<p>This is such a ridiculous thread - and I am a Cal student! UCLA likes to believe it has the same status as Berkeley as an academic leader. It is a fine university but to suggest that it has very few USC rejects is an absolute joke. First, my sister goes to USC and it is very true that there are several students that did not apply to UCLA or even Berkeley. Those students value the private mission of small classrooms, greater alumni connections, and greater student resources. To them there is no point to go to a large public school where professors’ main focus is their research. Second, having been raised in southern California, I have many friends that go to UCLA and yes some of them were rejected from USC and even UCSD. Why does this happen? Simply because the admissions process is unpredictable. Thirdly, one must realize that UCLA admits very few international and out of state students, because of its public mission to serve CA residents first. Where as, USC has the most international students than any other university in the US. Also, USC admits more out of state students because it is not funded by the state. So, my point is that UCLA does admit less of those demographics than USC. Although, that is not because UCLA is superior or more academically challenging. In fact, USC has SIGNIFICANTLY higher SAT and ACT scores than all the UCs. UCLA students will bring up the super scoring excuse, but come on enough with the excuses already. It will not make that big of a difference! The gap between UCLAs and USCs scores is quite large. Large enough to safely say USC’s smaller student body is overall more intelligent. However, UCLA does have excellent students, but for the most part that majority of the students are subpar. Again, largely due to the fact that they are bounded by state obligations. </p>
<p>And for the record, the same comparison can be made with Berkeley and Stanford.</p>