<p>Let's not confuse recognition and reputation. </p>
<p>UCLA is a marketable school because of its location, baby blue, and historic athletic success. Walk into a department store anywhere in California and you can find college gear for UCLA; walk into a department store in Southern California and you'd be hard-pressed to find Cal gear. The fact that the UCLA "brand name" is one of the most recognizable, quite frankly, is no shocker, but it should not be understood as indicative of academic reputation. For instance, UNC-Chapel Hill is also a very marketable university brand, but that doesn't mean much other than an extra boost in number of out-of-state applicants; this is also true with a school like NYU which, with UCLA, receives among the most freshman applications in the nation. The recent spike in USC's number of applicants and rising average standardized test scores is most often attributed to the success of its football team, but equally important is the image of the 'SC Song Girls and perfect grass at the Coliseum in mild temperature in the middle of November on ESPN. As witnessed on these boards many times, a lot of out-of-staters mistaken USC as a University of California campus because they could care less about USC's background as an institution and the significance of "UC": they apply to cash in on the brand and location.</p>
<p>Academic reputation, if that is what you are after, goes farther in terms of power of a degree. I'm originally form SoCal and didn't have a darn clue where exactly Berkeley was located in CA until senior year. I would surmise that if you asked southern Californians to pinpoint where Berkeley was in California, less than half would select an area within 50 miles of campus. The truth is, recognition of the "Berkeley" name lies in its "reputation"; that is, Berkeley as a very strong academic institution. I knew Berkeley, all southern Californians know Berkeley, the kid in a rural town in Iowa knows Berkeley and it's because of the school's education reputation; by the same token, all of the above know UCLA but not necessarily for the same reasons. When posters here and others comment on Cal's "reputation," it is strictly from an academic standpoint and cannot be compared against UCLA "recognition." Cal's reputation is almost exclusively referencing the Times Higher Education Supplement World Rankings which, in the past, has placed the university's academic reputation tops in the world. </p>
<p>Whichever is more important to you, be it recognition or reputation or somewhere in between, do consider to what audience is most important, most relevant to you. If you intend to stay in California after college, UCLA and Cal could be considered a push for discussion's sake. If you are seeking a career in Academia, Cal would have an undisputed edge. If you intend on entering a career where social networking is extremely important, especially with clients outside of California, I can see how UCLA can be advantageous. If you are looking for a job in more high-profile places, where education background is scrutinized by individuals "in-the-know," a Cal degree is advantageous. </p>
<p>To answer the OP's question, from what I've seen and in the spirit of generalizations, choosing UCLA is a lifestyle choice and choosing Cal is a life choice. Apply this statement as you see fit.</p>
