Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, it is a sports league and a miserable one at that, absolutely horrible, they should just drop sports altogether.

I'd be 100% for that.

Chill, OP. We know what people mean.

-Harvard graduate

Nothing more arrogant than a poster signing off like this. It gives you no more authority to speak on this than anyone else. Get bent.

Being from the school doesn't confer some level of weigh to opinions regarding the school?

-Princeton undergrad, Yale law, Harvard MBA, complete douchebag

You forgot the most important part.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, it is a sports league and a miserable one at that, absolutely horrible, they should just drop sports altogether.

I'd be 100% for that.

Chill, OP. We know what people mean.

-Harvard graduate

Nothing more arrogant than a poster signing off like this. It gives you no more authority to speak on this than anyone else. Get bent.

Being from the school doesn't confer some level of weigh to opinions regarding the school?

-Princeton undergrad, Yale law, Harvard MBA

You must have felt a bit giddy typing that out. It's been a while since you found an occasion to throw all of your pedigree into one conversation, huh?
Too bad you don't have a PhD from Oxford. You missed an opportunity to really impress. Plus then we would have to call you "Dr" on twitter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no such thing as a "Public Ivy." It's like calling Brown a "Private ACC."

Stop it.

Whoa. I didn’t know this. And I say “public ivy” all the time in reference to UVA, Michigan, UT Austin, Cal, Minnesota, and possibly UNC. But now that I’ve read this post I will definitely stop saying that. Thanks OP!

Wait I'm sorry. I get Michigan. And UC Berkeley. And even Georgia Tech. But...UVA? UT AUSTIN? In the words of our going-on-48-days-without-a-press-conference President: "Come on, Man!"

I would add Wisconsin and Alabama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no such thing as a "Public Ivy." It's like calling Brown a "Private ACC."

Stop it.

Whoa. I didn’t know this. And I say “public ivy” all the time in reference to UVA, Michigan, UT Austin, Cal, Minnesota, and possibly UNC. But now that I’ve read this post I will definitely stop saying that. Thanks OP!

Wait I'm sorry. I get Michigan. And UC Berkeley. And even Georgia Tech. But...UVA? UT AUSTIN? In the words of our going-on-48-days-without-a-press-conference President: "Come on, Man!"

^And schools like Dartmouth and Brown get huge boosts from being affiliated with others, so of course they love to harp on being an Ivy.

Fact of the matter is, only schools that don't have much else to advertise constantly harp on the "Ivy" or "public Ivy" slogan.

You will never see a Berkeley booster call Berkeley a "public Ivy" - they will just straight up argue that Berkeley is among the top 5 best universities in the world (and they wouldn't necessarily be wrong) and better than all the Ivies (they will bring up engineering when arguing they are better than Harvard).
This is true to a lesser extent with Michigan & UNC-CH. These are schools that directly compete with the top/middle Ivies in research, recruiting professors, and STEM international students. Calling themselves "public Ivies" is essentially ceding the ground to the real Ivies.

Meanwhile UVA & W&M boosters (and admissions) go absolutely nuts over the public Ivy stuff, primarily because these schools are in no competition with Ivies when it comes to research standings or students.

W&M has "feel" of the lesser Ivies, but that feeling is more akin to Northeastern liberal arts colleges rather than the well known Ivies like Harvard, Penn, etc. which are all research and professional-focused universities

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no such thing as a "Public Ivy." It's like calling Brown a "Private ACC."

Stop it.

Yes, I get you OP. I had to listen to a crazy parent Saturday prattling on about how her kid will apply to the "Public Ivies" next year. Most people have no clue what you are talking about when you say this and DGAF anyway. It is not a real thing. Let's go ahead and add the "The Colleges that Change Lives" marketing nonsense while we're at it.

Well, maybe you need to read and learn from wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Ivy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indeed, it is a sports league and a miserable one at that, absolutely horrible, they should just drop sports altogether.

I'd be 100% for that.

Chill, OP. We know what people mean.

-Harvard graduate

Nothing more arrogant than a poster signing off like this. It gives you no more authority to speak on this than anyone else. Get bent.

Being from the school doesn't confer some level of weigh to opinions regarding the school?

-Princeton undergrad, Yale law, Harvard MBA

No, no, and no.

Anne Arundel Community College grad

Anonymous wrote:This is silly. No one thinks Stanford sucks because it’s not an Ivy. Everyone knows what you mean when you say a public Ivy.

Ehhh. I would assume that the term referred to Cornell. If someone wants to group together excellent schools or very old schools, or whatever, then just say that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is silly. No one thinks Stanford sucks because it’s not an Ivy. Everyone knows what you mean when you say a public Ivy.

I live in the northeast and have a kid at a T10 school and have no idea which schools specifically are meant by this term.

Is your google broken?

google little ivy too, educate yourself

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is silly. No one thinks Stanford sucks because it’s not an Ivy. Everyone knows what you mean when you say a public Ivy.

I live in the northeast and have a kid at a T10 school and have no idea which schools specifically are meant by this term.

The only one from the original list that is in the Northeast is UVM but not sure I would put it in that bucket now. So not as much of a thing for people who are focused on the Northeast or T10 so you can stay in your bubble.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is silly. No one thinks Stanford sucks because it’s not an Ivy. Everyone knows what you mean when you say a public Ivy.

I live in the northeast and have a kid at a T10 school and have no idea which schools specifically are meant by this term.

How old are you? Did you go to college yourself? My parents wouldn’t have know which schools were in the Ivy League, but they didn’t go to college themselves. I knew because I spent a lot of time reading the old Barron’s college guide during my junior and senior year of high school.

Anonymous wrote:This is silly. No one thinks Stanford sucks because it’s not an Ivy. Everyone knows what you mean when you say a public Ivy.

I live in the northeast and have a kid at a T10 school and have no idea which schools specifically are meant by this term.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no such thing as a "Public Ivy." It's like calling Brown a "Private ACC."

Stop it.

The public Ivy concept derives from a book in the late 1980s that made the case that many public institutions offered a comparable education to the Ivy League at a fraction of the cost. Broadly speaking, the point is valid, even if economics and institution quality have changed since then.

No need to get all butthurt.

OP's point is Ivy League only references sports and has nothing to do with the academic institutions. I'm guessing it's the same deranged poster who inserts that comment into every post that mentions the Ivy League as short hand for the high caliber academic institutions that are a part of the League. I guess it makes her/him feel good in some way.

I remember touring U. Chicago in HS and someone there brought up the “Ivy League is a sports affiliation” trope roughly every 5 minutes. And they each thought it was some profound insight. I actually liked Chicago overall (went elsewhere) but still to this day remember nearly everyone having a chip on their shoulder about Ivies. Hopefully this has improved over the years.

Anonymous wrote:The notion that the “Ivy League” must be referenced only as a sports league or the idea that “Public Ivy” is meaningless because it’s an author’s construct is nonsense. People are always working to group and name things. It’s part of the process of thinking and communicating! You may not like the names or the contents of those references, but if enough people use them to mean the same thing, they are a useful cultural references.

That's too much nuance for OP.