<p>Keep in mind that many top schools (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.) may not offer undergraduate courses in finance, accounting, etc.</p>
<p>i mentioned that i m not saying ut is better than those ivies, i m talking about overall/estimate/generally.</p>
<p>
[quote]
McCombs is the most recruited school in the nation
[/quote]
</p>
<p>lol, what is this claim based on?</p>
<p>I never equated Stern with any of the Ivies in any of my posts, so I'm not sure what exactly you're trying to refute. The fact remains that average SAT score of students at McCombs is one of the lowest compared to all other respectable business schools. I think McCombs would be a much better school if it changed its admissions policies and stopped admitting people based purely on class rank. One of my friends was in the top 1% in my competitive high school, with barely any ECs, NO awards, NO leadership roles etc and was admitted to McCombs. His SAT scores weren't that high either. This clearly shows that the admissions policies at McCombs is flawed</p>
<p>yes it is flawed, but that doesnt make the school bad. McCombs admissions isnt flawed as the whole UT admission.</p>
<p>And for the "most recruited" you can look at it different ways. UT is number 1 in princeton review for "Best Career/Job Placement Services" and also McCombs has a large student body. Which means that out of all the elite business school, UT McCombs students land the most jobs, because its big, and most of the students get jobs straight out of UG.</p>
<p>ccviabank, you're right in that McCombs admission isnt as flawed as UT admission, but you have to admit that McCombs is a freaking joke. Schools like Haas, Ross, and Stern are much more competitive and are more respected than McCombs because they are much more selective. Heck, Ross takes only 35% of applicants for the BBA program starting sophomore year, and thats out of a student body that is better than UTs overall. UT's internal transfer rate for McCombs is around 70%.</p>
<p>I agree that McCombs is definately underrated here at CC. And i strongly disagree with anyone who calls McCombs a "freaking joke"</p>
<p>And for what its worth, UMichigan has ****ty admissions policies too but that dosnt in any way affect the quality of the school.
However, McCombs is NOT as good as Stern and cant even be compared to Ivies. sorry.</p>
<p>Basically, what im trying to say is that McCombs is a good school that is well respected by recruiters. If you go there and do well I dont see any reason why they wouldnt hire you.</p>
<p>I'm a recent graduate of UT as an engineer but sadly all my friends are either doctors or I-bankers. I personally have friends that have got offers/full time from Morgan Stanley, Wachovia, Jeffreys, Goldman Sachs, HSBC and Merrill lynch.</p>
<p>The vast majority were not in BHP but many had stellar GPAs or were in the FAP program.</p>
<p>Are most of the I-banking offers in NYC or in Texas?</p>
<p>quag_mire you bring up a good point,</p>
<p>Most of the offers were in Houston with the Energy industry.</p>
<p>Just thought I'd chime in here.</p>
<p>I go to UT as a BHP student, and yes all major banks recruit here. In fact, for IBD SA intern positions, all the major banks and boutiques (evercore, blackstone, lazard) came to campus for interviews. And more importantly, most of all of my junior friends (I'm a sophomore) received interviews and offers at these places. Keep in mind this is during poor market conditions. </p>
<p>However, there are a few caveats. Most of these individuals were in BHP. In fact on the interview lists posted before each interview day, about 80% of the students on that list were BHP majors. And about 50-60% of these positions were for Houston (or Dallas) offices. Nonetheless, there was still many NY offerings from GS, Lazard, Blackstone, UBS, and others.</p>
<p>So granted, while the BHP/McCombs admission process is flawed, the school and major are still respected by investment banks. Therefore, if you work hard, show an interest in finance, and can interview well, you'll be fine.</p>
<p>I think 5-year MPA program might get you further than BHP or FAP. I dont think FAP is really recognized as it should be by the recruiters. But BHP and MPA does have EXTREMELY strong recruitment. Regular McCombs students also have a good chance at i-banking in NYC, and can easily get one in Texas.</p>
<p>westsidewolf,</p>
<p>You are right the internal transfer rate is 60-70% but the average GPA of those applicants were between 3.7-3.8.</p>
<p>Undergraduate</a> Programs - The McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin</p>
<p>Also, since McCombs will NOT allow non-bmajors to take their classes, this GPA is derived from solely UT-based classes. </p>
<p>In addition, UT is looking to implement the A/A- system which will vastly change the grade distribution and academic landscape.</p>
<p>I completely agree that the top 10% rule is complete garbage and UT is actively trying to repeal it. The problem is that the admission process is very formulaic and makes it quite hard for out of state students or those who non-ranking schools to attend UT. The incoming class comprises of 81% of students within the top 10% (in texas) and unless you have a stellar out-of state GPA, it is hard to gain admission. Another example is that I have a Texan friend who attended a private school that doesn't explicity rank and while she gained admission to Northwestern, Duke and UChicago she was flat out rejected from UT since she wasn't top 10%. All in all, the top 10% blows but that along with PSAT scores got me a fullride to a top engineering program, so I can't complain too much. </p>
<p>Finally to the point that claims UT is dead without Engineerg/McCombs, most of the other subjects are ranked top 10 or top 15.</p>
<p>Rankings</a> & Kudos for The University of Texas at Austin</p>
<p>Oh and I almost forgot, 6th Street in Austin is a DAMN good reason to go to UT. :-D</p>
<p>not even soo much engineering bc admission is easy to get in but its true without McCombs/Engineering, UT wouldnt have any good side... and if UT is good at most of its majors, why cant any liberal arts/geoscience/commuication/natural science/etc get a job out of college... why would it be ranked 44th... it would be like top 30</p>
<p>ccviabank,</p>
<p>I'm not really sure where you are getting this information/data from. </p>
<p>For "not even soo much engineering " if you go by rankings, UT is ranked top 10 overall and in all the engineering specialties. If you don't go by rankings, which I would argue can be quite skewed, UT graduates earn significantly more than the national average.</p>
<p>Fact</a> Sheet - Cockrell School of Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin</p>
<p>"why cant any liberal arts/geoscience/commuication/natural science/etc get a job out of college". Once again I don't know where you get these inferences from. Even though these stats are a bit old for the geology department, of the 150 students who signed up for interviews, the average student had 4 interviews. </p>
<p>Placement</a> Statistics - Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin</p>
<p>"why would it be ranked 44th... it would be like top 30". Look, I'm not a USNEWS ranker or anything so I wouldn't have any idea. However, I do argue that rankings as a whole are useless and that faculty strength and graduation placements should be accentuated. Not to mention that rankings vary from one source to another and that there will always be skewing/partisianship in rankings as a whole. </p>
<p>For example, UT is #44 on USNEWS but also that Washington Monthly ranks it 17 (which also has A&M as #1, above MIT).</p>
<p>Times of London ranked it #15 in the world
UT</a> Austin wins 15th place in world list of 200 best universities | The University of Texas at Austin</p>
<p>Hell yet another ranking had it as #6
<a href="http://mup.asu.edu/research2007.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://mup.asu.edu/research2007.pdf</a></p>
<p>well you have a valid point</p>
<p>But you need to understand, I only mentioned engineering isnt "THAT!" great because its admission standards are really low compare to other elite engineering school or compared to McCombs (like I said, engineering/McCombs are GOOD, didnt I?). I believe with its ranking, it should tighten its admission standards, from my experience, ALOT unqualified students get into Petro, Civil, which is ranked highest. From that link, it seems like only 5 programs are highly ranked out of 15 programs.</p>
<p>And I dont know if you go to UT, or live in Texas, but like you said rank doesnt mean everything... so from people's view and experience. All those majors I mentioned are trash from job placement perspective. (exception of Pre-Med,Pre-Law,Pre-Pharm, and etc). And that link shows PHDs and Masters... and it shows only 47 Full-Time OFFERED, 47 out 107 (150)??? thats horrible. And also there were only 30 undergrads, I can imagine almost all of the 30 didnt get job offers.(looking at the history of Geoscience job offers... wow 47 offered is ALOT lol...) I did mention JOB PLACEMENT, NOT INTERNSHIP. I know people from those majors working at hollister, gap, old navy, and etc. They even admit mistake in picking those majors...</p>
<p>You mentioned rankings, and A&M ranking number 1. Seriously do you have no common sense. And also ranking differ because some like to emphasize on worthless factors. (some ranking put emphasis on retarded stuff like, "receiving Pell Grants?" "Peace Corp" "ROTC" "FEDERAL MONEY SPEND ON SERVICE" "Graduation Prediction" "Phds Awarded" and MORE") Do you seriously have no common sense? Its widely accepted that US News rankings are most VIEWED, RECOGNIZED, POPULAR, etc. I wonder what you base school ranking on? Do you research your own and make up your own ranks? Its most likely, that you look at U.S. News.</p>
<p>Ccviabank,</p>
<p>I completely agree with you about UT-Austin needing to tighten admission standards and that the stupid top 10 percent rule is leading to a underqualified student matriculation.</p>
<p>Yet one point is that it isn't UT-Austin's decision it is up to the Texas government--THEY passed the top 10 percent law and as a public institution, UT must comply. Beleive me, most of the faculty at UT want to do away with the top-10 rule and there was a recent resolution that changed the scope to top 10% as long as paperwork was filled on time.</p>
<p>Also, I don't think you understand that geoscience link. First, there were a total of 150 students who interviewed for a job OR an internship. Some of these students were B.S juniors/sophomores and others were in the middle of their graduate degrees. Needless to say, those who were not graduating applied for internships while the full-time job offers were for those who were graduating. I'll admit a more thorough breakdown by class would be beneficial.
In addition, most of the job/internships are from the base of employers that recruited on campus (30 companies from this list Representative</a> Recruiters - Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin) AND who used the career service. So these numbers don't mean "hollister, gap, old navy, " OR students who got jobs through other means.</p>
<p>"And also ranking differ because some like to emphasize on worthless factors".</p>
<p>My point exactly! Rankings can be useless since they have strange factors or criteria--hence my point that one list ranked A&M 1 while another listed it as 50.</p>
<p>"Its widely accepted that US News rankings are most VIEWED, RECOGNIZED, POPULAR, etc"</p>
<p>Look, USNEWS isn't without its fair share of criticism.
U.S</a>. News's College Rankings Face Competition and Criticism - washingtonpost.com</p>
<p>Do you research your own and make up your own ranks? Its most likely, that you look at U.S. News.</p>
<p>Anyway man, I don't really rely on rankings to decide what school I'm going to. Instead I look at the faculty, the course work, research, placement and most importantly student life--I still want to have a life.</p>
<p>I dont know why people are bringing up SAT scores when comparing undergraduate programs. I viewed the SAT as just another ordinary standardized test, as did most people, but still am having a great college career. Unfortunatley most financial positions look at SAT scores when hiring new applicants which is rediculous in my opinion. At 16 years old what did I know? Why bring that up when the job candidate is 21??? The top 10% rule is also garbage (as I know numerous people who transferred to an "urban" school thier senior year just to sneak their way into the top 10%)</p>
<ul>
<li>UT Austin is not comparable to the Ivies period...that has nothing to do with SAT scores but more rather with history, location, alumni, selectivity, private/public etc..
UT has a lock on jobs in the South over any school...8/10 of the current executives at my current internship are UT grads (Houston) and without question one of the top career placement centers in the nation not to mention less than $10,000 a year</li>
</ul>
<p>McCombs isnt ranked in the top 10 every year due to "luck", it is a great school that is overshadowed by UT's awful admissions procedures, isolated location (far from NE), large classes, and lenient grading system....im looking forward to graduating DEBT FREE from McCombs while competing for the same jobs that ivy league grads are pursuing</p>
<p>The major negative on McCombs is that after living in Austin, you won't want to go back to the northeast.</p>