USC’s reputation as the university of spoiled children isn’t helped by the school’s use of the imperious image of Tommy Trojan trotting around on a white horse. What do you think this image conveys? It’s a pretentious image evoking power, privilege, empire. Do you think such imagery inspires respect or contempt? It’s an example of USC trying too desperately to impress others of its relevance. Unfortunately, at least to me, it has the opposite effect. The first thing that comes to my mind seeing Tommy Trojan is “dude, you are taking yourself too seriously”. Relax. Ironically, the use of Troy - a dead city destroyed by the Greeks - as a symbol of USC does not convey longevity or relevance. The Greeks utterly decimated Troy. And they did so by using a horse! So Tommy Trojan trotting around on a horse is poorly thought out symbolism that inspires more than a few laughs.
I didn’t read the whole thread so I apologize if this has been brought up, but some of the dislike could be because there are so many Notre Dame football fans out there. ND to a lot of people always stood for good and righteous. I grew up as a diehard ND fan so I always disliked USC, at least from a football perspective.
USC is more like a LAC, sunshine, party, sports, and hyper cheerfulness.
She does not develop leading thinkers in any fields, but is especially weak in STEM.
The USC detractors on this thread and on many other threads like it… which is a very unique phenomenon here on CC (i.e. non-USC affiliates actually coming on to USC threads to bash or belittle USC)… actually know so relatively little about all that USC has become over the last 10-15 years that it is utterly pointless to continue to engage in proper discourse with them.
As many here on CC know, I have applauded and defended USC enough on scores of CC threads. I researched USC thoroughly online and in-person as a parent and urged both of my daughters to consider applying to it. When they were both accepted, I then urged them to attend, by-passing other elite admissions that included universities like Rice, Emory & even Princeton. I am super thankful for their decisions and for all that USC has provided for them thus far.
I am also very proud to have an USC graduate (c/o 2018) in the family with one more graduate (c/o 2021) to come.
Going back to the OP, I suspect USC attracts many bashers because of the attitude that USC defenders here promotes, which can be interpreted, rightly or wrongly, as this: “we are a rich private school, with rich students and alumni; therefore we deserve to be up there in prestige along with Stanford and the rest of them”. It’s a sense of entitlement based on the flawed belief that somehow money buys prestige. There are many other richer schools than USC that do not provoke the same animus. My personal example is the University of Notre Dame (to which my daughter got accepted but did not attend because she liked UCLA more), ranked higher than USC and much much wealthier. Yet ND doesn’t give off the same arrogant vibe. It is a humble school.
This is ridiculous.
@gyrase777 I’ve personally been active on CC for years and have never seen a single USC defender post anything at all similar to your characterization.
I just re-watched “The Hunting Game” again recently. I suggest it as required viewing for anyone (male or female) about to attend a college or university + their parents. When the Notre Dame examples were highlighted, especially detailing the cover-ups attributable to Notre Dame’s administration, I suspected mass resignations or firings. But as far as I can tell… none occurred. Just for silence and cover-ups.
At least at USC, the President was willing to resign and at least partially acknowledge that he failed to do enough. With 10K+ employees and 30K+ students, no university president should actually be responsible for one or two bad actors within their midst. But honor dictated that he resign… so he did. If you do watch “The Hunting Ground”, any UND supporter should expect the same from their Board of Trustees or university leadership.
As for USC’s reputation for wealth or privilege, that is largely a thing of the past. These days… it is more about diversity, inclusion and opportunity:
“Nearly two-thirds of USC undergraduates receive some sort of financial aid, including need-based grants, merit scholarships, Federal Work-Study and loans. Among the 2017 entering first-year class, nearly two-thirds received some form of financial assistance, with more than 21 percent receiving a USC merit-based scholarship. USC enrolls more than 4,000 low-income undergraduate students (as defined by Pell Grant eligibility) more than most private research universities. In fall 2017, 21 percent of enrolled undergraduates received Pell Grants. Most importantly, low-income and under-represented minority students at USC graduate at rates comparable to the overall undergraduate population.”
@WWWard my son was one of the 21% that receive merit scholarships. He got $4K on a $72K COA. We took the half tuition scholarship at UMiami instead. USC uses teeny tiny merit grants for advertising purposes. I am pretty sure the average (or perhaps, median) merit grant is quite small.
It’s honestly ridiculous that posters are criticizing the mascot of usc as a reason why the school isn’t great. Leave tommy Trojan alone folks…
@Gudmom its not just merit its grant based financial aid. Nearly 75% receive some form of aid and the average debt for graduating seniors at USC is $24,000 (vs $29,000 national average and $33,000 for private schools). That means a significant amount of the 320 million USC invests in students is in the form of grants and merit scholarships - which by the way is the largest aid pool of any university. Further, USC default rates for USC graduates is 1.2 % vs 6.8% for private schools and 11.7% for public schools so graduates are not overburdened financially.
@gyrase777 your comments just aren’t worth responding to.
I am just saying that bragging about a large percentage of minuscule merit awards is yet another way of “gaming” the system. I don’t have a grudge against USC; if it had been as generous as Miami, I would have had to resign myself to my son going there (I think he slightly preferred it, and I do think it was better for his intended major). I say “resign” because I am one of the Never-California people. Twonof my brothers are there, and always trying to tempt the others to join them in their “perfect weather”, but wildfires, mudslides, earthquakes, drought, and housing prices alone would be enough for me; however, I also just have an irrational but very common resistance to the very idea of California. The ocean is COLD. It’s full of sharks, and it is on the WRONG SIDE.
I didn’t want him to go to Cali because I didn’t want him to like it. It’s like dog people and cat people. You can’t make a rational argument; it is just a THING.
Choosing a school mascot is not some random act made by the decision-makers. Some conscious thought process must have gone into it (I would hope). Trojan warrior on white horse? There must have been a rationale behind this choice, picking a defeated figure from ancient Greek mythology to be the embodiment of a modern American university. The mascot is supposed to represent something about the school’s ethos and outlook. What outlook might that be? The mascot is part of the whole USC package, the very entity of which this thread is about. Since the thread is about why people dislike USC, it’s fair to examine the symbols that USC uses to project its public image which may have generated some of these reactions, both positive and negative. What do you think Tommy Trojan aims to convey about USC? It’s a legitimate question.
@Gudmom Some people just hate CA no matter what so please don’t come here it’s your prerogative…but don’t bash USC because of your irrational reasoning and logic. USC is a wonderful institution and the college grads that I have worked with are smart, driven, and great employees and even better people.
@gyrase777 Why Trojans? Here you go:
"The famed moniker was first seen in the Los Angeles Times when sports writer Owen Bird wrote a column previewing a track meet between USC and Occidental College.
“The Oxy Tiger will be seen in action for the first time this season, in the clash with Dean Cromwell’s USC Trojans on the Bovard cinder trail,” Bird said in his column.
In 1912 USC student-athletes ceased to be called the Methodists, Wesleyans and Cardinals.
When asked decades later why he chose the name “Trojans,” Bird said that USC athletes “were facing teams that were bigger and better-equipped, yet they had splendid fighting spirit. The name Trojans fitted them.”"
SCanteater thanks for the info. My recollection of the Trojan war is that the Greeks were getting roundly beaten and were about to retreat back to their ships when they concocted a last ditch plan to penetrate Troy by means of subterfuge: the Trojan horse. Greek warriors managed to slip into Troy, proceeding to lay it to waste. It wasn’t Greek physical superiority that did it; it was their superior cunning. Of course it helped that the Greeks had Athena, Hera. and Poseidon on their side. 
Tommy Trojan, in my opinion, is a poor choice for a mascot, but that’s a choice USC has to learn to live with and be sport enough to take criticism about. Visually, Tommy Trojan reminds you of a conquering imperial warrior that in the end was decimated in battle. All hat, no cattle.
Pointing at a mascot is a case of grasping at straws in an attempt to rationalize an irrational hatred of a school. Historically, the Spartans didn’t end up any better than the Trojans, so do we get to hate Michigan State and San Jose State because their mascot is a Spartan? Do I get to hate Notre Dame because its mascot is an angry, drunken leprechaun? The Duke Blue Devils? Why, they must all be Satan-worshipers there, so I guess it’s OK if I hate Duke.
It looks like gyrase777, with a daughter at UCLA, is taking the USC-UCLA rivalry a little too seriously.
If you think USC is despised you should try being a Dukie 
I vaguely recall a thread along the lines of “What are the most hated schools?” on CC a few years ago. Seems like USC, Duke, Ohio State and Alabama got a fair number of mentions.
Trojan is a fantastic symbol and I loooove seeing Traveler in the stadium just like I did the Anheuser Busch Clydesdales. Majestic animals, all of them.
Bruin actually means brown in Dutch and was then attributed to brown bears. Not sure of the power behind that but it’s just a mascot. All is in fun.
I am surprised I n this political environment is that no one has gone after Texas Tech for their battle cry being “Guns Up” with people pointing their hands like firing a gun. But that’s their thing.
You love your school and might not like others for good reasons or no good reason as evidenced on this thread. Frankly it bores me, but I do find the background of team names and mascots interesting, and appreciate accurate historical background from posters without personal axes to grind.
Hey I didn’t start his thread, I’m just reacting to it.
As I said in my first post, I think USC is a great university but there are a multitude of reasons people dislike it, in response to the OP’s query. In consonance with the thread, I posted examples of why I think people may dislike the school. Sense of entitlement, hubris (as exemplified by its ill thought-out choice of mascot reflecting its sense of entitlement without consideration for the meaning of the symbolism) are some of them.