PonyFans.com

I wonder if I should enlighten Cougar King about the nature of his school by relating here the experiences and attitudes of two UH graduates I know? Maybe I should also include the observations of my friend who is a professor at UH? Maybe my own experiences with UH would prove interesting?

Naw, the truth is crappy.

CK, don't you even talk to other Cougar fans? The detrements of UH and the woes of its boosters are a constant feature of any UH discussion.

CalallenStang wrote:

Agree with the probable reasons. All the more reason for them to not be in Division 1

Sounds like you're weary of all the [deleted] whoopings SMU gets from UH on a regular basis.

Rayburn wrote:I wonder if I should enlighten Cougar King about the nature of his school by relating here the experiences and attitudes of two UH graduates I know? Maybe I should also include the observations of my friend who is a professor at UH? Maybe my own experiences with UH would prove interesting?

Naw, the truth is crappy.

CK, don't you even talk to other Cougar fans? The detrements of UH and the woes of its boosters are a constant feature of any UH discussion.

Again, how long ago was it when the two grads you claim to know went to UH? It's also ironic that we have more beds on campus than some Big 12 schools and almost more beds than SMU undergrads. (We have roughly 6000) Yet, we have the rep of the commuter school.

Also, the neon donkeys in your avi and sig are obnoxious.

Cougar King wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:

Agree with the probable reasons. All the more reason for them to not be in Division 1

Sounds like you're weary of all the [deleted] whoopings SMU gets from UH on a regular basis.

No (72-42). It's about the mission of the university. Division I institutions should primarily be "residential" universities that draw students from all across the state, nation, and world. That's what you see with schools such as Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, USC, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, etc.

Institutions that primarily exist to serve those within the local area who for whatever reason do not have the choice to go out of the area (Houston, UTSA, UNT, Memphis, UTEP) should focus upon their mission -- which is to provide a quality education at an excellent price -- and leave the frills (and expenses) of Division I sports to those schools whose students have made the decision to invest in a "residential" (sometimes called "traditional") university.

CalallenStang wrote:No (72-42). It's about the mission of the university. Division I institutions should primarily be "residential" universities that draw students from all across the state, nation, and world. That's what you see with schools such as Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, USC, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, etc.

Institutions that primarily exist to serve those within the local area who for whatever reason do not have the choice to go out of the area (Houston, UTSA, UNT, Memphis, UTEP) should focus upon their mission -- which is to provide a quality education at an excellent price -- and leave the frills (and expenses) of Division I sports to those schools whose students have made the decision to invest in a "residential" (sometimes called "traditional") university.

Spoken like a true snob.

Cougar King wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:No (72-42). It's about the mission of the university. Division I institutions should primarily be "residential" universities that draw students from all across the state, nation, and world. That's what you see with schools such as Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, USC, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, etc.

Institutions that primarily exist to serve those within the local area who for whatever reason do not have the choice to go out of the area (Houston, UTSA, UNT, Memphis, UTEP) should focus upon their mission -- which is to provide a quality education at an excellent price -- and leave the frills (and expenses) of Division I sports to those schools whose students have made the decision to invest in a "residential" (sometimes called "traditional") university.

Spoken like a true snob.

How is focusing on a university's mission and what that means for proper choices a form of snobbery?

CalallenStang wrote:
How is focusing on a university's mission and what that means for proper choices a form of snobbery?

You're just saying an elegant version of the following; "Schools who are for the common man should not be allowed in division 1 sports. The highest level of athletics should be reserved for the blue-blooded schools, the old boys club."

Cougar King wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:
How is focusing on a university's mission and what that means for proper choices a form of snobbery?

You're just saying an elegant version of the following; "Schools who are for the common man should not be allowed in division 1 sports. The highest level of athletics should be reserved for the blue-blooded schools, the old boys club."

No. Public universities, such as Texas A&M, which have a very low cost of attendance and are thus accessible to anyone, but also have a focus on drawing students from throughout the state to their residential campus, certainly can play D-1 sports, so long as they maintain a 50% or higher 6-year graduation rate. If they drop below that, they should be required to drop their sports to a lower level and invest in student support services, etc.

Universities for whom the primary mission is to serve the local community as opposed to being a residential, "campus life" oriented school, should play at a lower level and instead focus in things like student support services/daycares/etc. to help people access a university education, unless they are already so excellent at achieving their goals that they have a 6 year graduation rate of greater than 50%.

Your viewpoint puts sports over the common welfare of the people in our communities. Education is far more important than athletic pursuits, and we should strive to allow anyone who is willing to put forth the required effort the ability to obtain a degree.

Cougar King wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:No (72-42). It's about the mission of the university. Division I institutions should primarily be "residential" universities that draw students from all across the state, nation, and world. That's what you see with schools such as Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, USC, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, etc.

Institutions that primarily exist to serve those within the local area who for whatever reason do not have the choice to go out of the area (Houston, UTSA, UNT, Memphis, UTEP) should focus upon their mission -- which is to provide a quality education at an excellent price -- and leave the frills (and expenses) of Division I sports to those schools whose students have made the decision to invest in a "residential" (sometimes called "traditional") university.

Spoken like a true snob.

Look. I am originally from Robstown, Texas where the high school mascot is the freaking "Cottonpickers." As a child, my mother had to pick cotton in the fields around South Texas with the other children of Mexican immigrants. When she wanted to escape a life of poverty, she went to a small college in San Antonio that (1) accepted Mexican-Americans and (2) kept costs down. Ultimately, she became a school teacher. My father, who came from a blue collar background, attended "XXXX Teacher's College" very similar to UNT. Using their education, my parents sent their daughter to ND and their son to SMU.

There is a huge need for low cost educational options for children who cannot (or should not) spend enormous sums of money on college. If you don't believe me, do a Google Search on the Student Loan Crisis facing many young people. There is nothing wrong with UH's mission any more than there is anything wrong with UNT's mission.

But, UH has very little in common with UT-Austin or TAMU. It has very little in common with Rice, SMU, TCU, or Baylor.

Well said - D'dog.

We have the same comparison here with the UC-System & the Cal-State one.

Both systems produce opportunities for their students to be millionaires someday if they work hard enough.

Pony^ wrote:

Cougar King wrote:Out of curiosity, when did your relative live on campus? (As in what years). We have built new dorms called Cougar Village about 2 years ago and are in the process of building Cougar Village II and Cougar Place which will be opened in Fall 2013. Over the last decade, more and more people have been staying on campus or at the apartments near campus that the demand has skyrocketed, prompting the new dorms to be built. I do like the idea of requiring freshmen to live on campus, I think that's an excellent idea as a matter of fact.

I did not have the luxury of visiting many campuses mainly because I couldn't afford it at the time. So, I relied on brochures, reviews, college websites, message boards and the occasional school field trip to a college campus. (Because of school, I was able to visit A&M and UH).

I figured SMU was a rich person's school because of when I went to UNT initially, every SMU student I met in Dallas was a [deleted] who drove a luxury car. Every individual review I read about SMU, along with the student-written guide about SMU on Collegeprowler and to the admission to many posters on here and the uncommon snobbery I see on here didn't help much either.

Regarding admission standards, right now is the highest UH admission standards have ever been and it was announced recently that the standards are being raised even higher in the oncoming semesters, so that will be interesting to see. I have heard about a few people and a cousin of mine who recently applied to UH and were rejected and had to go to a Southland or SWAC school instead.

To answer your question, he presently attends University of Houston. He was accepted to UT in November and I assume that means he starts there in January. Apparently, he is not alone:

Transfer, Retention and Graduation Rates:

•First Year Student Retention (full-time students): 81%
•Transfer Out Rate: 24%
•4-Year Graduation Rate: 15%
•6-Year Graduation Rate: 46%

http://collegeapps.about.com/od/collegeprofiles/p/houston.htm

24% of UH students transfer out. Why? Honestly, UH needs to do something about those graduation rates. I imagine graduation rates would improve if so many students did not transfer to other universities.

If you were interested in SMU, I'm sure the admissions office would have put you in touch with some minority students for you to question. Further, it's hard to believe that you could not get to Dallas if you were interested in SMU, especially if you were at UNT.

For your information, "Minority undergraduate and graduate students constitute 25 percent of SMU's student population [and] each year, approximately 1,000 undergraduates (17 percent) qualify to receive federal Pell Grants, based on low family income." http://smu.edu/impact/LeadingNationalUniversity.asp

See also: Editorial: SMU stereotype no longer works

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20120420-editorial-smu-stereotype-no-longer-works.ece

25 percent of its students are minorities.

10 percent are from abroad, with China leading the way.

50 percent come from outside Texas.

70 percent receive financial aid based upon merit or need.

17 percent qualify for Pell grants based upon low family income.

404 endowed scholarships have been added since 1997.

In short, the school is diversifying - and has been for some time.

There were only about 200 African American students that went to SMU when I was there in the mid 80's. Just curious if you or anyone else know what the number is now?

Wow, so much UH talk. I went because it was cheaper for me than UT or A&M and I was being recruited for the Honors College. The UH president has done an excellent job of building lots of beds on campus to the point of having the second largest number (directly on campus) than any school in Texas other than A&M, by 2014. Of course, not a ton of UH students live within biking distance.

SMU is a great school, has lots of funding with supportive alumni and excellent leadership. I believe I read recently that the median average family income of SMU students is around $200K. So while 17% qualify for pell grants, it's a distinct minority. It is certainly more diverse than Highland Park HS -- both ethnically, geographical experiences and possibly economically -- but it's far more like HPHS than the general population. UH is a bit more like the gen pop with few on the poor end.

The low grad rate at UH is due to the amount of people who work full or part time and/or go to college PT. Fewer students at UH graduate with debt versus SMU, but they also graduate with lower paying jobs on average.

On the SMU front, since I live in the 'hood, what I want to see is more people choosing SMU in state vs. UT. Plenty do but I want to see more of it. The best students will get plenty of aid and the experience is much richer thanks to smaller classes and more services per head.

UH is doing fine with more beds, sports are solid and endowment is same or higher than Tech's. As a sidenote, my niece is in the Top 8% at Lufkin HS and I'm encouraging her to go to UH vs. community college. [Single parent household]. It's somewhat ironic that she could get into UT with the Top 8% but she isn't considering them or anything out of town due to cost and family situation. UH would give her a great community if she lives on campus and she could be in the band. Then again, maybe getting some "basics out of the way" at a minimal cost and then transferring will work. I think doing it that way sets your expectations lower. College admissions dynamics are pretty fascinating.

Cougar King wrote:Also, the neon donkeys in your avi and sig are obnoxious.

May they burn your eyes, pussycat!

Rayburn wrote:

Cougar King wrote:Also, the neon donkeys in your avi and sig are obnoxious.

May they burn your eyes, pussycat!

6-6 is a successful and well-accomplished season for $moo but a massive disappointment for UH. Also congrats on winning your Super Bowl against us for the first time in almost a decade.

Cougar King wrote:6-6 is a successful and well-accomplished season for $moo but a massive disappointment for UH. Also congrats on winning your Super Bowl against us for the first time in almost a decade.

Disappointment is the main course at all Cougar High gatherings. It's served in heaps. Enjoy reruns of the Tony Levine show this long, cold winter pussycat.

Funny that the Super Bowl was less attended than the TCU or A&M games. Must've been due to opposing fans' attendance.