Best Public Schools By State

College Search & Lists
81

<p>bzva…</p>

<p>I wouldn’t go on some outdated survey by WSJ for you to reference elite professional grad-school feeders.</p>

<p>UCLA and Cal (as much as I don’t care for Cal) are two of the top feeders to professional schools in the country. The last time Harvard listed its law students’ undergrad schools, UCLA and Cal were at the top of represntation among public universities in the country. (Though not nearly as much as elite privates.) This was a few years ago; the school has stopped producing this list. </p>

<p>Also, you have to remember there are top choices in CA for UC students for l,m, b schools that are a lot cheaper (and considering that most want to be professionals in CA):</p>

<p>8 or so med schools in CA
many l schools</p>

<p>etc…</p>

82

<p>

I find the differences in quality of undergrad education between top publics (Berkeley, Virginia, UCLA, Michigan, UNC, UCSD, etc.) to be negligible. The prevalence of lecture style teaching severely diminishes any of the benefits of their world class professors.</p>

<p>William and Mary is notable, however, for having a lower student-faculty ratio.</p>

83

<p>If you’re truly looking for a more personalized undergrad education, then one of the LAC’s like Amherst would be best. Even moderately sized elite universities like Harvard do employ the lecture-style teaching. There is a good representation of “dissatisfied” reponses at Harvard regarding teaching. </p>

<p>And I realize I’m not stating anything new here, but a university’s designation of research and rankings therewith and therein tends to steer a university away from teaching.</p>

<p>When you become a highly successful consultant or atty, you’ll get over your disappointment with UCLA.</p>

84

<p>

2006</p>

<p>[10 char.]</p>

85

<p>Nice technicality…</p>

<p>And which school was the BCS representative that year?</p>

<p>Let me rephrase the question: When was the last time Cal won a title outright, and was the Pac’s represetative to the Rose or some other BCS bowl?</p>

<p>I believe in 06 Texas claimed (what you believe to be) your spot in a BCS game. Cal fans inveighed for months, had good cries, etc. Didn’t Cal get smoked in the Holiday taht year? I don’t particularly care for anything Cal, so my memory might be off.</p>

86

<p>^ No, you asked a question and I gave you the answer.</p>

<p>The Texas Rose Bowl controversy was in 2005 (after the 2004 season).
USC went to the Rose Bowl in 2007 (for the 2006 season), because they beat Cal that year and won the tie-breaker.</p>

87

<p>

</p>

<p>Really, I’m being genuine, even if you’re not, with you’re mixing and matching, lol:</p>

<p>When was the last time Cal won a title outright, and was the Pac’s represe(n)tative to the Rose or some other BCS bowl?</p>

<p>Again, honestly trying to find out, and being too lazy to look…</p>

88

<p>Michigan, CAL, UVA, Texas.</p>

89

<p>… (that second ‘you’re’ s/b ‘your,’ btw).</p>

<p>… with any mention of Cal with a note as to who was teh league’s rep in that year, tough formatting, btw - [Pac</a> Title winners fb](<a href=“http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/champions_pacten.html]Pac”>College Football Poll.com):</p>

<p>PAC-10 CHAMPIONS Year Team Record </p>

<p>1959 Southern California
UCLA
Washington</p>

<p>1960 Washington </p>

<p>1961 UCLA</p>

<p>1962 Southern California</p>

<p>1963 Washington </p>

<p>1964 Oregon St.
Southern California </p>

<p>1965 UCLA</p>

<p>1966 Southern California</p>

<p>1967 Southern California</p>

<p>1968 Southern California </p>

<p>1969 Southern California </p>

<p>1970 Stanford </p>

<p>1971 Stanford </p>

<p>1972 Southern California </p>

<p>1973 Southern California </p>

<p>1974 Southern California </p>

<p>1975 California
UCLA (UCLA was rep in Rose)</p>

<p>1976 Southern California </p>

<p>1977 Washington </p>

<p>1978 Southern California </p>

<p>1979 Southern California </p>

<p>1980 Washington </p>

<p>1981 Washington </p>

<p>1982 UCLA </p>

<p>1983 UCLA </p>

<p>1984 Southern California </p>

<p>1985 UCLA </p>

<p>1986 Arizona St.</p>

<p>1987 Southern California
UCLA </p>

<p>1988 Southern California </p>

<p>1989 Southern California </p>

<p>1990 Washington </p>

<p>1991 Washington </p>

<p>1992 Stanford
Washington </p>

<p>1993 Arizona
Southern California
UCLA </p>

<p>1994 Oregon </p>

<p>1995 Southern California
Washington
1996 Arizona St. </p>

<p>1997 UCLA
Washington St. </p>

<p>1998 UCLA 8-0 </p>

<p>1999 Stanford </p>

<p>2000 Oregon
Oregon St.
Washington </p>

<p>2001 Oregon </p>

<p>2002 Southern California
Washington St. </p>

<p>2003 Southern California </p>

<p>2004 Southern California </p>

<p>2005 Southern California </p>

<p>2006 Southern California (USC was Pac’s rep in NC game, Rose)
California </p>

<p>2007 Southern California
Arizona State </p>

<p>2008 Southern California </p>

<p>2009 Oregon</p>

<p>Wow, this listing back to 1959 doesn’t show Cal with one outright title. Any comments UCB, bayboi?</p>

90

<p>1958 was the last year Cal won the Pac and represented the league in the Rose Bowl.</p>

<p>You’re asking a different question because the answer did not fit your agenda.</p>

91

<p>Does anyone really care if a school shares a title with another but isn’t league rep in a major bowl?</p>

<p>Head-to-head meeting is one of the most important considerations in determining a true league champ.</p>

<p>Only because the colleges are into feel-good-about=oneself empowerment do they list co-winners. You’ll never see that in the pros.</p>

92

<p>

Perhaps you should bring that up to Pac-10 leadership if it bothers you. Pac-10 grants conference championship to team/s with best in-league record…it’s the system and rules we have.</p>

<p>But all of this is kinda moot. We should look at current history:</p>

<ol>
<li>UCLA has not won at Cal since 1998.</li>
<li>Cal 35 - UCLA 7 </li>
<li>Recent history for Cal football:</li>
</ol>

<p>2003 8-6 5-3 T-3rd W Insight<br>
2004 10-2 7-1 2nd L Holiday
2005 8-4 4-4 T-4th W Las Vegas
2006 10-3 7-2 T-1st W Holiday
2007 7-6 3-6 T-7th W Armed Forces<br>
2008 9-4 6-3 4th W Emerald<br>
2009 8-5 5-4 T-5th L Poinsettia </p>

<p>Recent history for UCLA:
2003 6–7 4–4 T–5th L 9-17 Silicon Valley
2004 6–6 4–4 T–5th L 21-24 Las Vegas
2005 10–2 6–2 3rd W 50-38 Sun
2006 7–6 5–4 4th L 27-44 Emerald
2007 6–7 5–4 T–4th L 16-17 Las Vegas
2008 4–8 3–6 8th
2009 7–6 3–6 8th W 30-21 EagleBank</p>

93

<p>… but then again, you have nearly 7k reponses on this board.</p>

<p>I like people who stand and fight instead of taking flight. Good for you…</p>

<p>Let’s face it neither UCLA nor Cal has been at the top of its game wrt fb. But whereas Cal has been picked to contend and maybe even win a Pac title, UCLA has surely been languishing. And I wouldn’t know what to consider worthy recent history to present, so I would would rather stick to the whole rather than in part. UCLA has by far the greater tradition.</p>

<p>I don’t consider any bowl really worthy unless it has a BCS designation, although the Holiday Bowl seems fun because it’s usually a shootout. </p>

<p>I see Tedford’s window of opportunity closing especially since Oregon is coming on, but UCLA’s window just opening with the kind of players like Brett Hundley to hopefully place the team in contention next season and beyond. It’s a new o, it’ll take time.</p>

<p>I wouldn’t even write off this season for UCLA despite a game at Oregon in about a week & 1/2. Most teams buildup and gradually contend for championships. Next year, the team could be true contenders.</p>

94

<p>^ UCLA’s adoption of the pistol looked like an act of desperation even with Norm Chow calling the shots. If UCLA doesn’t finish strong, I think Neuweasel will be shown the door (despite the signature win over Texas).</p>

<p>A strong QB is great but not everything (see Washington).</p>

<p>With Oregon’s facilities and money it will be a strong contender for a long time IMO. Fortunately, Cal is <em>partially</em> addressing that gap with renovation of Memorial stadium and the addition of new training and locker facilities. I guess UCLA is too with some renovations to the Rose Bowl on tab. </p>

<p>Competition becomes greater next year with the addition of Colorado and (esp.) Utah…along with the whole championship game structure. </p>

<p>In a sense, the Pac-12 is addressing your complaint of co-champions.</p>

95

<p>

</p>

<p>The pistol has probably saved Neuheisel’s job. The team couldn’t run at all the prior two years. Now it can and usually quite well.</p>

<p>The problem with Prince of Bel Air at qb is he’s throwing at a 40% clip. He’s the king of overthrows right now. Good arm, good running ability, but terribly inaccurate. Granted he’s been hurt all year. Teams will stack the line to defend against the run until he (or Brehaut) can throw accurately intermediate and long.</p>

<p>I think the team finishes strong. UCLA probably has a better chance to finish stronger than Cal does. I don’t see Cal beating USC, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State. After UCLA falls to 3-4 against the Ducks, I see the following as victories: @ ASU, Arizona, @ Washington, Oregon State. USC at home will be tough. UCLA has a better shot at home against USC than Cal has traveling to LA to face them next Saturday. But good luck… </p>

<p>Btw, I particularly like these two videos of Kevin Riley running the ball at the end of the OSU game in 07: video [url=<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXwPf5iivSA&feature=related]one[/url”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXwPf5iivSA&feature=related]one[/url</a>] showing highlights and lowlights including Tedford slamming down his headset - advance video to the end, and [url=<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXwPf5iivSA&feature=related]two[/url”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXwPf5iivSA&feature=related]two[/url</a>], just the play itself. Cal was rated pretty highly at the time, top five?, but afterward tanked.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Locker has all the skills except accuracy which he hasn’t improved upon in his four years of starting. If he manifested this skill even slightly, he would undoubtedly be the best qb in the nation.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think a lot of football players also like the fast-break style of spread offense the Ducks run. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The more important thing, I think, is having a commish that will fight for more than one BCS team besides having 12 schools to promote this. I would have loved to have seen Texas in our conference, and hopefully after time and despite their being a big fish in a small Big-12 pond, revenue-wise, they’ll see the benefits of a move to the Pac.</p>

96

<p>

No. 2…actually, LSU lost to Kentucky earlier that day so we were No. 1 for a few hours. Ahhh the joys of being a Cal Bears fan…we are the Chicago Cubs of college football.</p>