Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: More economically relevant state in the future
California 195 56.85%
Texas 148 43.15%
Voters: 343. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-29-2014, 12:05 AM
 
1,207 posts, read 1,281,726 times
Reputation: 1426

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Folks3000 View Post
According to USNews? Gosh why don't you just post one of those stupid Forbes lists that come out twice an hour. Most don't take USNews seriously for university rankings. Most in the Midwest don't know much about Rice University other than maybe the name. You can bet they know UC, Standford and UCLA!
I was unaware of USNews reputation. I stand corrected.

Also, let's be fair here. With the exception of Stanford, those schools increased their name recognition through their sports programs rather than their academics. This isn't a knock against them; they are top tier schools academically. But Rice lacks name recognition mainly because they aren't seen in the media a lot. There are probably people in other regions who know nothing about University of Chicago, UC Boulder, etc. other than hearing the name a few times here or there. Regardless of their name recognition, these are all top research universities in the U.S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-29-2014, 03:37 PM
 
557 posts, read 715,197 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian View Post
I was unaware of USNews reputation. I stand corrected.

Also, let's be fair here. With the exception of Stanford, those schools increased their name recognition through their sports programs rather than their academics. This isn't a knock against them; they are top tier schools academically. But Rice lacks name recognition mainly because they aren't seen in the media a lot. There are probably people in other regions who know nothing about University of Chicago, UC Boulder, etc. other than hearing the name a few times here or there. Regardless of their name recognition, these are all top research universities in the U.S.
Somehow, I don't think UC-Berkeley is known because of its sports program. I have never heard anyone talk about a sports team at UCLA or UC in the Midwest. People talk about the world renown research done there. Just look at your periodic table of elements if you want to know about UC's stature (Berkelium (sp?)/ Californium/ etc) I don't think UC Boulder is super well known, but the University of Chicago is definitely well known outside the Midwest. Chicago School of Economics, for example. This is coming from someone who personally doesn't like the U of Chicago, but I can certainly admit it is more well known than Rice. Certainly Rice is a good school, but among the superstars like UC, UCLA, Stanford, U of Chicago, MIT, Harvard, Yale, etc? No way! Not even UT ranks that highly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2014, 04:05 PM
 
Location: a bar
2,722 posts, read 6,110,810 times
Reputation: 2978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folks3000 View Post
I have never heard anyone talk about a sports team at UCLA or UC in the Midwest.
Really? UCLA has a phenomenal basketball program. They're a fixture at the NCAA tournament with 17 final four appearances and 11 tournament championships. Alumn include Bill Walton, Reggie Miller, Kareem...

They have a solid football program too. Troy Aikman is a former UCLA Bruin.

Personally, when I think UCLA I think sports. UC Berkley...I think nerds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2014, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Upper East Side of Texas
12,498 posts, read 26,986,110 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folks3000 View Post
Not when you have an Inland Empire like LA or South and North Bay like San Francisco. Not inlcuding those areas in the metros is ludicrous!
I've been to the Bay Area. People don't live in San Jose & commute to San Francisco to work every morning. That would just be insane.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2014, 04:28 PM
 
1,461 posts, read 2,109,523 times
Reputation: 1036
You can't be serious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2014, 07:08 PM
 
Location: Upper East Side of Texas
12,498 posts, read 26,986,110 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalAtheist View Post
You can't be serious.
That's a 50+ mile commute. BART only goes as far south as Milbrae.

You'd be insane to do it every day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2014, 10:13 PM
 
557 posts, read 715,197 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
That's a 50+ mile commute. BART only goes as far south as Milbrae.

You'd be insane to do it every day.
Or you know.. Caltrain express train with a 50 min commute..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2014, 10:15 PM
 
557 posts, read 715,197 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
I've been to the Bay Area. People don't live in San Jose & commute to San Francisco to work every morning. That would just be insane.
Are you crazy? Have you heard of Caltrain??? It is full of ppl who do that commute and farther. Commuting from Sunnyvale to SF is like commuting from Schaumberg to Chicago on Metra. SJ to SF is like Aurora to Chicago on Metra timewise. You are the only one here who has no idea what you are talking about! BART comes down to Fremont and is BEING EXTENDED TO DTSJ! That would be like having Metra AND the Chicago El going to a city but not having it be part of the metro. Laughable.

Last edited by Folks3000; 05-29-2014 at 10:23 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2014, 08:50 AM
 
1,207 posts, read 1,281,726 times
Reputation: 1426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folks3000 View Post
Somehow, I don't think UC-Berkeley is known because of its sports program. I have never heard anyone talk about a sports team at UCLA or UC in the Midwest. People talk about the world renown research done there. Just look at your periodic table of elements if you want to know about UC's stature (Berkelium (sp?)/ Californium/ etc) I don't think UC Boulder is super well known, but the University of Chicago is definitely well known outside the Midwest. Chicago School of Economics, for example. This is coming from someone who personally doesn't like the U of Chicago, but I can certainly admit it is more well known than Rice. Certainly Rice is a good school, but among the superstars like UC, UCLA, Stanford, U of Chicago, MIT, Harvard, Yale, etc? No way! Not even UT ranks that highly.
I misunderstood you. When you say UC, I thought you were talking about the Bears, who are better known for their sports teams. Berkeley is known for their academics, no doubt. UCLA is definitely better known for its sports teams. And in the South, most people I've spoken with that aren't from the Midwest aren't really aware of University of Chicago or Rice. They do know the Ivy League and California schools.

I don't know why UT keeps being brought up. It's better known as a business school, not a research university.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2014, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,134,401 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
I've been to the Bay Area. People don't live in San Jose & commute to San Francisco to work every morning. That would just be insane.
It's difficult to believe that you would form and broadcast opinions about a place you know even less about than Houston, but there you go again...

Are you really ready to go on record with this based on your one "drive through San Francisco" when you were 15? Ask yourself this: if no one commutes between San Jose and San Francisco, why are there two major freeways that begin and end between the two citities--one of them is specifically a commuter route that doesn't go through any developed area for most of its run? (280 goes through the hills on the west side to relieve traffic on 101).

As mentioned above, there's also heavy commuter rail between the two in CalTrain--a dedicated line between San Jose and San Francisco, specifically designed for commuting--including express service that only makes a few stops in between.

Where do you get this stuff?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top