<p>noimagination - Your student peers are not like your profs. It is apples and oranges. Well, almost. I mean I certainly wouldn’t want to go to a school where I knew the profs are not competent, but that is just not an issue at any of the schools that are, for example, in the USNWR top 100. There are certainly individual profs that might be questionable, that they would be a definite exception.</p>
<p>But sure, the more “competent” (i.e. smarter) and more interesting your peers are due to varied experiences and the like, the better your college years are likely to be. In a huge sense the undergrad stats that are published, and the selectivity of the colleges accomplish exactly that. By looking at the academic stats and the overall selectivity, you can see how smart your peers at that school would be, and to some degree judge how “experienced” they would be in that many upper level schools expect greater EC’s, although that is a much “softer” thing to determine. No really good measure for that, just reputation perhaps. The experience thing just doesn’t translate as well for students that are highly varied as it does for profs where you are focusing on their accomplishments in their professional field. But in fact many students filter their choices based on exactly those criteria, and hopefully then look at the other factors I often talk about. I think that is obviously true.</p>
<p>Once you establish that “baseline”, a school where your peers are nice people on the whole, and are not cut-throat, that would be a better place to be, it seems to me. Students often come on here to get a feel for that too. How preppy is a school? How Greek is it? How is the sports scene? So once they establish a group of schools that meet their “baseline” academically, they then look to these other factors. To me that is exactly the right way to pick an undergrad school, and not to worry a whit about which schools are ranked higher in a certain major, undergrad or grad.</p>
Um, we were the national champs this year. Wisconsin lost to Cornell in the tournament. How does it feel to be trounced by an Ivy League school being a premier Big 10 school and all?</p>
<p>
Duke’s football team is a work in progress but we’ve still beaten reputable teams like Northwestern, Virginia and Maryland. With Coach Cutcliffe in hand, we should be heading to bowl games quite regularly from here on out.</p>
<p>Don’t be fooled, Duke would wipe the floor with Princeton anytime in football. Your alma mater doesn’t compare to Duke athletically JA so I wouldn’t be too cocky if I were you.</p>
<p>
Oh please, this is coming from the person who thinks Michigan’s Math Honors students are on par with the top math students at HYPSM.</p>
<p>I know you went to college back in the stone ages but it’s time to wake up. Michigan is no longer the elite school it was 50 years back.</p>
<p>Also, are you perhaps bitter about the so-called winningest football team of all time’s losing record the last two years?</p>
<p>Scoreboard baby. Should not have been as close as it ended. Our best big man was hurt later in the season and was not anywhere near full strength in the NCAA games. </p>
It seems to be “in progress” for quite a while:</p>
<p>“Since 1994, however, Duke’s football program has declined, with the team lacking a winning season since. From 1999 to 2007, Duke’s football win-loss record was at 13-90; from 2005 to 2007 Duke suffered a 22-game losing streak.”</p>
<p>I thought we were discussing how good Wisconsin football is an how terrible Dook football is?</p>
<p>so let see, Dook v. Princeton in football…I would call it about even or give Dook (which together with Columbia is known as one of the worse football teams in the history of NCAA football) a win by about a TD, but certainly not a wipe-out as you claim.</p>
<p>now</p>
<p>regarding your comment that Princeton doesn’t compare to Dook athletically, lets see, out of 283 teams, Princeton ranked 32 in the Directors Cup this year and Dook ranked 10th, so yes, Dook ranked higher in athletics this year. It is amazing how giving out athletic scholarships to your students helps your program eh?..because Princeton is one of those schools that doesn’t believe in athletic scholarships.</p>
<p>now</p>
<p>lets compare Dook to Princeton in academics…</p>
<p>oops, never mind, it is not worth even comparing…</p>
<p>good stuff eh?</p>
<p>but say, shouldn’t we further discuss your erroneous claim that Wisconsin has one of the worse football programs in the country?</p>
<p>Puerile. I repeat myself: it reflects extremely poorly on your school. This is just cheap juvenile stuff that reminds me of what I don’t like about Dookies in general.</p>
<p>Found this while looking for something else–great profs/researchers are often great people too. UW’s loss is Yale’s gain. Guess that state school PHD did not hold her back too much.</p>
<p>Who said state school PhD would hold anyone back? UW-Madison, UIUC, Berkeley are all in the top 10 in Chemistry PhD programs, and UCLA is way up there, too.</p>