Started By
Message
re: The State Schools vs. the non-State schools in the SEC.
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:42 pm to texashorn
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:42 pm to texashorn
I thought the Air Force was the CO school and I'm not sure there is a huge difference between KSU and KU. Aren't they about the same size & same rankings.
Anyway you go one claiming A&M. I don't blame you. I wouldn't want to settle for tu either.
Anyway you go one claiming A&M. I don't blame you. I wouldn't want to settle for tu either.
0
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:43 pm to oman
I do believe that there was once a movement to rename A&M as Texas State, but it didn't get far. They wanted to keep their heritage (even though A&M doesn't officially stand for anything, any longer), and that is great.
A&M also almost lost its PUF funding during the 1960s (it was going to go to the University of Houston), because A&M didn't allow women and corps membership was mandatory. The A&M leadership eventually pushed to remove compulsory corps service and allowed women to attend and be in the corps, too. But don't think it was really some kind of statesman-like thinking to do so, they just wanted to keep their state funding.
A&M also almost lost its PUF funding during the 1960s (it was going to go to the University of Houston), because A&M didn't allow women and corps membership was mandatory. The A&M leadership eventually pushed to remove compulsory corps service and allowed women to attend and be in the corps, too. But don't think it was really some kind of statesman-like thinking to do so, they just wanted to keep their state funding.
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:45 pm to texashorn
What does any of that have to do with anything?
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:46 pm to texashorn
Ohio St?
MIT?
Missouri?
Minnesota?
Wisconsin?
Move on from this stupid Randy Duke talking point.
MIT?
Missouri?
Minnesota?
Wisconsin?
Move on from this stupid Randy Duke talking point.
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:48 pm to texashorn
You're just rambling at this point
Posted on 6/22/15 at 10:52 pm to p_bubel
I'm not sure what your list denotes? MIT is a private school, by the way.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the crux of A&M's little brother syndrome. They think the University of Texas at Austin stole their destiny as being the state school of Texas. They'll drone on into the night to fill you full of bullshite.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the crux of A&M's little brother syndrome. They think the University of Texas at Austin stole their destiny as being the state school of Texas. They'll drone on into the night to fill you full of bullshite.
Posted on 6/22/15 at 11:00 pm to texashorn
quote:
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the crux of A&M's little brother syndrome. They think the University of Texas at Austin stole their destiny as being the state school of Texas. They'll drone on into the night to fill you full of bullshite.
Good grief. Destiny!
Good luck against Iowa St this year. Should be another riveting squeaker.
This post was edited on 6/22/15 at 11:01 pm
Posted on 6/23/15 at 12:10 am to texashorn
quote:
I'm not sure what your list denotes? MIT is a private school, by the way.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the crux of A&M's little brother syndrome. They think the University of Texas at Austin stole their destiny as being the state school of Texas. They'll drone on into the night to fill you full of bullshite.
STFU and hit the fricking road you fricking longwhorn bone smoker. Take YOUR bullshite back to the bevo board before one of us come track you down and drag your sorry arse to a Sonic somewhere and make an example out of you for all the other ghey whorns to see.
Adios coño.
Posted on 6/23/15 at 12:16 am to texashorn
quote:
They'll drone on into the night to fill you full of bullshite.
quote:
I do believe that there was once a movement to rename A&M as Texas State, but it didn't get far. They wanted to keep their heritage (even though A&M doesn't officially stand for anything, any longer), and that is great.
A&M also almost lost its PUF funding during the 1960s (it was going to go to the University of Houston), because A&M didn't allow women and corps membership was mandatory. The A&M leadership eventually pushed to remove compulsory corps service and allowed women to attend and be in the corps, too. But don't think it was really some kind of statesman-like thinking to do so, they just wanted to keep their state funding
Posted on 6/26/15 at 6:53 am to DorchesterGamecock
quote:
South Carolina has one flagship... University of South Carolina... Clemson is a good school academically, it's engineering programs really carry its ranking. Everything else is pretty average. But still... it is not the flagship school of South Carolina.. UofSC is the larger school, spends more on research, has a higher research rating by Carnegie, gets more research funding from the government/NSF, has a more diversified academic offering, has a larger endowment, larger enrollment, larger alumni base, is about 100 years older, has a larger graduate program (including a law and medical school), has more representation in the state legislature and a larger fan base throughout the state by a ratio of 2:1 Clemson University itself was created to spite the University of South Carolina.. but still, we're blessed to have two great universities in a state of this size..
Why is being a 'flagship' so important? It is one of the two main public universities in SC. I don't think being a land grant university makes it a less university than a flag ship.
Clemson was created to offer agricultural and mechananical science programs that SC did not offer, similar to all land grant colleges. Nothing to do with spite of SC.
Clemson offers everything that SC does at the undergrad/grad level and has an architecture school that SC does not have.
More engineering / science research happens at Clemson. What research is really going on at SC given it touts itself as a business / liberal arts school.
This post was edited on 6/26/15 at 6:54 am
Page 9 of 9
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News