<p>Thank God. Now Stanford will be put in it’s place and face the true reality that it doesn’t come close to Harvard, Princeton, or the Ivy League in general. It is not an Ivy League school, no matter how many squash matches or regattas they partake in. The fat lady is singing, Stanford. Go back to the PAC10 with Arizona and Washington State. Go support your football team composed of students who wouldn’t have been accepted to my county college.</p>
<p>It is the general attitude like yours that makes Stanford so much better than the Ivies. Thanks for the demonstration.</p>
<p>Yeah, what potato said.</p>
<p>Frankly, I wouldn’t touch most of the ivies when it comes to my degree area. Stanford has an amazing track record in areas like engineering and computer science.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just wanted to point out that of the students admitted both to Stanford and an Ivy, only one school takes more than half, and that’s Harvard, with about a 60/40 split–seems pretty close to me. Stanford take 2/3 of the admits with Princeton, half with Yale, and the rest of the Ivies are negligible (i.e. Stanford takes almost all of them; not to mention MIT, where Stanford takes 2/3 of the cross-admits).</p>
<p>So clearly, most students happen to think that Stanford measures up pretty well against the Ivies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s better than the Ivies–notice that Stanford dominates every Ivy in top departments, # top faculty, etc. Harvard is a close second, though.</p>
<p>You mention regatta, when that’s pretty characteristic of the old-boy-type Ivies?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When was Stanford not in the Pac-10? (Pac-12 now, by the way.)</p>
<p>Let’s not forget that Ivies also recruit heavily for sports; they have the same proportion of athletes. The difference? Stanford offers athletic scholarships, so it competes for–and wins–the best student-athletes (the ones who are the top students in academics and are also top athletes). The Ivies are left recruiting and lowering their standards for mediocre athletes who are either good or mediocre students. Or a good athlete who’s a mediocre student. Any way you cut it, the Ivies lose because of their no-athletic-scholarship agreement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704364004576132503526250500.html[/url]”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704364004576132503526250500.html</a></p>
<p>I don’t know why I wasted my time; UncleTomsCabin12 also said these gems</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This coming from someone who was rich enough to have private tutoring from Princeton Review and raised his SAT score 300 points.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Clearly he thinks that the low-income student who got the same SAT score without private tutoring isn’t more impressive than he is. (By the way, low-income students generally can only take the SAT twice–not four times–because that’s all the fee waivers that they’ll get.)</p>
<p>Judging by his other posts he got rejected by Harvard (probably Stanford too), went to Penn, and is now trying to transfer to Harvard. Doesn’t look like that private tutoring paid off, did it? Bitter that you got rejected and are blaming low-income students? Guess what–they worked a lot harder, have more to contribute, and are more impressive than you. Deal with it.</p>
<p>STANFORD=GOAT
Ivies pale in comparison.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say that Harvard is better than Stanford EVER… Last year, we had 6 (THATS A LOT) kids from my school accepted to HYP, however REJECTED (I mean flat out rejected!!!) from Stanford and for 2 of them Stanford was their dream school.</p>
<p>SO KISS CARDINAL ASS!!!</p>
<p>Please tell me when Harvard was ranked number 4 in the country in football? When did Harvard have a player as dominant as Andrew Luck (Will be the number one draft pick btw)? Oh wait, NEVER!!! I am so glad Princeton kicked yalls ass to claim the one ivy spot in the NCAA tournament!!!</p>
<p>Well well look who just lost to OKSU!!!</p>
<p>My D was recruited to all the Ivies, got a likely letter from Harvard etc., but chose Stanford. Most of the kids on her team were also recruited by HYP, but made the same choice and for the same reasons: friendlier atmosphere, nicer people, warmer weather, better tech. courses, and a far superior sports program. So it’s not like Harvard’s athletes are better students–H recruits from the very same pool as Stanford does. The difference is, that Stanford tends to actually get the most talented kids to attend. Also, almost all the freshmen on my daughter’s team chose S despite NOT being offered an athletic scholarship. My daughter just gets financial aid, the same as she would if she didn’t play a sport. So let’s not act as though the athletes only come for the money; it might be true for football and a few other sports, but not for the majority. And to be honest, Stanford’s FA package was not even the best–HYPC all offered D a little more.</p>
<p>^ good points. I imagine the best student-athletes tend to choose Stanford regardless of money, simply because it’s better in the sports they’re interested in. The schools that beat Stanford in other sports are either not much better (e.g. women’s basketball) or much better (e.g. men’s basketball), but they don’t have the prestige/offerings that Stanford has. So it wins there again.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is very true that The State University of New Jersey at Princeton, formerly known as the Teacher College of New Jersey, is the best college in New Jersey and Rutgers comes in second. The good students go to Princeton, and the best students in New Jersey go to Stanford.</p>