be engines of social mobility and the gateways to dreams. Sometimes they’re just another sour deal.

www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/opinion/college-bribery-admissions.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

[simpsongal]

Mar 13, 2019 1:00:22 GMT -5 sent said:

Thanks guys. Homeland is CIA, I forgot. I also watch Shameless and keep thinking how ironic this is.

Regardless, very interesting case. This can't be the only college admissions agency operating in a shady manner.

the irs is interested too bc the agency had a phony nonprofit and these people had the audacity to deduct the payments as charitable donations.

[jeaniebueller]

Mar 12, 2019 22:37:05 GMT -5 turnipthebeet said:

I’ve been obsessing over this for the last two hours.

I am in burn it down mode. Take away diplomas that have been handed out. Expel students who are currently enrolled. Sorry, if you don’t deserve to be there, you don’t get the reward. Them’s the breaks, and let it be a lesson to anyone else considering a similar scheme.

Honestly, worse things could happen to these current/former students. I can’t imagine any of them winding up on the street.

I'm here too. Kick them out. They don't deserve to be there. Aunt BEcky's daughter will be JUST FINE. 

[WOUNDTIGHT]

US Magazine is reporting that the FBI arrested Felicity in her home at 6:00 am with guns drawn.

Now, I’m all for justice and can’t want to see how this all shakes out, but that seems . . . a bit extreme? If it actually is true. She and her H are so high profile that I couldn’t see them being flight risks.

[sugarglider]

Mar 13, 2019 7:25:23 GMT -5 WOUNDTIGHT said:

US Magazine is reporting that the FBI arrested Felicity in her home at 6:00 am with guns drawn.

Now, I’m all for justice and can’t want to see how this all shakes out, but that seems . . . a bit extreme? If it actually is true. She and her H are so high profile that I couldn’t see them being flight risks.

Uh, Roman Polanski, anyone?

That said, when the suspected criminals are wanted for a non-violent crime that’s not otherwise affiliated with violence, the guns seem like overkill. But I’m not in law enforcement.

[Velar Fricative]

DH and I were also discussing other things related to this last night, which CheeringCharm's post reminded me of. His brother, a very smart and accomplished person without needing this kind of "help," was able to get an MBA from one of the most prestigious (read: $$$) business schools in the country for free because he's a military veteran whose tuition and fees were funded through a scholarship fund via one megadonor. He's doing very well in his career thus far, although he definitely has colleagues whom he recognized probably got this kind of help their whole lives. BIL also had the task of giving megadonor's daughter a tour of the school while a student and talking to her about his experience at the school, since she was also applying. He said she was...not smart. But of course she got in. I think I'm looking at a situation like that differently because even though that donation yielded a spot to an unworthy applicant, it also gave spots to *many more* worthy applicants who otherwise would have either not been able to afford to attend such a school or would be forever in debt after attending. Within Operation Varsity Blues, the money these parents were paying seemed to go directly into the pockets of scammers.

I sit here wondering if I need to convince myself that all of the above is bad and shouldn't happen, because at the end of the day, the consequence is still at least one person who wouldn't have gotten in on their own merits getting in (and I include legitimate athletic talent as part of their own merits, FYI). Obviously, one situation is legal and the other isn't, but...both unethical? I'm not sure. I think the bigger problem is how colleges have to depend on the uber-wealthy to attract students, but that's another discussion for another day.

[Velar Fricative]

Mar 13, 2019 7:25:23 GMT -5 WOUNDTIGHT said:

US Magazine is reporting that the FBI arrested Felicity in her home at 6:00 am with guns drawn.

Now, I’m all for justice and can’t want to see how this all shakes out, but that seems . . . a bit extreme? If it actually is true. She and her H are so high profile that I couldn’t see them being flight risks.

Yeah, I agree with sugarglider, their fame doesn't mean they wouldn't be flight risks.

[WOUNDTIGHT]

Mar 13, 2019 7:49:58 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Mar 13, 2019 7:25:23 GMT -5 WOUNDTIGHT said:

US Magazine is reporting that the FBI arrested Felicity in her home at 6:00 am with guns drawn.

Now, I’m all for justice and can’t want to see how this all shakes out, but that seems . . . a bit extreme? If it actually is true. She and her H are so high profile that I couldn’t see them being flight risks.

Yeah, I agree with sugarglider, their fame doesn't mean they wouldn't be flight risks.

IDK. They seem so ego-driven and obsessed with their hapless offspring that I’d have a hard time imagining them abandoning Hollywood and leaving the kids in US colleges. But that’s neither here nor there really- I just thought for a non violent offense and a $15k bribe, to be ambushed at gunpoint seemed like a lot. ‘Murica.

Are the mugshots going to come out today?

Also #15 on this list killed me dead.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/ryanschocket2/reactions-to-this-bonkers-felicity-huffman-lori-loughlin

[onomatopoeia]

Mar 13, 2019 7:59:22 GMT -5 melmaria said:

Mar 13, 2019 6:54:06 GMT -5 CheeringCharm said:

“It may be legal to pledge $2.5 million to Harvard just as your son is applying — which is what Jared Kushner’s father did for him — and illegal to bribe a coach to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, but how much of a difference is there, really? Both elevate money over accomplishment. Both are ways of cutting in line.”

www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/opinion/college-bribery-admissions.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Re: Bruni’s article, I think colleges would argue that the difference is that in one scenario, the college arguably gets some benefit from the wealthy person’s donation (a new building, funding for a new academic program, etc), which in turn at least indirectly benefits the students at the university - while in this scenario, the colleges/student body received no benefit. Only the individuals who were bribed did.

It’s true that wealthy people have been able to buy their way into college since forever (college admissions has never been a meritocracy!), and there’s absolute debate to be had over the merits of that system, but I don’t think the impact is exactly the same.

This might be flammable, but I don't even necessarily have a big problem with this.   I know it's not ethical or fair, and maybe it's just that I'm jaded, but a new library wing or academic program in exchange for admitting one new student?  Eh.  That's the way it is.  This situation is direct and criminal scamming/cheating for the sole benefit of their own child, I do see it as different.

WOUNDTIGHT, I saw #15 yesterday and it cracked me up too! 

[kadams767]

I have so many thoughts and feelings on this, but the one I keep coming back to is one of hopelessness. It isn't enough that poor and underprivileged kids have to overcome a million and one obstacles that middle class and above kids don't face, just to get the same grades and test scores so they can compete with them on the same level (academic merit-wise). Now they also have to compete with rich kids who aren't even on that level but who cheated.

[goldengirlz]

Mar 13, 2019 9:16:54 GMT -5 melmaria said:

Mar 13, 2019 9:03:27 GMT -5 onomatopoeia said:

This might be flammable, but I don't even necessarily have a big problem with this.   I know it's not ethical or fair, and maybe it's just that I'm jaded, but a new library wing or academic program in exchange for admitting one new student?  Eh.  That's the way it is.  This situation is direct and criminal scamming/cheating for the sole benefit of their own child, I do see it as different.

Right - and it also depends on how you define “fair.” Because college admissions isn’t a meritocracy, students can be accepted for all sorts of reasons and considerations. (Most) colleges value more than just grades and test scores. A student might get in, at least partially, because their admission will allow for a privately funded new library wing. Or a better football team. Or increased diversity that the school values (racial, socioeconomic, first generation college students, etc.). Or because the band really needs a new oboe player that year because the current one is graduating. Or or or.... Are all of those reasons “fair”? Well, from a purely academic standpoint, no. But no one has a right to go to any particular college.

What IS shitty is when white people complain that minority candidates who might happen to have lower test scores are somehow taking the place of somehow more deserving white people - because there are plenty of white people getting in to college for reasons beyond academic merit too (legacies, donations, athletes, etc.). But that’s a different conversation.

I don’t think it’s a different conversation, necessarily. It all circles back to inequality. If an elite education is one of the best ways to improve or maintain your socioeconomic status, and the wealthy get a disproportionate share of the pie, then everyone else is behaving like there’s a Black Friday sale for the remaining spots (i.e. it’s ugly). We’ve seen this happen with other issues where the white lower and middle class take out their anger on minorities rather than the true culprit.

And you can argue, one kid, one building, whatever, but there are more super-wealthy than ever before. That’s a lot of buildings. Or, fine, maybe that’s at least a quid pro quo. But what about paying someone to write your kid’s essay or “massage” a transcript (whatever that means)? These are kids who are already going to top private schools, who never sat in under-resourced classrooms, whose teachers never went on strike. Kids whose parents could afford to nurture their every passion to an extreme level to give them a “hook” on their applications.

As I said above, somehow seeing all those local names on the list is igniting my inner rage so much more than seeing some random C-list celeb. The system is already SO RIGGED in their favor. And the more I consider the question of: so why did they do it then? All I come up with is: because it’s common. Maybe not to that extreme, illegal degree — or maybe we’re all just naive to how pervasive this is.

Either way, the 99% barely stands a chance.

[Velar Fricative]

What also makes me super angry is that all the other non-wealthy parents are doing everything they can to give their kids a fighting chance to attend "good schools" (and even going to jail for lying about their addresses), because that is their biggest hope for the future. Meanwhile, here are kids for whom the good schools are merely a stepping stone to more privilege. It's yet another example of rich parents having the power to move the finish line further and further as more "undesirables" join the race. So all the 99% can possibly have are the good schools, if they're lucky, while the 1% will have the good schools AND money to set their kids and grandkids up for life.

And yes, I know this is nothing new. I know this should not be surprising. But I am quite happy that this investigation happened so we can actually talk about how wrong this shit is and maybe a few people will realize it was never a meritocracy to begin with.

[kadams767]

Mar 13, 2019 9:43:13 GMT -5 goldengirlz said:

Mar 13, 2019 9:16:54 GMT -5 melmaria said:

Right - and it also depends on how you define “fair.” Because college admissions isn’t a meritocracy, students can be accepted for all sorts of reasons and considerations. (Most) colleges value more than just grades and test scores. A student might get in, at least partially, because their admission will allow for a privately funded new library wing. Or a better football team. Or increased diversity that the school values (racial, socioeconomic, first generation college students, etc.). Or because the band really needs a new oboe player that year because the current one is graduating. Or or or.... Are all of those reasons “fair”? Well, from a purely academic standpoint, no. But no one has a right to go to any particular college.

What IS shitty is when white people complain that minority candidates who might happen to have lower test scores are somehow taking the place of somehow more deserving white people - because there are plenty of white people getting in to college for reasons beyond academic merit too (legacies, donations, athletes, etc.). But that’s a different conversation.

I don’t think it’s a different conversation, necessarily. It all circles back to inequality. If an elite education is one of the best ways to improve or maintain your socioeconomic status, and the wealthy get a disproportionate share of the pie, then everyone else is behaving like there’s a Black Friday sale for the remaining spots (i.e. it’s ugly). We’ve seen this happen with other issues where the white lower and middle class take out their anger on minorities rather than the true culprit.

And you can argue, one kid, one building, whatever, but there are more super-wealthy than ever before. That’s a lot of buildings. Or, fine, maybe that’s at least a quid pro quo. But what about paying someone to write your kid’s essay or “massage” a transcript (whatever that means)? These are kids who are already going to top private schools, who never sat in under-resourced classrooms, whose teachers never went on strike. Kids whose parents could afford to nurture their every passion to an extreme level to give them a “hook” on their applications.

As I said above, somehow seeing all those local names on the list is igniting my inner rage so much more than seeing some random C-list celeb. The system is already SO RIGGED in their favor. And the more I consider the question of: so why did they do it then? All I come up with is: because it’s common. Maybe not to that extreme, illegal degree — or maybe we’re all just naive to how pervasive this is.

Either way, the 99% barely stands a chance.

Your last paragraph is what I keep thinking about.  Using my own situation as a personal anecdote, it's insane to me the level of this kind of thing that I still, as a grown adult, would never have really thought about.  I was a good student, but my parents were low to low-middle income and absolutely not savvy (nor helpful in any way) about navigating the college admissions process with me.  I did all of my prep, testing, applications and interviews myself.  As a naive teenager.  I guess I had some idea about things like legacy admits, and athletes getting scholarships who probably couldn't actually hack it academically, but I definitely would have put those instances as rare occurrences and not ones that were really impacting regular students like me.  Now, I'm not so sure. 

I'm also a bit taken aback at exactly how undeserving these students were.  The one BigLaw guy profiled in the Above the Law article posted talked about cheating but not making it look so obvious, so he was looking for an ACT score of maybe 31 or 32.  This guy, as a parent, couldn't find a way that wasn't cheating, to get his kid to actually get a 31 or 32?  With all of the resources they have at their disposal, how far below typical acceptance levels was this damn kid?  Just, ugh.  


  

[VillainV]

Mar 13, 2019 10:05:04 GMT -5 kadams767 said:

Mar 13, 2019 9:43:13 GMT -5 goldengirlz said:

I don’t think it’s a different conversation, necessarily. It all circles back to inequality. If an elite education is one of the best ways to improve or maintain your socioeconomic status, and the wealthy get a disproportionate share of the pie, then everyone else is behaving like there’s a Black Friday sale for the remaining spots (i.e. it’s ugly). We’ve seen this happen with other issues where the white lower and middle class take out their anger on minorities rather than the true culprit.

And you can argue, one kid, one building, whatever, but there are more super-wealthy than ever before. That’s a lot of buildings. Or, fine, maybe that’s at least a quid pro quo. But what about paying someone to write your kid’s essay or “massage” a transcript (whatever that means)? These are kids who are already going to top private schools, who never sat in under-resourced classrooms, whose teachers never went on strike. Kids whose parents could afford to nurture their every passion to an extreme level to give them a “hook” on their applications.

As I said above, somehow seeing all those local names on the list is igniting my inner rage so much more than seeing some random C-list celeb. The system is already SO RIGGED in their favor. And the more I consider the question of: so why did they do it then? All I come up with is: because it’s common. Maybe not to that extreme, illegal degree — or maybe we’re all just naive to how pervasive this is.

Either way, the 99% barely stands a chance.

Your last paragraph is what I keep thinking about.  Using my own situation as a personal anecdote, it's insane to me the level of this kind of thing that I still, as a grown adult, would never have really thought about.  I was a good student, but my parents were low to low-middle income and absolutely not savvy (nor helpful in any way) about navigating the college admissions process with me.  I did all of my prep, testing, applications and interviews myself.  As a naive teenager.  I guess I had some idea about things like legacy admits, and athletes getting scholarships who probably couldn't actually hack it academically, but I definitely would have put those instances as rare occurrences and not ones that were really impacting regular students like me.  Now, I'm not so sure. 

I'm also a bit taken aback at exactly how undeserving these students were.  The one BigLaw guy profiled in the Above the Law article posted talked about cheating but not making it look so obvious, so he was looking for an ACT score of maybe 31 or 32.  This guy, as a parent, couldn't find a way that wasn't cheating, to get his kid to actually get a 31 or 32?  With all of the resources they have at their disposal, how far below typical acceptance levels was this damn kid?  Just, ugh.  


  

For kids who went to academically strong schools, who actually participated and paid attention, with a good work ethic and maybe poor test-taking ability, a good tutor could probably get them to a strong SAT/ACT score, assuming the kid wanted to and was willing to put in the work.

I don’t get the feeling that most of those conditions apply to these kids. Sure, they attended good schools, but most probably didn’t work very hard, weren’t motivated to work hard, or were used to having everything handed to them (or in the case of some of these kids, actually had other people take their online HS classes for them). In that case, cheating was probably the only way to get the required score.

[pinkdutchtulips]

Mar 12, 2019 15:17:45 GMT -5 moonriver said:

Mar 12, 2019 15:06:17 GMT -5 pinkdutchtulips said:

These sports these parents picked .. sailing, rowing ... they picked sports they thought would fly under the radar bc really who does them 🙄 they thought they could get away w/ it 😡😡😡

Sailing and rowing seem like very normal Ivy League sports. Sure it’s not college football, but I think they both have a large presence in the Ivy League world.

i doubt these parents would have tried to pull a fast one w sailing or rowing at an Ivy League school but rowing at a school in so cal not historically known for being a rowing powerhouse .... I’m gonna wonder.

I was a walk on rower at UC Irvine and my cousin was a
coxswain for San Diego State men’s crew - a walk on as well. No need to have parents actively petition/solicit a spy on those teams for their kids unless something shady is going on.

[sonrisa]

I agree completely with this op ed saying the problem at the heart is with college sports and the role it plays in admissions. Yes, what they did was criminal. And that is why they were indicted.

But it's also troubling that colleges give so much weight to athletics in admissions. They didn't buy their way through the admissions office or a professor recommendation. They bought their way in through the athletics department. And frankly, wealthy families know that sports are the real backdoor to colleges. They pay and prep their kids for skiing/sailing/fencing/whatever so that they can have an admissions edge without making the grade on academics.

www.nytimes.com/2019/03/13/opinion/college-sports-bribery-admissions.html

[TamiTaylor]

Mar 13, 2019 7:12:26 GMT -5 simpsongal said:

Mar 13, 2019 1:00:22 GMT -5 sent said:

Thanks guys. Homeland is CIA, I forgot. I also watch Shameless and keep thinking how ironic this is.

Regardless, very interesting case. This can't be the only college admissions agency operating in a shady manner.

the irs is interested too bc the agency had a phony nonprofit and these people had the audacity to deduct the payments as charitable donations.

Would that also be tax fraud then too?

[sugarbear]

Mar 13, 2019 12:00:09 GMT -5 pinkdutchtulips said:

Mar 12, 2019 15:17:45 GMT -5 moonriver said:

Sailing and rowing seem like very normal Ivy League sports. Sure it’s not college football, but I think they both have a large presence in the Ivy League world.

i doubt these parents would have tried to pull a fast one w sailing or rowing at an Ivy League school but rowing at a school in so cal not historically known for being a rowing powerhouse .... I’m gonna wonder.

I was a walk on rower at UC Irvine and my cousin was a
coxswain for San Diego State men’s crew - a walk on as well. No need to have parents actively petition/solicit a spy on those teams for their kids unless something shady is going on.

I was coming in to say this too. I used to coach DI Women's Rowing -- which is one of the most well-funded NCAA sports for women -- and many of my athletes were either walk-ons, or women I recruited knowing they were great athletes (swimmers, basketball players, volleyball players), but would still have to learn how to row. 

Also, USC has a thriving women's rowing program, so while it is traditionally seen as an Ivy League sport, it certainly is not any more.