Bragging about my alma matre (UCLA)

[David Abramowitz]

Out of 25, 19 are sports related. That considered, you have convinced me to attend UCLA should I wish to change a careers, and pusue full time employment as a halfback. :-) Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

The fact that it was a post on the UCLA Softball site might have something to do with the reason the bullets are sports related, eh? Of course, if you wish to change careers to Computer Science, it's probably one of THE top choices also. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer . "David Abramowitz" wrote in message news:4dfdbbff.0@WebX.WawyahGHajS... | Out of 25, 19 are sports related. That considered, you have convinced me to attend UCLA should I wish to change a careers, and pusue full time employment as a halfback. :-) | | Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

I agree with David - UCLA sounds like the place to go for a sports career! That bit about the average house price within a 3 mile radius is interesting. I take it that finding off-campus housing is a bit tricky, eh? Are they trying to attract smart students? Or wealthy students? BTW, when my "alma mater" (Queen's) won the Canadian university football championship in 1978, two of the top players on the team were enrolled in med school. I do find it strange that a university prides itself so much on its sports programs.

[Guest.Visitor]

As to the housing: Yes, it's ironic that UCLA, the public school, is surrounded by BelAir and Westwood, some of the most expensive housing in the country while USC, the exclusive, expensive private school, is in Watts which is in the middle of south central L.A. It's not a huge problem for most UCLA students since it's mostly a commuter college. I lived at home during my student tenure. UCLA prides itself in a lot of things. One of them being in the top 5 academic universities in the country, year after year. It stands tall with the likes of Harvard, Stanford, et al. What's unusual is that a top academic university, is also THE top athletic university. Nothing wrong with priding oneself in athletic achievement. In fact, most of the athletic achievement is in sports that are non-revenue producing. National championships in sports such as track, soccer, softball, tennis, gymnastics, golf, volleyball, etc. These athletes aren't coming to UCLA to make a professional living of it, they're coming to UCLA to better their education. In fact, if a student is a 4.0 in high school it is very difficult to get admitted as a freshman. It takes around a 4.2 and a lot of extra curricular activity. You'd better be passing all of those AP tests! Only 4,000 of the 30,000 students are freshman. UCLA wants only serious students. And...no part timers need apply. Only FULL TIME day students are permitted. Extension and evening classes will not apply toward a degree. While you might find southern schools bigger in football or Midwestern schools bigger in basketball, well I take that back, (not sure what the Midwestern schools would be bigger in), UCLA is, by far, the most rounded in athletics. While I majored in Computer Science (UCLA is the home of the Internet) and didn't play sports, the sports were certainly entertaining and made for a great community spirit. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "Hans Boldt" wrote in message news:4dfdbbff.2@WebX.WawyahGHajS... | I agree with David - UCLA sounds like the place to go for a sports career! | | That bit about the average house price within a 3 mile radius is interesting. I take it that finding off-campus housing is a bit tricky, eh? Are they trying to attract smart students? Or wealthy students? | | BTW, when my "alma mater" (Queen's) won the Canadian university football championship in 1978, two of the top players on the team were enrolled in med school. I do find it strange that a university prides itself so much on its sports programs.

[Guest.Visitor]

I'm not arguing that UCLA isn't a good school, it clearly is. But from the fact that it has a good althetic program, it does not necessarily follow logically that the academic programs are also good. BTW, my own alma mater (Queen's) is consistently rated as one of the top schools in Canada (along with rivals the University of Toronto and McGill). In contrast with UCLA, most students at Queens's (not living at home) live within a short walking distance of the campus near downtown Kingston. That also significantly adds to the University experience. (Is it true that no one "walks" in SoCal? ;-)

[Guest.Visitor]

Hans, Ok, I see your if-then logic. You're saying "If a school has good athletics, then it has good academics" is not necessarily true. I agree. USC comes to mind. ;-) It's certainly not true that nobody walks in California. The streets are flooded with walkers in my neighborhood when I go to work in the morning. However, their walking is for health reasons, not for getting to a destination. Walking is difficult for going to/from destinations for several reasons. My neighborhood, like so many here is filled with hills which doesn't lend itself to walking. If you've been to Southern California then you know it's covered with mountains and most of the living is in valleys or foothills. Also, because California grew up in the "automobile age" many cities are spread out and so is housing and shopping. It's not uncommon to be 2-3 miles from the nearest shopping. And, even the most avid walkers will avoid walking 2 miles of hills to carry back 2 bags of groceries. Jeez, my family alone uses 1 gallon of milk per day, that would amount to a lot of walking with heavy objects! Most of us find ourselves too busy to include walking, especially with kids involved. I have 3 daughters. The oldest one is in performing choir and has many competitions throughout the year. My middle one plays travel softball, high school softball, travel basketball and high school basketball. My youngest, a 6th grader, plays travel softball and travel basketball. At least 2-3 times per month our weekends are on the road, in a hotel, with a sports team. There's simply no time for walking. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer. "Hans Boldt" wrote in message news:4dfdbbff.4@WebX.WawyahGHajS... | I'm not arguing that UCLA isn't a good school, it clearly is. But from the fact that it has a good althetic program, it does not necessarily follow logically that the academic programs are also good. | | BTW, my own alma mater (Queen's) is consistently rated as one of the top schools in Canada (along with rivals the University of Toronto and McGill). In contrast with UCLA, most students at Queens's (not living at home) live within a short walking distance of the campus near downtown Kingston. That also significantly adds to the University experience. (Is it true that no one "walks" in SoCal? ;-)

[rdean400@yahoo.com]

While I majored in Computer Science (UCLA is the home of the Internet) and didn't play sports, the sports were certainly entertaining and made for a great community spirit.

No one University can claim to be the home of the Internet, especially in its present form. U of Illinois can stake at least as big a claim to majority of the software that operates on the Internet. Mosaic was an NCSA project, and was the root of both IE and Netscape. HTTPD is the root of Apache, which operates 60+% of all web servers. Wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft used HTTPD source code in IIS, either.

[David Abramowitz]

Q.: How many Californians does it take to change a light bulb? A.: 47 - - - Only one actually changes the bulb, , , , , the other fourty six sit around and "share the experience".

[Guest.Visitor]

I'm sure most of the opinions we easterners have of residents of the "left coast" aren't really true! ;-) Actually, I do know for a fact that SoCal'ers do walk. My cousin recently bought a house in LA, and he has to climb 90 steps from the street to the front door! Even though he didn't have his drivers license when he arrived in LA, the car rental place said "No problem! We'll give you driving lessons!"

[Guest.Visitor]

Robert Dean said: No one University can claim to be the home of the Internet, especially in its present form. I'd say that Computer Science historians would disagree with that. It's been pretty well celebrated for years that in October 1969 Leonard Kleinrock was the first to send information over what became the Internet. It was October 1969when the Internet was born (as ARPAnet those days) and it was a message sent from UCLA to Stanford. The design was basically Kleinrock's. You can hear about it directly from Vinton Cerf's mouth (another UCLA student/professor) at : http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Int...netCame2B.html Or you can get more info at PBS: http://www.pbs.org/internet/timeline/ or directly from the UCLA engineering department at : http://www.engineer.ucla.edu/stories/netis30.htm Or... http://uclabruins.fansonly.com/schoo...s-is-ucla.html Just go to google and search for: ucla "birth of the internet" and you'll get an eyeful. There may be lots of things to argue about but the birth of the Internet is well documented. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.