<p>hell yes they do^ and i’m damn glad…i went to their admit day and have never seen such fine ass in my life…not to mention the milfs in attendance were amazing.</p>
<p>I think it comes down to the difference of public and private admission. UCLA is bound by the UC system, while USC can do what they want with admissions. The UCs care a lot about your GPA as stated before; 84% of SC admits are in the 10%, while something like 97% of UCLA’s admits are in the top 10%. I think USC as a private school is more subjective. Also SATs are a very poor indicator of a school’s selectivity, the difference of average SAT scores is small and most likely fluctuates. When it comes down to it I think they both want different types of students… but then again no one calls UCLA the university of second choice… j/k in actuality I’d probably pick USC over UCLA.</p>
<p>this thread is a pathetic fight between USC and UCLA grads.</p>
<p>i am seeing a little more venom being spat at USC for some reason, why do you need to justify yourselves by ridiculing a school that is provenly excellent?</p>
<p>I think it’s been said many many times (so those of you who cant read and are just here to rivalry bash pay attnetion) but UCLA and UC-Berkely are public CA schools, they have a wonky admissions system wherein it is pretty difficult to get in outside but a good deal easier to come in on the inisde.</p>
<p>you cant just combine the easy and hard selectivies and compare to USC’s.</p>
<p>As evidenced by the post, some people got into two but not anohter, some got into none, some got into all three, it’s always a different story, but having a high SAT garuntees nothing (except an evidenced bitterness).</p>
<p>i just wanted to point out that we all should be commending berkeley and ucla because they are part of a very rare breed of universities: the state school that is a national top 25. given its admissions restraints, it’s great what berkeley and ucla are and what they can offer!</p>
<p>on another note, one of ucla’s water polo players is a model for abercrombie and fitch:
<a href=“http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=32865[/url]”>http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=32865</a></p>
<p>Even if USC has higher scoring students, they’ll still graduate stupider. You can’t mess with Berkeley and UCLA grads, because they went through the meat grinder and came out on top.</p>
<p>lol what a “stupid” assumption. They’ll graduate stupider. I think that your statement was stupid. You can’t generalize, so don’t.</p>
<p>whats wrong with people? are they that insecure that they need to bash USC? a school that by all rights in equivicably as excellent? i’ve never seen some people clamor so much to find something bad about a school.</p>
<p>and for that matter the other way around, albeit i’m not seeing as much of that here, some people…</p>
<p>“…they’ll still graduate stupider. You can’t mess with Berkeley and UCLA grads, because they went through the meat grinder and came out on top.”</p>
<p>I don’t see you can make the leap of promoting the beauracracy and red tape at your school and then somehow claim that fighting waitlists and crashing classes somehow enhances a student body’s intelligence. </p>
<p>If anything, USC students could point out that not having the same insane level of beauracracy (though we certainly have it too!) gives us more time to pursue other academic matters… like doing homework, as opposed to filling out petition forms.</p>
<p>whats wrong with people? are they that insecure that they need to bash USC? a school that by all rights in equivicably as excellent? i’ve never seen some people clamor so much to find something bad about a school.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone’s saying USC’s not a great school. As to bashing because of insecurity? The thread was created by the OP because of his/her own insecurity and trying to justify why he/she may very well attend USC. I admit, some posts haven’t been constructive, ie mine at the beginning, but still…I still don’t really see a comparison between USC and UCLA, much less Berkeley. Undergrad is very very intense at Cal, and still intense at UCLA in the sciences and engineering(I don’t know much about humanities so I can’t really comment on that.) Grad schools of UCLA outrank USC in I think every category(yeah I know US News rankings aren’t much to go on, but it’s what we have).</p>
<p>For that matter the other way around, maybe that’s because there’s not much bad to say about UCLA or Cal except funding issues =)</p>
<p>I could find plenty of bad things to say about UCLA and UCB, but everyone knows about them anyways so they’re self explanatory.</p>
<p>I’ll say them: Big classes, student quality gap, bureaucracy like a Chinese dynasty, and rising student fees.</p>
<p>Heck yea!! Chinese dynasty!!! That’s the best part</p>
<p>Yes, even when the Chinese dynasties rose and fall, bureaucrats stayed in place. The one rule of a modern state is that bureaucrats just entrench and consume.</p>
<p>But hey, if they’re part of the Chinese dynasty, it’s all good, right?</p>
<p>Well, until the next dynasty rolls along. Or the British…or Japanese…</p>
<p>Is it any coincidence that the dynasty happens to be Asian? =)</p>
<p>Well, it’s a bit of a sine qua non that a dynasty in China would be Chinese, and therefore Asian.</p>
<p>Well, I was making reference to the fact that you chose an Asian Dynasty to compare to UCLA’s (which has a large asian student population) beauracracy.</p>
<p>Right. I knew that.</p>
<p>University of Caucasians Lost in Asians</p>
<p>Asian pride! :)</p>