If deemed necessary, reported comments will be removed within 7 - 10 days but usually sooner. Please submit this report ONLY if you STRONGLY believe this needs to be removed. Multiple illegitimate reports slow down the administrative process of removing the actual and more seriously unfavorable content.

Poster Name:
SMUsorority

Poster Message:
OMG This little "debate" is funny. I'll start off by saying i'm a Texas native and I'm an aggie fan, though I never applied because it was never my intention to stay in Tx (was gonna go to UofArk). Reputation wise, UT DOES have a better reputation. However, it's not comparable to Princeton, Yale or Harvard. The only schools I've ever seen compared are Rice and Vandy, mostly because they try hard to be labeled the Harvards and Princetons of the south. Money wise, SMU is a private schools funded by very wealthy and prominent alumni. Football wise, well duh, UT>SMU. There's no debate there. But it's Texas, therefore, it is a part of the debate I would say SMU is more elitist because of the people who go here. You have heirs and heiresses of corporations/companies, sons/daughters of politicians and old money. Money runs SMU. And as someone who was a GDI their first year, it IS virtually impossible to enjoy school or have a social life unless you're greek. You find out who your real friends are after recruitment, because they all vanish. In terms of Greek life, I'd say they're about the same. Both are competitive, but you're comparing a private school(with less students) to a state school (with many students). I also want to add, that, if it weren't for money, certain houses here would be gone. but the alumni also tend to fund our school. Obviously in college you're gonna have people from money and people who are poor. But the majority of students at SMU are wealthy.