Suppose you’re the president or another executive at a major university. Imagine, for the sake of argument, that you are entirely amoral. You find out that one of your employees is taking bribes, falsifying athletic recruit records, and personally pocketing the money. Do you:

(a) look the other way because you like rigging the system, or

(b) fire them and call the FBI.

I think (b) is the clear answer. Even if you want the children of the rich and powerful in your university, you want to know who they are, you want to collect any money that comes with it into the university’s coffers, and you do not want your employees enriching themselves at your university’s expense.

Add in the fact that most universities’ presidents are unlikely to be entirely amoral, and I think it’s pretty hard to conclude that this particular incident indicates corruption at the top levels.

(Sure, one might argue that the fact that athletic recruiting requests are considered at all for admissions is a problem, but the case in question wasn’t really about this.)

If it was corruption because employees lied, violated their employment contracts, etc. in return for bribes, then the system is not "rigged". Important distinction, because in one case the system actually is striving to be better, even if humans break rules now and then.