<p>^ You mean Hipster U?</p>
<p>Obviously, no one has ever heard of Vanderbilt. Nashville is an amazing city, Vandy has amazing athletes, higher rank than Michigan (17 as opposed to 29), and great weather. Vanderbilt should be that curveball thrown in to deter Stanford and Michigan.</p>
<p>Vanderbilt is deeply rooted in southern traditions. It is a good school to go to if youāre white. Otherwise, forget it. I know so many unhappy people of other ethnicities there. The greek scene there is also dominated by white people; it is hard to integrate into the higher tier frats not being white.</p>
<p>I say Stanford. </p>
<p>Michigan athletics suck in recent years and the weather is terrible. They both have in common that their respective states are going down the tubes, though.</p>
<p>Dukeās football sucks and thereās not much there outside the campus.</p>
<p>All the ivy league schools have imperfect weather and are at least a little more snobbish than Stanford in my humble opinion. Also, their sports arenāt that good.</p>
<p>UCLA is too big. Also, I dunno, I just donāt think LA is that nice of a city.</p>
<p>UT-Austin is probably a safe bet but the academics arenāt up to par with Stanfordās.</p>
<p>UW-Madison suffers from the same weather problems Michigan. It doesnāt have the athletics issue, but it is slightly less academically sound than Michigan and nowhere near Stanford.</p>
<p>UChicago is more for grad-school. Also, itās in a horrible part of Chicago.</p>
<p>Northwestern has an absolutely beautiful campus, but the sports arenāt that great and I think its academics are over-hyped.</p>
<p>CalTech doesnāt have the school spirit or sports.</p>
<p>Anybody mentioned so far that I didnāt get to? </p>
<p>There you have it, Stanford tops the list for me.</p>
<p>UT Austin no doubt. Academically itās great overall, more specifically the Plan II program and BHP are incredible and respected across the country. You canāt beat it. Austin, Texas is just the bees knees with UT being one of the few large state schools that manages to maintain its reputation as a prestigious university coupled with a great social atmosphere.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thatās why I said if you emphasize menās basketball and football, easily the two most popular college sports, that it pretty much comes out to a wash as far as athletics between the three.</p>
<p>Iām surprised UVa hasnāt been mentioned more. Great academics, great athletics, amazingly beautiful town and campus, great location, I obviously could go on and on.</p>
<p>I would include UNC but their lack of engineering throws them out.</p>
<p>I donāt know enough about UT-Austin or Michigan cuz Iāve never been to either, but from what Iāve read, they should be in here no doubt. I also think UCLA should be considered.</p>
<p>Anyone who tries to convince me that an Ivy League school should be on here should immediately leave this thread.</p>
<p>Honorable mention to Vandy: I donāt know about their engineering, or if they even have a program, but the town, academics, and sports are great.</p>
<p>Top 5 (in no order):
UT-Austin
Michigan
UVa
Stanford
UCLA</p>
<p>Thatās a pretty good list.</p>
<p>
Thatās going down a tricky path. Who says engineering is important but, say, public health isnāt? Certainly theyāre both rather important fields. In fact, we could probably do with a fair amount more of the latter and fewer Apple engineers. 
For that matter, why are business (the #1 most popular major in the country) and journalism not significant?</p>
<p>(Let anyone accuse me of bias, it should be noted that I have never attended UNC and in fact argued against two of the schools Iāve attended in this thread - rather unlike most posters.)</p>
<p>I agree that the top two most rounded are Stanford and Michigan (as they were my top 2 choices and I had to choose between them this year). Overall however, I also think that personal attention should be taken into account. I loved UMich but it does have slightly larger class sizes and is, in general, a huge school where itās easy to be lost in the crowd. For me, Stanford just seemed like a smaller, sunnier, more prestigious version of Michigan, which is why it gets my vote (and my money =P ).</p>
<p>P.S. As a tennis player and runner, those sports are the ones I looked at when I considered which teams were better. LOL.</p>
<p>Michigan doesnāt have petroleum engineering right?</p>
<p>Weather. Are people really that afraid of winter? No one likes the snow? I realize Michigan and other schools up here do not have the greatest weather, but iāll never understand making it a significant factor in your school selection process.</p>
<p>Yes I go to Michigan? Does that mean I lose all credibility? I got into one of the best engineering schools in the country and iām gonna back it up.</p>
<p>Oh, and I only say Stanford because I am just covering my tracks? Wow, looks like you figured me out. I say Michigan only because I go there and Stanford only so I donāt look bias.</p>
<p>UNC does take a hit for not having an engineering program. You can argue for or against liberal arts, whatever, but no one will argue against engineering. Its incredibly important and should be at a āwell roundedā school.</p>
<p>Just like with athletics. You can say college football is engineering and business is mens basketball, a āwell roundedā school needs these and they have weighted importance.</p>
<p>And to the guy that said Michiganās athletics have sucked the past few yearsā¦ WHAT?! I didnāt realize a few down years in football means ALL of your athletics sucks. I realize I just said football has higher weight, but come on. Hockey here is amazing, BBall nearly beat Duke in the second round of the tourney, mens soccer made it to the semifinals and lost to the eventual champions, I canāt really speak for womens softball and volleyball, or our gymnastics but I know they ate pretty much always good.</p>
<p>And Michigan football. MICHIGAN! I realize we had a few down years with Rrod (we got to a bowl game last year atleaat). But does that really override everything else? The most winningest, highest winning percentage team in history. Michigan will be back, and to put UNC, UVA, or Stanford ahead of them for football is ridiculous. Do any of those teams have the record for largest attendance at a football game? You know, in THEIR 114,00 capacity stadiums? UVA football is nothing, UNC has been up lately thanks to all of those agents helping them out, and up until recently Stanford had a hard time even filling their student section. </p>
<p>Out of all of the ridiculous claims made here I think putting Michigan athletics as low as some of you have us the worse.</p>
<p>And if I canāt quote my ranking system, I donāt see why the US rankings should be used. Especially with the way some schools play the system.</p>
<p>Hereās what is going to take U of Michigan out of contention. Itās in #@$%ing Michigan for Godās sake! No one wants to live there, except to die or kill. Michigan did not create Tom Brady, the Patriots did. Michigan created a 7th round draft pick. It doesnāt matter if you have down years recently, for the OPās experience to be good, itās for him during the PRESENT while he ATTENDS. Living on the past donāt mean jack if your team is 4-8 for 3 consecutive years while you are enrolled. Why is football so big there? Itās got nothing else going for it. Itās usually the same for crap cities in crap states. Ever wonder why college football and college basketball are big in areas where there are no professional sports teams? Because their school sucks and so does the state/city they are located. </p>
<p>Ross is not a top B-school in terms of MBAs. In fact, Itās a safety to the safety.</p>
<p>Best sports rivalry is Yankees and Red Sox, or Frazier and Ali. Although OSU and Michigan is up there.</p>
<p>Honestly, Stanford wins. And this is a Cal student saying this, I canāt deny that it is probably one of the best overall schools in the world. If the sports teams arenāt that good, graduate and go buy one with your degree from there.</p>
<p>ā ā ā ā ā ā ā ā by the way. Donāt take anything serious on CC.</p>
<p>michigan.</p>
<p>but why did you mention mba, arenāt we talking about undergrad</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um. No. Please reread what I wrote; I never said nightlife was something to ignore. </p>
<p>I mainly wanted to point out it would be unfair to say UT is the best school because of Austinās nightlife because schools mentioned by others in the thread (Stanford, UCLA, USC) are located in/near cities (San Francisco, Los Angeles) that also have very vibrant, diverse communities and nighttime entertainment. </p>
<p>If you think Austin has more nightlife than somewhere like LA, youāre seriously mistaken. I am not bashing Austin, I love Austin ā but I mainly brought up other cities to say your post was superfluous.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LA isnāt for everyone ā but neither is San Francisco, New York, Chicago, etcā¦</p>
<p>Iām guessing you havenāt spent much time in LA and/or are operating off LA stereotypes. Los Angeles is a great city that offers something for every kind of student. </p>
<p>UCLA IS big and is plagued by the UC budgeting issues, but both it and USC (itās private, smaller and now slightly more prestigious counterpart) are great schools and do a lot to make sure its students take advantage of all LA has to offer.</p>
<p>Again, I am biased ā but I have heard mostly negative or neutral things from UCLA students (both UGs and PhDs). The environment is a little hostile between students, classes are hard to navigate or even get into, and a lot of people I know who went there said they felt like a drop in a bucket. Thatās why I ultimately chose USC over UCLA; USC might not be a tiny liberal arts school, but I never felt ālostā in the USC system. </p>
<p>I think Stanford (I grew up near Stanford and spent a lot of time there, family works there) and USC, despite the size difference, both share similar āvibesā in terms of student happiness, school spirit, academic success and the āconcernā the school has for its students. </p>
<p>Anyone who tries to deny that this has a lot to do with the public vs. private university problem in California obviously doesnāt know much about California to begin with.</p>
<p>The thing abut Austin is that itās primarily a college town. I donāt think the same can be said for LA and SF because of their respective sizes. Iām from a big urban city myself (Madrid), and smallish college towns have always had a college type atmosphere that bigger cities lack due to their size.</p>
<p>The one issue about Stanford that never gets much say is how expensive Palo Alto is. Apartments/houses there are very expensive when compared to other schools.</p>
<p>Most Stanford students live on campus all four years, though.</p>
<p>Iād say best all-around would be UT-Austin. But, Iām obviously a bit biased.</p>
<p>hereās a few of the reasons:
Great weather
Great athletic department
beautiful city with plenty to do, but it still functions as a college town
great campus, although a bit big
Very good academics with a wide variety of programs</p>
<p>Also, to the point of Austinās night life, it may not be at the level that some major cities are, but itās still really good and if you havenāt been to 6th street, youāre missing out.</p>
<p>Iād also say Michigan.</p>
<p>UNC-Chapel Hill, for sure. Good at nearly every sport, one of the top 3 programs in the country in basketball, great weather, amazing college town, and great location.</p>