<p>I would love to see more universities take more of a consortium model. </p>
<p>Caltech-USC-UCLA seem like an obvious choice. If these universities do more collaboration, it would really help strengthen the LA area. Although the Bay Area only has two top universities, Stanford-Berkeley are two of the most elite research universities in the world. I think USC and UCLA need to continue their strengthen their programs at full speed in order to top the Bay consortium model.</p>
<p>I want to make a side note that I love seeing the brotherly love from the UCLA students. It will also be amazing to see less animosity from the rival schools and more LA pride.</p>
<p>The Texas guy did hit on one of USC’s biggest challenges – its size.</p>
<p>USC has a much larger student body than any of the other private schools in the USNews top 25. This means USC has to do more in order to keep pace with or surpass the smaller schools.</p>
<p>For example, USC has almost as many endowed professorships as Stanford. But USC’s faculty is 4x larger. In order to match the overall quality of the smaller schools, USC must do more.</p>
<p>film can be monumental works of art. Just look at Avatar, or most of the stuff pixar does. Most of it isn’t. Both industries goals are to make as much money as possible, and both succeed in doing so. The oscars are also meant to pick out the films that are exceptional. But the point is all debatable, so i’m not going to sit here and argue it with you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He was there actually lol. Google is just the start of something much bigger. Los Angeles is better than the bay area in pretty much every way imaginable. Our weather’s better, our beaches are better, our women are hotter, etc, etc. I can totally see los angeles becoming a similar type of tech hub like silicon valley.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure you could go to any top 50 university and ask the engineering professors what awards or grants they’ve been awarded in their lifetime and 90-95% could list at least one or two. They’re professors; that’s what they all do. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>L…OH…L…</p>
<p>I hope you’re not a business, engineering, computer science, math, pharmacy, nursing, architecture, liberal arts, hard sciences, or law student because all of these programs are ranked higher at Texas than USC.</p>
<p>I think, as a USC alum mom, that until USC has guaranteed housing for all UGs, it will have a hard time broadening its appeal to many top students interested in going to private U’s. It especially needs to strengthen and broaden its graduate school programs. UCB for instance, has the reputation it has not because of its UG programs, but from the strength of its graduate programs. To a certain extent, the same can be said for U of Chicago, CalTech, HYP and MIT.</p>
<p>octrojans - Hahaha, great stats, especially in regards to football! I wonder when andrewt787 will respond by bringing up the 2006 Rose Bowl game, upon which we can reiterate our superior number of national championships, Heisman Trophy winners, and players taken in the NFL Draft (472, which is first among all universities since we recently passed Notre Dame).</p>
<p>That’s going to take a longgggg time,
but SC has at least done its kickstart to <em>acquire</em>
in faculty & researcher from one-&-only-Nobel for a long while
to become 4 now, whether their after-glory-day or not.
(though Heismen has become minus-1 …)</p>
<p>Bottomline, $money capital endowment has to be the starting catalyst,
from recruiting star faculty to new buildings and programs,
and then school vision, ambition and management.</p>
<p>We’re talking on academic prestige and ranks,
so where does football suddenly have to do with all this ? =)</p>
<p>As much as SC’s football history is positively glorious
and contributes to alumni support and donation,
SC’s current lag in academic prestige exactly need time
to shake off its longtime party-football-school image today often still
viewed nationally as the likes of “pure NFL factories”–>
Florida Gatorade, Forrest Gump Alabama, UMiami,
The Program Notre Dame…
(At least even Notre Dame is USNews Top-20,
so I just don’t see why SC can’t be Top-20 as a minimum …),
and the NCAA football and basketball sanctions certainly make
worse not better.</p>
<p>Oh please. USC beat Oklahomo 55-19. I think its obvious who the undisputed 2004 NCAAF champion was. BTW, USC is still the national title winner according to the AP poll. </p>
<p>And I think USC has UT beat even at only 10 national titles. </p>
Doing just fine. Thanks for asking. We went to the CWS last year and raised enough money to reinstate all cut sports…If that’s what you were implying. :)</p>
<p>Well, that’s nice. But the fact that they were cut demonstrates the poor finanical condition of Cal athletics. </p>
<p>And the “Bush is a cheater!” argument is getting old. Did the improper benefits Bush took somehow make him a better player? Did it make him faster, stronger? Did USC’s team play better because Bush took money? </p>
<p>“EEEEEh Eeehhh…but he cheated!!!..eeeeeeHHHH”</p>
<p>Yes, what he did was wrong. But USC did not benefit, USC did not perform better on the field because of Bush taking money, yet USC, USC football athletes and USC fans are the ones being punished for the stupidity of one player. Meanwhile, Reggie earns millions in the NFL and goes essentially unpunished.</p>
<p>“Whine/cry/moan…But but butbutbut eeeEHHHHHhhh…USC lost institutional control over its athletic program and CHEATED EEEEE!!!”</p>
<p>Spare me. An athletic program can have all the institutional controls in-place and that still wont affect the actions of the athletes in that program, even if you watch them like hawks 24/7. Yet, if an athlete is caught taking benefits, guess who gets punished. If the NCAA was smart, they would find a way do deter athletes from taking benefits rather than punish the athletic programs that have little control over the actions of people. But the NCAA is obviously not smart enough to figure this out. And if a college does report improper conduct, guess who gets punished. How does that motivate colleges to report improper activity and play by the rules? Well, it doesnt, it motivates them to cover up scandal. It concerns me that the NCAA could be this stupid. </p>
<p>While we are on the subject of institutional control lets talk Paul Dee and Umiami…</p>
<p>Paul Dee to USC - “You need to have the kind of institutional controls we have at Miami”</p>
<p>^ Ha, ha! I agree with you completely, oc. I said it was too harsh of punishment and I don’t think that it impacted his talent/performance on the field. I was just towing the rhetoric line. :)</p>
<p>
It’s in better shape now due to the Pac-12 contract. I think it was all a ploy by the Cal administration to drum up support…announce you’re cutting the program to raise the ire of alums.</p>