Do most UVA choose UVA over privates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a Public Ivy with Grounds being recognized as a World Heritage site. The University’s only flaw is a mediocre football team.

UVa is basically a brand new school. Harvard, Yale, Princeton were founded before the US was a country. Far less prestigious historically and does not compare to actual ivies. Your new kid on the block public is random and weird. Publics are not ivies.

Why is the age of UVA vs Ivies so important? Stanford was founded in the late 1800s. I would assume we all here consider it a prestigious university.

It's being mentioned because UVa does not and can not be compared to those universities which are members of the Ivy League. No one tries to call Stanford an Ivy because its reputation alone is sufficient for recognition and acclaim. UVa is not an Ivy in any regard.

What a laughable argument. UVA has passed W&M even though they were founded first. Is Hampden Sydney an Ivy since it was founded in 1775, about the same time Dartmouth was founded?

Absolutely not. UVa, William & Mary, Hampden Sydney are all non-ivy league schools. To suggest any of them is in any capacity is ludicrous.

So date of founding doesn’t matter, right?

Date of founding is one way non-ivy league schools are distinguished from those in the Ivy League.

Then W&M and Hampden-Sydney could be Ivy League.

Predictably, you have misunderstood the words you have read.

Maybe we should make this easier for you to understand. W&M were founded before some Ivy League institutions.

DP. Good grief. W&M is not an Ivy League school, regardless of its founding. Just stop.

According to the Ivy booster date of founding matters. Today we learned Hampden Sydney might be an Ivy. Thanks Ivy booster!

Do you think the Ivy League is inducting new members? They kinda stopped doing that after 1865.

You’re basically arguing that this comment is wrong for commenting that pencils have graphite in them, because batteries do too.

UVA was founded before 1865. Is UVA an Ivy?

The president must be 35 years old. Do you believe that All 35 year olds are president?

Of course not. Ask the poster that tried to suggest UVA was disqualified based on founding date. Obviously that was a poor argument. Tsk tsk

The Ivy League was founded as an athletic conference. At that time there would never have been a Southern school invited. Too far and too big of a cultural divide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a Public Ivy with Grounds being recognized as a World Heritage site. The University’s only flaw is a mediocre football team.

UVa is basically a brand new school. Harvard, Yale, Princeton were founded before the US was a country. Far less prestigious historically and does not compare to actual ivies. Your new kid on the block public is random and weird. Publics are not ivies.

Why is the age of UVA vs Ivies so important? Stanford was founded in the late 1800s. I would assume we all here consider it a prestigious university.

It's being mentioned because UVa does not and can not be compared to those universities which are members of the Ivy League. No one tries to call Stanford an Ivy because its reputation alone is sufficient for recognition and acclaim. UVa is not an Ivy in any regard.

What a laughable argument. UVA has passed W&M even though they were founded first. Is Hampden Sydney an Ivy since it was founded in 1775, about the same time Dartmouth was founded?

Absolutely not. UVa, William & Mary, Hampden Sydney are all non-ivy league schools. To suggest any of them is in any capacity is ludicrous.

So date of founding doesn’t matter, right?

Date of founding is one way non-ivy league schools are distinguished from those in the Ivy League.

Then W&M and Hampden-Sydney could be Ivy League.

Predictably, you have misunderstood the words you have read.

Maybe we should make this easier for you to understand. W&M were founded before some Ivy League institutions.

DP. Good grief. W&M is not an Ivy League school, regardless of its founding. Just stop.

According to the Ivy booster date of founding matters. Today we learned Hampden Sydney might be an Ivy. Thanks Ivy booster!

New low for UVA boosters. How stupid are you people?

It’s funny how some of you fall for troll posts. So grumpy.

Trolls don’t act stupid. They purposefully agitate with relevant information. That person is just dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a Public Ivy with Grounds being recognized as a World Heritage site. The University’s only flaw is a mediocre football team.

UVa is basically a brand new school. Harvard, Yale, Princeton were founded before the US was a country. Far less prestigious historically and does not compare to actual ivies. Your new kid on the block public is random and weird. Publics are not ivies.

Why is the age of UVA vs Ivies so important? Stanford was founded in the late 1800s. I would assume we all here consider it a prestigious university.

It's being mentioned because UVa does not and can not be compared to those universities which are members of the Ivy League. No one tries to call Stanford an Ivy because its reputation alone is sufficient for recognition and acclaim. UVa is not an Ivy in any regard.

What a laughable argument. UVA has passed W&M even though they were founded first. Is Hampden Sydney an Ivy since it was founded in 1775, about the same time Dartmouth was founded?

Absolutely not. UVa, William & Mary, Hampden Sydney are all non-ivy league schools. To suggest any of them is in any capacity is ludicrous.

So date of founding doesn’t matter, right?

Date of founding is one way non-ivy league schools are distinguished from those in the Ivy League.

Then W&M and Hampden-Sydney could be Ivy League.

Predictably, you have misunderstood the words you have read.

Maybe we should make this easier for you to understand. W&M were founded before some Ivy League institutions.

DP. Good grief. W&M is not an Ivy League school, regardless of its founding. Just stop.

According to the Ivy booster date of founding matters. Today we learned Hampden Sydney might be an Ivy. Thanks Ivy booster!

Do you think the Ivy League is inducting new members? They kinda stopped doing that after 1865.

You’re basically arguing that this comment is wrong for commenting that pencils have graphite in them, because batteries do too.

UVA was founded before 1865. Is UVA an Ivy?

You two are arguing the same thing, and I don’t know how you can’t tell.

You’re both arguing that there are other factors that go into whether something was inducted to the Ivy League. Objectively, age does matter, and there is no post-19th century institution that has joined the league. Addressing that doesn’t mean it’s the only point the other commenter made.

Once again, you are arguing the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a Public Ivy with Grounds being recognized as a World Heritage site. The University’s only flaw is a mediocre football team.

UVa is basically a brand new school. Harvard, Yale, Princeton were founded before the US was a country. Far less prestigious historically and does not compare to actual ivies. Your new kid on the block public is random and weird. Publics are not ivies.

Why is the age of UVA vs Ivies so important? Stanford was founded in the late 1800s. I would assume we all here consider it a prestigious university.

It's being mentioned because UVa does not and can not be compared to those universities which are members of the Ivy League. No one tries to call Stanford an Ivy because its reputation alone is sufficient for recognition and acclaim. UVa is not an Ivy in any regard.

What a laughable argument. UVA has passed W&M even though they were founded first. Is Hampden Sydney an Ivy since it was founded in 1775, about the same time Dartmouth was founded?

Absolutely not. UVa, William & Mary, Hampden Sydney are all non-ivy league schools. To suggest any of them is in any capacity is ludicrous.

So date of founding doesn’t matter, right?

Date of founding is one way non-ivy league schools are distinguished from those in the Ivy League.

Then W&M and Hampden-Sydney could be Ivy League.

Predictably, you have misunderstood the words you have read.

Maybe we should make this easier for you to understand. W&M were founded before some Ivy League institutions.

DP. Good grief. W&M is not an Ivy League school, regardless of its founding. Just stop.

According to the Ivy booster date of founding matters. Today we learned Hampden Sydney might be an Ivy. Thanks Ivy booster!

Do you think the Ivy League is inducting new members? They kinda stopped doing that after 1865.

You’re basically arguing that this comment is wrong for commenting that pencils have graphite in them, because batteries do too.

UVA was founded before 1865. Is UVA an Ivy?

The president must be 35 years old. Do you believe that All 35 year olds are president?

Of course not. Ask the poster that tried to suggest UVA was disqualified based on founding date. Obviously that was a poor argument. Tsk tsk

How do zoo animals get computers? Begone bonobo

Coherent arguments can be hard. It’s fine, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a Public Ivy with Grounds being recognized as a World Heritage site. The University’s only flaw is a mediocre football team.

UVa is basically a brand new school. Harvard, Yale, Princeton were founded before the US was a country. Far less prestigious historically and does not compare to actual ivies. Your new kid on the block public is random and weird. Publics are not ivies.

Why is the age of UVA vs Ivies so important? Stanford was founded in the late 1800s. I would assume we all here consider it a prestigious university.

It's being mentioned because UVa does not and can not be compared to those universities which are members of the Ivy League. No one tries to call Stanford an Ivy because its reputation alone is sufficient for recognition and acclaim. UVa is not an Ivy in any regard.

What a laughable argument. UVA has passed W&M even though they were founded first. Is Hampden Sydney an Ivy since it was founded in 1775, about the same time Dartmouth was founded?

Absolutely not. UVa, William & Mary, Hampden Sydney are all non-ivy league schools. To suggest any of them is in any capacity is ludicrous.

So date of founding doesn’t matter, right?

Date of founding is one way non-ivy league schools are distinguished from those in the Ivy League.

Then W&M and Hampden-Sydney could be Ivy League.

Predictably, you have misunderstood the words you have read.

Maybe we should make this easier for you to understand. W&M were founded before some Ivy League institutions.

DP. Good grief. W&M is not an Ivy League school, regardless of its founding. Just stop.

According to the Ivy booster date of founding matters. Today we learned Hampden Sydney might be an Ivy. Thanks Ivy booster!

Do you think the Ivy League is inducting new members? They kinda stopped doing that after 1865.

You’re basically arguing that this comment is wrong for commenting that pencils have graphite in them, because batteries do too.

UVA was founded before 1865. Is UVA an Ivy?

You two are arguing the same thing, and I don’t know how you can’t tell.

You’re both arguing that there are other factors that go into whether something was inducted to the Ivy League. Objectively, age does matter, and there is no post-19th century institution that has joined the league. Addressing that doesn’t mean it’s the only point the other commenter made.

Once again, you are arguing the same thing.

Correct. However, age alone does not disqualify UVA from the Ivy League. The Ivy booster should have known better than to introduce date of founding when trying to argue UVA isn’t an Ivy.

[Anonymous]

Is UVA a prestigious institution? No, it’s alum are worried about the date it was founded more than its yield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is UVA a prestigious institution? No, it’s alum are worried about the date it was founded more than its yield.

The date UVA was founded was questioned by Ivy boosters. Turns out that was a mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Evidenced by UVA's ~30% yield rate, most do not choose it when admitted

It’s over 50% for in state students.

Hopefully, you're not surprised by this or are using this to boast.

Only half of in-state students choosing a school like UVA ( T25, right?) is very telling.

Actually according to the data on their website it is 58%, and yes I think that is pretty good knowing the choices these students are presented with.

Typical of UVA students and faculty, this is false. 55%.

Lol…either way not much difference. Same theme….i think we can all agree more than half of in state acceptances are choosing UVA and many of these students are getting multiple offers from high ranking schools so yeah I’d say it’s still pretty good.

So a majority of out of state applicants aren’t choosing UVA? Isn’t that a bad thing? Sounds like people only want to go because it’s dirt cheap, not because it is elite

It is a bad thing and a consequence of the fact that UVa is not an "elite" institution by any definition of the word.

There is no universally agreed definition of elite university but any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

It has the yield rate to suggest that students don’t consider it elite at all.

As I said, any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is UVA a prestigious institution? No, it’s alum are worried about the date it was founded more than its yield.

The date UVA was founded was questioned by Ivy boosters. Turns out that was a mistake.

You have a sub-human lack of intelligence. Probably have the cranial capacity of a lampshade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Evidenced by UVA's ~30% yield rate, most do not choose it when admitted

It’s over 50% for in state students.

Hopefully, you're not surprised by this or are using this to boast.

Only half of in-state students choosing a school like UVA ( T25, right?) is very telling.

Actually according to the data on their website it is 58%, and yes I think that is pretty good knowing the choices these students are presented with.

Typical of UVA students and faculty, this is false. 55%.

Lol…either way not much difference. Same theme….i think we can all agree more than half of in state acceptances are choosing UVA and many of these students are getting multiple offers from high ranking schools so yeah I’d say it’s still pretty good.

So a majority of out of state applicants aren’t choosing UVA? Isn’t that a bad thing? Sounds like people only want to go because it’s dirt cheap, not because it is elite

It is a bad thing and a consequence of the fact that UVa is not an "elite" institution by any definition of the word.

There is no universally agreed definition of elite university but any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

It has the yield rate to suggest that students don’t consider it elite at all.

As I said, any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

Not as stupid as you. If there's one thing this thread has shown it's that UVa is a place for the dumbest of the dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is UVA a prestigious institution? No, it’s alum are worried about the date it was founded more than its yield.

The date UVA was founded was questioned by Ivy boosters. Turns out that was a mistake.

You have a sub-human lack of intelligence. Probably have the cranial capacity of a lampshade

Are you capable of forming an argument without resorting to shallow personal attacks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is UVA a prestigious institution? No, it’s alum are worried about the date it was founded more than its yield.

The date UVA was founded was questioned by Ivy boosters. Turns out that was a mistake.

You have a sub-human lack of intelligence. Probably have the cranial capacity of a lampshade

Are you capable of forming an argument without resorting to shallow personal attacks?

Argument for or against what exactly? Anyone with a brain can see exactly what UVa is (public school) and isn't (ivy). You obviously lack this qualification and are therefore confused. I see the situation you cannot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is UVA a prestigious institution? No, it’s alum are worried about the date it was founded more than its yield.

The date UVA was founded was questioned by Ivy boosters. Turns out that was a mistake.

You have a sub-human lack of intelligence. Probably have the cranial capacity of a lampshade

Are you capable of forming an argument without resorting to shallow personal attacks?

Argument for or against what exactly? Anyone with a brain can see exactly what UVa is (public school) and isn't (ivy). You obviously lack this qualification and are therefore confused. I see the situation you cannot.

More personal attacks. You really can’t argue against UVA without personal attacks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Evidenced by UVA's ~30% yield rate, most do not choose it when admitted

It’s over 50% for in state students.

Hopefully, you're not surprised by this or are using this to boast.

Only half of in-state students choosing a school like UVA ( T25, right?) is very telling.

Actually according to the data on their website it is 58%, and yes I think that is pretty good knowing the choices these students are presented with.

Typical of UVA students and faculty, this is false. 55%.

Lol…either way not much difference. Same theme….i think we can all agree more than half of in state acceptances are choosing UVA and many of these students are getting multiple offers from high ranking schools so yeah I’d say it’s still pretty good.

So a majority of out of state applicants aren’t choosing UVA? Isn’t that a bad thing? Sounds like people only want to go because it’s dirt cheap, not because it is elite

It is a bad thing and a consequence of the fact that UVa is not an "elite" institution by any definition of the word.

There is no universally agreed definition of elite university but any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

It has the yield rate to suggest that students don’t consider it elite at all.

As I said, any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

Not as stupid as you. If there's one thing this thread has shown it's that UVa is a place for the dumbest of the dumb.

I am sad for you that you don't realize how stupid this statement makes you sound.

UVA has a 62% in state yield rate. Apparently this means it's not elite.

What then should we think of these yields?
Brown, 63%
Notre Dame, 59%
Vanderbilt, 57%
Emory, 40%
CMU, 44%
Michigan, 47%
WUSTL, 47%
Berkeley, 48% in-state
UCLA, 52%
Amherst, 39%
Williams, 47%
Swarthmore, 42%
Bowdoin, 57%

These schools are not elite. Very telling that they have such low yield rates. Only the dumbest of the dumb go to these schools. RIght?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Evidenced by UVA's ~30% yield rate, most do not choose it when admitted

It’s over 50% for in state students.

Hopefully, you're not surprised by this or are using this to boast.

Only half of in-state students choosing a school like UVA ( T25, right?) is very telling.

Actually according to the data on their website it is 58%, and yes I think that is pretty good knowing the choices these students are presented with.

Typical of UVA students and faculty, this is false. 55%.

Lol…either way not much difference. Same theme….i think we can all agree more than half of in state acceptances are choosing UVA and many of these students are getting multiple offers from high ranking schools so yeah I’d say it’s still pretty good.

So a majority of out of state applicants aren’t choosing UVA? Isn’t that a bad thing? Sounds like people only want to go because it’s dirt cheap, not because it is elite

It is a bad thing and a consequence of the fact that UVa is not an "elite" institution by any definition of the word.

There is no universally agreed definition of elite university but any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

It has the yield rate to suggest that students don’t consider it elite at all.

As I said, any definition of elite that did not include UVA would be a pretty stupid one.

Not as stupid as you. If there's one thing this thread has shown it's that UVa is a place for the dumbest of the dumb.

Smart people don’t make comments like this. Secure, happy people don’t make comments like this.