"They're Duke and SMU is not"

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:14 pm

Monica?

dcpony · Post by **dcpony** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:22 pm

Current STUDent wrote:
dcpony wrote: Sorry looks like I'm going to be at work late tonight. Congress is in session.

Are you a congressman?

Yeah right dude. But we have some clients concerned about the energy and farm bills

EastStang · Post by **EastStang** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:26 pm

And its those darned midnight committee staff meetings where the mischief begins. Keep them honest or not, dc depending on who your clients are.

RE Tycoon · Post by **RE Tycoon** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:29 pm

dcpony wrote:
Yeah right dude. But we have some clients concerned about the energy and farm bills

Aren't we all?

dcpony · Post by **dcpony** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:42 pm

Current STUDent wrote:
dcpony wrote:
Yeah right dude. But we have some clients concerned about the energy and farm bills

Aren't we all?

The bills are probably going to get vetoed by Dubbya anyway.

Speaking of Duke, my Dukie Repub office neighbor is more dialed into the administration's moves on the bill. I'll just say that his boss is a former high ranking Dubbya advisor...for a Dukie he's all right.

08 is going to be fun ...if you think nothing gets done in Congress in any given year..presidential election years are even more active...

SMUMan02 · Post by **SMUMan02** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:43 pm

Maybe we should all get out our wallets and write another check to make sure this happens?

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:35 pm

FWMustangGirl wrote:Wow. And people think SMU alums are snobs.

we are very similar, aren't we? all those who refer to UNT and UH grads as 7-11 employees, etc... it's the same with Duke in their part of the world...they poke fun at UNC and NCSU grads...except they at least have a great bball program and we don't.

I don't get the sense that TCU is looked on as unfavorably as SMU. What's your take on that being a Ft Worth person?

OC Mustang · Post by **OC Mustang** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:59 pm

Charleston Pony wrote:
FWMustangGirl wrote:Wow. And people think SMU alums are snobs.

I don't get the sense that TCU is looked on as unfavorably as SMU. What's your take on that being a Ft Worth person?

Competitively, I'd say that TCU is an allergy to the world...a pimple on education's [deleted], and deserving of the

and

awards.

But realistically, SMU, Baylor, & TCU are comparable in student. The variance (think statistics) in students are different, and can differ year to year. But by and large, they are similar enough to warrant comparison, not contrast. Rice has overlap, but by and large their student body, collectively speaking, has a more academic bent...in fact, I think if there is an Ivy-type school in the Southwest (similar to Stanford in the Northwest), I'd call it Rice. Same goes for Vandy.

deepellumfrog · Post by **deepellumfrog** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:50 pm

OC Mustang wrote:
Charleston Pony wrote:
FWMustangGirl wrote:Wow. And people think SMU alums are snobs.

I don't get the sense that TCU is looked on as unfavorably as SMU. What's your take on that being a Ft Worth person?

Competitively, I'd say that TCU is an allergy to the world...a pimple on education's [deleted], and deserving of the and awards.

But realistically, SMU, Baylor, & TCU are comparable in student. The variance (think statistics) in students are different, and can differ year to year. But by and large, they are similar enough to warrant comparison, not contrast. Rice has overlap, but by and large their student body, collectively speaking, has a more academic bent...in fact, I think if there is an Ivy-type school in the Southwest (similar to Stanford in the Northwest), I'd call it Rice. Same goes for Vandy.

See you tommorow nite for the hoops game!!

FWMustangGirl · Post by **FWMustangGirl** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:44 pm

Charleston Pony wrote:
FWMustangGirl wrote:Wow. And people think SMU alums are snobs.

I don't get the sense that TCU is looked on as unfavorably as SMU. What's your take on that being a Ft Worth person?

They aren't. Of course in FW, TCU gets far more local support than SMU does in Dallas. The kids are mostly the same. There are trust fund babies and those who struggle to pay rent and tuition just like at SMU. For some reason, they don't get the reputation SMU has. Believe me, there are loads of snobby TCU kids and alums running around.

gostangs · Post by **gostangs** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:14 pm

Main differences are that the Froggies are more Texan - whereas SMU is over 50% non Texas. Both mostly spoiled rich white kids

Also - although they think this is wrong - we have a slightly better student in general - although not statistically that significant.

School wise we are a pretty comanding 30 slots above them in the rankings - and when combined with a endowment that will close to double in 3-4 yrs and an increasing giving percentage by our alumns could move us closer to Vandy/Wake Forest etc......Rice is in an academic category all their own in Texas - but just meeting some of their students answers the question of whether it is worth it or not.

Our single biggest issue that is keeping us from rising much in the rankings is the percentage of annual giving from our alums - only 15-20 % currently and it needs to about double before we make any big moves in the rankings - (it is one of the ranking criteria).

peruna11 · Post by **peruna11** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:21 pm

Being from ft worth myself, i would take it another step and say TCU draws a great deal from the metroplex, especially Fort Worth and Arlington. At my high school, TCU was known as Grade 13, as close to 30% of each graduating class ended up there.

In addition to that, SMU students seem to move back to where they came moreso than at TCU, or move to different job markets altogether after graduation. A majority of people i know that went to TCU still live in Ft Worth (or at least the metroplex) and will/would never move.

I think a combination of these 2 factors help explain TCU's greater fan base and community involvement/support in the last 10 years or so.

perunapower · Post by **perunapower** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:25 pm

gostangs wrote:Main differences are that the Froggies are more Texan - whereas SMU is over 50% non Texas. Both mostly spoiled rich white kids

Where'd you see that SMU is over 50% non-Texan? It's held pretty steady at 85% over the past 5 years.

http://smu.edu/ir/Publications/Trends_2006/HEADCOUNTS_2006.pdf

CalallenStang · Post by **CalallenStang** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:28 pm

perunapower wrote:
gostangs wrote:Main differences are that the Froggies are more Texan - whereas SMU is over 50% non Texas. Both mostly spoiled rich white kids

Where'd you see that SMU is over 50% non-Texan? It's held pretty steady at 85% over the past 5 years.

http://smu.edu/ir/Publications/Trends_2006/HEADCOUNTS_2006.pdf

That cannot be correct.

I know for a fact that this year's entering class was over 50% non-Texan

huskerpony · Post by **huskerpony** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:30 pm

It was always about 45% Texan / 55% non-Texan when I was there.