Do most UVA choose UVA over privates?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

UVA, Michigan, UCLA and Berkeley are such great options. I'm envious of the families that live in those states. Such great and affordable choices.

There are a handful of private universities that are worth the premium, but not many. If it's not MIT or Stanford or similar, I don't see why anyone would forgo Charlottesville, Ann Arbor, or Berkeley. Maybe for STEM majors at UVA. But otherwise, why wouldn't you go to UVA?

Also, UVA was founded in 1819. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were there. UVA is at least 50 years older than Cornell and certainly BU and Northeastern.

[Anonymous]

Anecdotally I chose an OOS T10 LAC over UVA as a low income community college student. Despite the LAC being double the price. I disliked UVA both times I visited.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Closer to Boston University and Northeastern than Harvard. Again, the University the Virginia (a public university funded by the state) is not an Ivy League university in any way, shape, or form.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA, Michigan, UCLA and Berkeley are such great options. I'm envious of the families that live in those states. Such great and affordable choices.

There are a handful of private universities that are worth the premium, but not many. If it's not MIT or Stanford or similar, I don't see why anyone would forgo Charlottesville, Ann Arbor, or Berkeley. Maybe for STEM majors at UVA. But otherwise, why wouldn't you go to UVA?

Also, UVA was founded in 1819. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were there. UVA is at least 50 years older than Cornell and certainly BU and Northeastern.

25% in state acceptance rate.

[Anonymous]

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.

UVA is older than Cornell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA, Michigan, UCLA and Berkeley are such great options. I'm envious of the families that live in those states. Such great and affordable choices.

There are a handful of private universities that are worth the premium, but not many. If it's not MIT or Stanford or similar, I don't see why anyone would forgo Charlottesville, Ann Arbor, or Berkeley. Maybe for STEM majors at UVA. But otherwise, why wouldn't you go to UVA?

Also, UVA was founded in 1819. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were there. UVA is at least 50 years older than Cornell and certainly BU and Northeastern.

The US is one of the youngest counties but one of the strongest so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA, Michigan, UCLA and Berkeley are such great options. I'm envious of the families that live in those states. Such great and affordable choices.

There are a handful of private universities that are worth the premium, but not many. If it's not MIT or Stanford or similar, I don't see why anyone would forgo Charlottesville, Ann Arbor, or Berkeley. Maybe for STEM majors at UVA. But otherwise, why wouldn't you go to UVA?

Also, UVA was founded in 1819. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were there. UVA is at least 50 years older than Cornell and certainly BU and Northeastern.

If your family makes less than 100k better financial aid at pretty much every peer of UVA and above private college.
Maybe you just also don’t like UVA or luke big schools or schools either Greek life.

[Anonymous]

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.

+100
Only on DCUM do we get this kind of idiocy.

[Anonymous]

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.

UVA is older than Cornell.

Which is why I did not say and would never say that age is the only way Ivy League universities are distinguished from non-Ivy League universities.

[Anonymous]

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.