<p>People at UCSD hate on UCLA because UCLA is the "other" strong UC that's in socal. Berkeley obviously hates UCLA and some people pretend to not acknowledge the rivalry they have with each other.
USC continually hates on UCLA. This year even more so since they surpassed UCLA in rankings.</p>
<p>UCLA is rarely mentioned among the top public schools in threads. Usually its Berkeley, UMich, UVA...it barely gets credit for being the most selective UC.
So why the hate?</p>
<p>Mr. Prince, I don’t care what you have been told. I will go with the CDS. Cal is slightly more selective. We are not talking night and day mind you. Cal’s mean SAT is roughly 1350 (out of 1600) compared to UCLA’s 1290 and Cal’s mean ACT is 30, compared to UCLA’s 28. Either way, we are talking about insignificant differences, but Cal has the edge.</p>
<p>@Alexandre
UCLA is more selective once you factor in Berkeley spring admits (that are awarded to fall applicants). Not factoring in these admits would be sort of “gaming the system” and the stat published in the UC website has recently come to publish the Cal admit rate w/ their Spring offers. UCLA does not offer spring admissions. </p>
<p>Since you do not live in California, you may be more reluctant to accept a perspective against the USNWR point-of-view, which does not account for spring admits, but I’m just telling you that an increasing number of Californians, who are the majority applicants to both schools and easily the authority regarding the UCs, acknowledge UCLA is more selective than Berkeley for the aforementioned reason. </p>
<p>Take it from UCBChemGrad, he would never say something like that about Cal unless its true.</p>
<p>sentiment, I go by the CDS, not the USNWR. If anybody has figures to support that UCLA is indeed more selective than Cal, feel free to share them.</p>
<p>I’m just telling you these are the stats many Californians go by. You can accept MrPrince’s view or you can reject it but it is not an uncommon one amongst actual applicants to the two schools.</p>
<p>Those links would suggest that they have virtually identical admission standards. Either way, I don’t see how anybody can claim that UCLA is more selective than Cal.</p>
Personally, I think UCLA’s neglect on CollegeConfidential is from OOSers perception that any university other than the state “flagship” cannot be good and Berkeley is a very well established flagship. This is true in most states. </p>
<p>Historically, many critics such as the author of the “Public Ivies” merely wrote down the University of California and left it at that. </p>
<p>The fact OOSers grossly overlook, however, is that California has a huge population and Berkeley is so many eons ahead of every other state flagship that many UC “non-flagships”, including even the midtier UCs, can be better than well known state flagships as soon as you bring universities such as UTexas - Austin, UWisconsin, PennStateU etc. into the conversation.</p>
<p>UCLA has had to fight tooth and nail for an identity other than another homogeneous “UC campus” (and the UCs can admittedly be quite similar despite their all mostly being excellent universities that can each individually in reality stand toe-toe-toe with other national leaders). The university only receives the acknowledgement it does today from its athletic program and scaling many college ranking authority’s lists to the likes of Virginia and Berkeley itself.</p>
<p>Even then, I would argue that UCLA is not the most unfortunate and far from being as neglected as UC San Diego. This is a university that ranks highly in every college ranking and could easily be compared to UNC.</p>
<p>your OP is a bit misleading. from my 4 years at USC what i’ve found is that USC students are rather ambivalent towards bruins while UCLA students are quite antagonistic towards trojans.</p>
<p>if you doubt what i have to say, try having a guy wearing a UCLA sweatshirt walk around USC vs a guy wearing a USC sweatshirt walk around UCLA. the UCLA guy will mostly be ignored whereas the USC guy will be cursed at and even have stuff thrown at him. mind you, this scenario takes place during a regular evening, not the week of the USC/UCLA game or anything.</p>
<p>personally i think both schools are great but i do feel like the reputation of UCLA’s undergraduate student body rides on the coattails of their EXCELLENT graduate schools. their undergrads are good but not elite.</p>
<p>Fwiw, if one wants to use the Spring admits to establish the comparative selectivity of each school, he might as well look at the transfer data. While Cal admits more than 2,000 students in the Spring, it does admit about 2,000 fewer transfer applicants who mostly emigrate from the California community colleges. </p>
<p>With 3,000 and 5,000 admitted transfer students, the UC flagships are beyond bona fide comparison to most selective schools, at least on a national level. But this has little influence on “national” applicants because the UC schools enjoy mostly state or regional draws at the UG level.</p>
I never saw this happen before. Trojans do paint the Bruin bear red quite frequently, however. lolz</p>
<p>I do believe most of the animosity between the two universities is hyped, however. Its because the universities don’t share near as many cross admits as one may think.</p>
<p>
UCLA does not have an “elite” undergrad ranking. Nor is it treated as much of an “elite” institution on CollegeConfidential (as noted by MrPrince) from its missing presence in far too many “top public” lists.</p>
<p>As a matter of fact, none of the other top publics (Berkeley, UVa, and Michigan) have “elite” rankings either. That’s why everybody is always ranting and raging against USNWR, but not for UCLA of course.</p>
<p>sentiment, I think UCSD and UCs (except for Berkeley and LA) suffer from their commuter campus feel/reputation and lack or resources. Also, having flagship status adds a certain boost to a school, whether deserved or not.</p>
<p>It’s not hate, MrPrince – outside California, it’s largely indifference. UCLA is known for a sports program, and “I’ve heard it’s a really good school”, but it’s not really known or associated with anything in particular (beyond sports, Los Angeles and maybe a UCLA/USC rivalry). So no one “hates” it – it just doesn’t have a strong brand identity outside of California. That’s all.</p>