Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan was considered a good school back in the 1980s UVA was a tier below and Wisconsin a tier below that. UVA and Wisconsin have closed the gap considerably but I think the rank order is about the same

I’d say it’s the opposite. Michigan has widened the gap since the 80’s with both of these schools.

Cool story... everyone is better off for hearing your expert analysis and anonymous opinion.

As opposed to other anonymous opinions with no analysis….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan was considered a good school back in the 1980s UVA was a tier below and Wisconsin a tier below that. UVA and Wisconsin have closed the gap considerably but I think the rank order is about the same

I’d say it’s the opposite. Michigan has widened the gap since the 80’s with both of these schools.

Cool story... everyone is better off for hearing your expert analysis and anonymous opinion.

As opposed to other anonymous opinions with no analysis….

The analysis part was sarcasm... there was no analysis and definietly nothing "expert" about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan was considered a good school back in the 1980s UVA was a tier below and Wisconsin a tier below that. UVA and Wisconsin have closed the gap considerably but I think the rank order is about the same

I’d say it’s the opposite. Michigan has widened the gap since the 80’s with both of these schools.

Cool story... everyone is better off for hearing your expert analysis and anonymous opinion.

As opposed to other anonymous opinions with no analysis….

The analysis part was sarcasm... there was no analysis and definietly nothing "expert" about it.

Oh you were being sarcastic? Thanks Captain Obvious for that clarification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

There have been a lot of changes over the past forty years. In 1980, Wisconsin was probably the most prestigious of this bunch. Vanderbilt was a regional school for rich southerners. Notre Dame was a niche school for Catholic school kids. And UVA and Michigan were decent state schools but nothing exceptional.

And today everything is different. Obviously having responsive management to changing trends and demographics has been critical. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame have had great chancellors over the past few decades. And both schools developed outstanding brands with smart investing in infrastructure and key programs. Both schools also now have enormous endowments that allow them to get top students and faculty and pretty much do as they please. And sports revenue certainly helps. Notre Dame is Notre Dame. And Vanderbilt is part of the SEC and getting a cool billion per ten years just through revenue sharing alone. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame are now among the most desirable schools in the country.

Michigan did two things great - football. And engineering. Most of the Ivies are decades behind the smart public flagship universities when it comes to engineering. As engineering became more critical, more in demand, more desirable, and more competitive there was an enormous opportunity for certain schools with the resources to invest to really make a name for themselves. And Michigan did just that. Combined with overall excellence and a football program that inspired immense passion and loyalty - not to mention revenue - and Michigan became a cool school. Also, Ann Arbor is a great college town. Plus, Michigan is nearly 50 percent OOS, which gives it both national stature and a high quality student body.

I think the source of UVA's prestige remains the same as always - it's one of the oldest schools, founded by TJ, in a pleasant part of the country. It is a genteel school with a long list of famous alumni. Darden has helped keep it modern and lucrative. But UVA has a preppy vibe that's long been appealing to many. Plus sports and school spirit. And generally being good academically, particularly in liberal arts.

Wisconsin, meanwhile, has done everything wrong. They've remained focused on graduate programs instead of undergrad. They've had terrible political interference from state politicians that drove away both funding and talent. They're not particularly good at sports. And it's too cold, which is a no-no with this generation of students.

I’ve been following colleges since the early 1970s, & in all that time Wisconsin has never been equal to Mich or UVA, much less superior to them. Good school overall, & excellent grad programs, but IF it was ever considered superior to Michigan academically (or athletically), you’re going to have to go back way before the 1980s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

All of these schools are more prestigious now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

There have been a lot of changes over the past forty years. In 1980, Wisconsin was probably the most prestigious of this bunch. Vanderbilt was a regional school for rich southerners. Notre Dame was a niche school for Catholic school kids. And UVA and Michigan were decent state schools but nothing exceptional.

And today everything is different. Obviously having responsive management to changing trends and demographics has been critical. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame have had great chancellors over the past few decades. And both schools developed outstanding brands with smart investing in infrastructure and key programs. Both schools also now have enormous endowments that allow them to get top students and faculty and pretty much do as they please. And sports revenue certainly helps. Notre Dame is Notre Dame. And Vanderbilt is part of the SEC and getting a cool billion per ten years just through revenue sharing alone. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame are now among the most desirable schools in the country.

Michigan did two things great - football. And engineering. Most of the Ivies are decades behind the smart public flagship universities when it comes to engineering. As engineering became more critical, more in demand, more desirable, and more competitive there was an enormous opportunity for certain schools with the resources to invest to really make a name for themselves. And Michigan did just that. Combined with overall excellence and a football program that inspired immense passion and loyalty - not to mention revenue - and Michigan became a cool school. Also, Ann Arbor is a great college town. Plus, Michigan is nearly 50 percent OOS, which gives it both national stature and a high quality student body.

I think the source of UVA's prestige remains the same as always - it's one of the oldest schools, founded by TJ, in a pleasant part of the country. It is a genteel school with a long list of famous alumni. Darden has helped keep it modern and lucrative. But UVA has a preppy vibe that's long been appealing to many. Plus sports and school spirit. And generally being good academically, particularly in liberal arts.

Wisconsin, meanwhile, has done everything wrong. They've remained focused on graduate programs instead of undergrad. They've had terrible political interference from state politicians that drove away both funding and talent. They're not particularly good at sports. And it's too cold, which is a no-no with this generation of students.

I’ve been following colleges since the early 1970s, & in all that time Wisconsin has never been equal to Mich or UVA, much less superior to them. Good school overall, & excellent grad programs, but IF it was ever considered superior to Michigan academically (or athletically), you’re going to have to go back way before the 1980s.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

There have been a lot of changes over the past forty years. In 1980, Wisconsin was probably the most prestigious of this bunch. Vanderbilt was a regional school for rich southerners. Notre Dame was a niche school for Catholic school kids. And UVA and Michigan were decent state schools but nothing exceptional.

And today everything is different. Obviously having responsive management to changing trends and demographics has been critical. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame have had great chancellors over the past few decades. And both schools developed outstanding brands with smart investing in infrastructure and key programs. Both schools also now have enormous endowments that allow them to get top students and faculty and pretty much do as they please. And sports revenue certainly helps. Notre Dame is Notre Dame. And Vanderbilt is part of the SEC and getting a cool billion per ten years just through revenue sharing alone. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame are now among the most desirable schools in the country.

Michigan did two things great - football. And engineering. Most of the Ivies are decades behind the smart public flagship universities when it comes to engineering. As engineering became more critical, more in demand, more desirable, and more competitive there was an enormous opportunity for certain schools with the resources to invest to really make a name for themselves. And Michigan did just that. Combined with overall excellence and a football program that inspired immense passion and loyalty - not to mention revenue - and Michigan became a cool school. Also, Ann Arbor is a great college town. Plus, Michigan is nearly 50 percent OOS, which gives it both national stature and a high quality student body.

I think the source of UVA's prestige remains the same as always - it's one of the oldest schools, founded by TJ, in a pleasant part of the country. It is a genteel school with a long list of famous alumni. Darden has helped keep it modern and lucrative. But UVA has a preppy vibe that's long been appealing to many. Plus sports and school spirit. And generally being good academically, particularly in liberal arts.

Wisconsin, meanwhile, has done everything wrong. They've remained focused on graduate programs instead of undergrad. They've had terrible political interference from state politicians that drove away both funding and talent. They're not particularly good at sports. And it's too cold, which is a no-no with this generation of students.

I’ve been following colleges since the early 1970s, & in all that time Wisconsin has never been equal to Mich or UVA, much less superior to them. Good school overall, & excellent grad programs, but IF it was ever considered superior to Michigan academically (or athletically), you’re going to have to go back way before the 1980s.

You are correct. Iserved in a high-ranking position at the US Dept of ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA was not a big deal when I went to college in 1997.

Agent Starling bragged about going there though.

I went to high school in Massachusetts in the 1970s & the first thing that made me aware of UVA was that the Kennedys sent two of their dimmer bulbs to its law school. Decades ago I assumed that meant its law school was good, but now I think they probably attended because they could make some DC connections & sow a ton of wild oats without offending anyone of importance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

UVA is absolutely superior to the other schools listed here. However, what is unique about the architecture? Other colleges have nice buildings too.

I always thought it was an amazing achievement that at UVA they managed to construct brick walls while drunk & pass off their shoddy output as “serpentine.” Reminds me of how Target used to advertise their cheapest, thinnest towels as “fast-drying.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a Public Ivy and World Heritage site.

True, but recognizing the site of Teddy Kennedy’s first Chivas Regal buzz is not one of the things of which the World Heritage program is most proud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

What "connections with Ivies"? It's a state school.

Wasn’t there some informal connection between UVA & Princeton? Woodrow Wilson & all that? Something about Princeton being the farthest south of the prestigious Northeastern colleges, & therefore being more inclined than the others to deal with UVA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At my expensive and high performing private school in the 1990s, Michigan, Madison and UVA were all well-regarded OOS flagships. These three and Berkeley were the only respectable public schools that carried the same oomph as the lower T25 private universities.

Don't recall much interest in UCLA.

As some of you will recall, due to software issues, US News drastically altered its ranking formula in 1990. The impact on the oomph category sent shockwaves throughout academia, both here and abroad. Johns Hopkins was hit especially hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

What "connections with Ivies"? It's a state school.

Wasn’t there some informal connection between UVA & Princeton? Woodrow Wilson & all that? Something about Princeton being the farthest south of the prestigious Northeastern colleges, & therefore being more inclined than the others to deal with UVA?

uh. no. Wilson attended UVA for law. Want to try that assertion again with facts?

[Anonymous]

Depends on where you grew up and what your community focused on. In my world there were three schools: Notre Dame, Georgetown, and the state flagship. Ivy was not on the radar; nobody cared about those schools at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think they were ever equivalent to Vanderbilt.

NP, im the 80s, Vanderbilt didn't have the same rank as today and UMich was a top 10 school, a top 3 law school and a top three or five med school.