RSS
September 18, 2006
Why USC Haters Are Lame
Smack-talk has started again in the world’s greatest cross-town rivalry. No other city but LA can boast two of the nation’s finest sports institutions. In fact, UCLA and USC are #1 and #2 in NCAA championships for all sports. But nothing gets All-American blood pumping like football.
When you have an institution of 30,000+, there are bound to be some skeletons in the closet. UCLA is a sterling exception, but that’s just because they sold the skeleton while it was still a cadaver. At least USC’s skeletons look great in a mini-skirt and Uggs. For those people who can’t hide their jealousy, here’s why you should stick an athletic sock in it.
FLAME #1: USC breaks all the rules.
USC has faced lots of allegations over the past year, but that’s due to the increased scrutiny that comes with the national spotlight. Notice that I didn’t say “convictions” or “violations.” The team has managed itself far better than Thug U and they didn’t demonstrate the same handicap that plagued the Bruins. As for Reggie Bush, nothing seems to stick to him (kinda’ like most college defenders over the past three years). If anything shady happened, look to his step dad. This is the same guy who alienated USC fans when declaring that Reggie would go pro several weeks before Reggie made his decision official. There won’t exactly be any tears shed in the land of Troy if he goes down for something.
FLAME #2: USC fans are bandwagon.
Of course there are bandwagon fans in Los Angeles. Does anybody else remember what Laker car flags looked like? They were yellow. I remember some very empty stands while the Trojans slumped through a 5-7 season in 2000. I even traveled hundreds of miles to watch a squad dubbed “the worst football team in USC history.” Why would anybody subject themselves to that sort of loyalty? Because when I wasn’t sitting in the stands I was sitting in class with a much maligned Carson Palmer (a so-called underachiever before he took home the Heisman). Students are the best fans (followed closely by alumni) because they are more dedicated, more passionate, and more connected with the student-athletes. As a student-fan, I appreciated the support from non-student diehards when we were loosing, but I couldn’t be upset with the large bandwagon that came shortly after USC’s last non-bowl loss in 2003 (and yes, I was on the road for that game, too). The students and alumni have always been there. To everybody else, welcome aboard.
FLAME #3: USC is an ivory tower dynasty. Damn Yankees, errr, Trojans.
USC’s fans are actually cheering for something that has taken shape over just the last 5 years. Pete Carroll has built something from nothing, taking over a team that had just recaptured the Victory Bell after 8 long seasons, and did it all while being looked down upon as an NFL retread. Unlike other sports dynasties which do it with money (ahem, Yankees), Carroll energizes the team with his own youthful enthusiasm and energy. Other coaches don’t take snaps with the team in practice, and that attitude is part of the reason he was able to recruit the best players despite the modern era of NCAA scholarship parity. While the NFL’s version of parity gives the best team the last draft pick (and only one per round), Carroll takes future top NFL draft picks into his program en-mass.
FLAME #4: USC is the University of Second Choice.
Stay classy, Bruins. I’m sure those erudite scholars of Westwood realize this is an ad hominum, or “straw man,” attack (the last cry of a desperate orator). Different institutions are going to be better at different things (USC gets the gridiron, UCLA gets the hardcourt, USC gets film, UCLA gets medicine). When painting the schools with a broad brush, remember that USC was recently named Time-Princeton School of the Year, and that the incoming Freshman class has a 3.7 GPA and middle 50% SAT range of 1290-1430. Once somebody becomes a Trojan, they become part of a network so strong it’s known as the USC Mafia. And if sports are your thing, USC and UCLA are neck and neck for the national lead once football championships are factored into the NCAA rankings (which don’t officially crown a champion). When it comes down to it, which championship is more impressive, football or men’s gymnastics? (Sidebar: After USC and UCLA, Stanford is third. With Cal ranking just outside the top 10, California is by far the top college sport state in the nation.)
Oh, and after being admitted by both institutions, I chose USC over UCLA.
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
um...if Bush goes down for something it will be USC that will face the brunt of the punishment, not Bush for the simple fact USC still plays NCAA football. I'm sure the three straight national title game appearences is part of the reason USC is coming under scrutiny. Another might be they are doing things to warrent said scrutiny (and that might have something to do with those titles).
But hey, the "rules" and stuff aren't relevent to OJ's alma mater I guess. Great arguments all around!
[ report this ]
USC= University of Sexy Coeds. Or University of Spectacular Cellists, if you're a musician.
[ report this ]
Aaaah the OJ card. At least you've heard of our murderers! :P
[ report this ]
Just a note: UCLA has the edge on medicine AND law AND a whole list of other disciplines too lengthy to catalogue here
[ report this ]
From Newsweek's August 13th Post of Top 100 Global Universities
#5 - Cal
#12 - UCLA
#23 - UCSD
#54 - USC (below such powerhouses as the University of CO at Boulder)
[ report this ]
bwunderlick - Actually, it's more likely that Reggie Bush would loose the Heisman than USC would loose the 2004 National Championship (or other penalties). If the NCAA proves that Reggie was aware of the benefits (to him or his stepdad), the Heisman committee could consider revoking the award. They're not likely to do that, since even OJ was allowed to keep his (in name only, since he lost the statue in the civil suit). In order for USC to suffer consequences, first the NCAA would have to prove that the University was aware of the benefits being received (much harder to do). But the NCAA doesn't officially crown the national champion. The BCS would then have to create a committee to investigate, which they don't have any protocol for. All of this is hypothetical, since there are only accusations. Anybody can point fingers. If somebody claimed John Wooden's teams were on steroids, I wouldn't buy into it without rock-solid evidence. Yahoo has created a lot of buzz and site traffic, but nothing is on the public record or verified yet (if ever).
[ report this ]
inquisitive - Grad school rankings, like all rankings, are pretty subjective. USC is only two behind UCLA in Law by USN&WR, which is one of the most widely circulated metrix. By the same rankings, USC blows UCLA out of the water in Engineering, but UCLA is one spot above USC in undergrad (note that USC has shown major improvement for the past few years, while UCLA has been stagnant). Anyway, if forced to choose between going against a USC lawyer or UCLA lawyer, I'd take my odds against the Bruin (the Trojan probably knows the judge). It's also widely accepted that nobody can hold a candle to USC in Communications. Obviously there's a lot of back-and-forth, but there's no calling USC a second choice.
[ report this ]
Newsweek's list is a brand new system which doesn't accurately rank what it's attempting to rank. Besides a heavy dependence on things like international faculty and students (hence the name "Global Universities"), it bases a whopping 10% of the score on the number of volumes in a University's library. While a cute concept, this is far less important in the modern academic era than, say, computer connectivity. The result? A poorly made list with UCSF ranked above both UCLA and USC. While one of the premier medical institutions in the world, UCSF doesn't even have a real undergraduate program and is hardly a global player. USC maintains administrative offices in Hong Kong, Jakarta, Mexico City, Taipei, and Tokyo, but couldn't crack the top 50 on this list. Hmmmm.
UCSF has only 72 countries represented in its student body. UCLA's 893 international students from "more than 100 countries" is more impressive, and USC blows both out of the water: "Last year USC hosted over 5,500 international students from 115 different countries, in addition there were more then 1,200 visiting scholars and professors from abroad on campus."
Another oddity is that UT-Austin sits at 47 in the domestic rankings, but jumps to 27 in the global rankings. Even a UCLA engineering student could see the flaws in this system.
[ report this ]
Adam Rose: The rankings for Newsweek were heavily based on academic publications (in both the natural and social sciences) traditionally held as the benchmark for rating faculty and teaching institutions. The fact that USC maintains ADMINISTRATIVE offices in all of those cities is not a benchmark for determining the ACADEMIC rigor of the institution.
[ report this ]
P.S. Adam Rose: Regarding your comment about UCSF, who said that this Newsweek ranking was merely for undergraduate studies? You were the very person who brought this fight to the level of graduate studies "USC gets film, UCLA gets medicine." FYI, the study of medicine is a graduate program.
[ report this ]
P.P.S. - Adam Rose: From your Post to bwunderlick --> "Loose" is an adjective. "Lose" is the verb. Apparently, UCLA also has the edge on English and grammar.
[ report this ]
Hey Adam, as a UCLA contributor to this site, I have to say I enjoy what you've written so far. Keep up the good work!
[ report this ]
My mistake, inquisitive. I assumed you actually read the article you were citing. I even provided the link, just in case. Since you missed it, here's what the Newsweek rankings are about:
"In response to the same forces that have propelled the world economy toward global integration, Universities have also become more self-consciously global ... To capture these developments, NEWSWEEK devised a ranking of global universities that takes into account openness and diversity, as well as distinction in research."
You'd think a diverse undergraduate program and international outreach (which supports academic endeavors) should carry a little more weight. Notice that the primary value is openness and diversity, followed by research. UCSF, while an excellent institution, is clearly not as "global" as some of the institutions ranked below it.
And thank you for catching my typo. Obviously my small mistake proves that hundreds of thousands of USC alumni are illiterate.
[ report this ]
Adam Rose: I did read it. Here's the part you "forgot" to paste in:
We evaluated schools on some of the measures used in well-known rankings published by Shanghai Jiaotong University and the Times of London Higher Education Survey. Fifty percent of the score came from equal parts of three measures used by Shanghai Jiatong: the number of highly-cited researchers in various academic fields, the number of articles published in Nature and Science, and the number of articles listed in the ISI Social Sciences and Arts & Humanities indices.
[ report this ]
Adam Rose: P.S. A "typo" is a mistake. You did it twice and in separate places in your post. But whatever . . .
[ report this ]
Adam Rose: P.P.S. "Ad hominem" is not spelled "ad hominum". And, "ad hominem" arguments are literally translated as "attack(s) against the man." It is a logical fallacy where, instead of attacking the rationale or logic presented, you attack the person presenting it. It is not a "straw man" argument - which is the equivalent of a "red herring" argument.
The argument that USC is a second choice does not attack the students at USC, it is based on obervations, facts, etc. So it does not qualify as an "ad hominem" attack.
Here is an example of an "ad hominem" attack: You're an idiot.
So, I guess UCLA can add Latin and philosophy/rhetoric to the list of disciplines in which it has an edge.
[ report this ]
Inquisitive, since you've been on a tear lately, let me remind you of point #2 of our comment policy: Good comments can disagree with the content in the post, but they never insult the writer of the post, other commenters, Gothamist, other websites, etc.
Take a moment to read over your comment. It appears to intend to be hurtful and insulting. Please try to be nice next time.
[ report this ]
Re: USC second choice ---- numbers simply don't substantiate. First off, nearly everyone at UCLA is a CA resident, due to the system whereby the CA residents are rewarded for paying into the taxbase for this public university. However, USC is private. No obligation to taxpayers. Simply based on competition, not address. I argue that alone skews the tables in USC's favor. Moreover, a claim of 700+ nations represented in UCLA's population must be bogus; again, less than 2% of its population come even from outside the state, let alone the world. USC has true foreign students, ones that are topnotch that the American kids had to compete against to gain their seats. Not so at UCLA. Again, advantage USC.
[ report this ]
Speaking of ad hominum and straw man ... yipes. I'm seeing plenty of tangential response, but Newsweek's major problems (outcomes inconsistant with reality, mis-weighted factors like library volumes, and no history of widely accepted value) are still unaddressed.
As for the Second Choice arguement, it can be constructed as either ad hominum ("You like USC, but you failed to get into your first choice, therefore USC is lame.") or straw man ("USC was everything I hoped for and more!" - "So? USC was your second choice, therefore USC is lame."). Either way, it's a falacy.
How's that list coming along? UCLA can have spelling (Bill Gates devalued that, anyway), but USC will keep rhetoric. Afterall, rhetoric is communication, and USC has the top communication school in the world.
[ report this ]
"USC gets the gridiron, UCLA gets the hardcourt, USC gets film, UCLA gets medicine."
Actually...UCLA gets film. UCLA's program is much better and much harder to get into than USC's. Sorry.
[ report this ]
adam: I understand the politics and possible consequences of the Bush controversy, but that was my point. Anything that can happen to Bush will be minor and probably soon forgotten. The damage to USC is more wide ranging and could effect future classes that never attended when Bush was there. Of course, being college football, this probably won't happen, but it was you who said USCers won't feel bad for what happens to Bush. My point is it doesn't matter if they don't care about Bush, its the entire program that looks sketchy.
And I really don't think your analogy to Wooden's team having taken steroids much sense beyond 'ucla is full of stupidheads'. USC has been accused of lots of stuff with numerous sources and some real penalties. But none of this is illegal, it just kind of takes the shine off the program. There's a reason why USC is called the "LA's professional team", for good and bad.
kathy: UCLA doesn't have foreign students (or are you saying no qualified foreign students)??? Have you ever been to Westwood, or are you just making conclusions based on your own biases?
and generally, are people saying USC is better because its private and not (the horror) a state school like UCLA? if so, wow, you really showed whose the classier bunch. hopefully there is some more rankings that can prove it! good luck!
[ report this ]
SC doesn't care about the fans..... and the announcers and the real beginners watching the games who might be fans someday.
For almost a decade, you could understand the need for teams from USC, Notre Dame and Penn State wanting to hide, but the real reason for not putting names on their jerseys was a false sense of superiority. Like looking down their noses at everyone and daring them to learn their names the hard way.
I suppose these universities explain it to their recruits that if you are any good, people will know your name, etc. etc.
All the teams of the world's largest sport puts them on the uniform, the NFL does, ditto the NBA, MLB and most all of the rest of college sports who care about the fan.
Why is there this trend to take the names off, i.e. Washington, etc,. Oh well, I guess it's because the Notre Dame coach just moved to the Huskies.
The next decade that these precious teams have a rough time, maybe we will forget all their names.
Richard
[ report this ]
cinebruin - Not sure how you think UCLA is a better film school than USC. Anything to back that up with? Maybe you should read the links from this post.
bwunderlick - My post wasn't clear enough, I meant nobody would feel bad if this came down on his stepdad (who may have been doing things behind Reggie's back). Of course, nothing could really be done to the stepdad unless Reggie cut him off now. Anyway, I agree it hurts the image of the school. That doesn't mean it's all true. On the allegation scale of Lance Armstrong to Barry Bonds, I'd put Reggie Bush closer to Lance Armstrong. Wooden would be an example of a preposterous allegation, and annoying because it would probably be unprovable either way. I'll let Kathy clarify the public thing.
Richard - Agreed. The University is currently researching a new polymer that will change player's numbers during while on the field.
[ report this ]
Here's a thread on last names on jerseys. It's punctuated with this photo:
[ report this ]
From a poster's sig on wearesc.com ...
FACTS ABOUT THE STREAKS
.......................................................UCLA............USC
Years..........................................1991-1998...1999-present
Consecutive wins vs.oppt........................8...........7
Total margin of victory.........................57..........148
Average score.......................................32-25.....39-18
Highest ranking during streak...................2...........1
# of weeks at that ranking.......................3..........33
Pac-10 championships...............................3...........4
Rose Bowl victories during streak..............0...........1
Rose Bowl victories during oppt's streak...0...........1
Other major bowl victories during streak...0...........2
Heisman Trophy winners............................0...........3
National Championships.............................0...........2
[ report this ]
For the simple fact that USC strongly pushed for the absurd penalties imposed by the Pac-10 (stronger than what the NCAA had agreed to impose) on the University of Washington in the early 90's, I'd like to see USC get screwed.
The Mike Ornstein stuff is what could get the program. There is no way that Pete Carroll doesn't know who Mike Ornstein is, according to John Clayton, anyone who's been in the NFL within the past 20 years is familiar with him and what role he plays. If Ornstein was welcome in the locker room, you can and probably should see USC get hit with the 'Lack of Institutional Control' charge.
Simply for the karma factor I'd like to see them get hammered.