what does "ivy league", well known LACs mean to you?

[interestingguy]

<p>

Stanford is indeed an athletic powerhouse and is arguably the best combination of academics and sports to be found anywhere. Most of its sports teams, except football, lack popular following, however. (One poster put it rather distastefully as Stanford performing well in the “sports that don’t matter.”) </p>

<p>While Northwestern lacks the football tradition of Stanford and some of its midwestern neighbors, it benefits in recognition from being in the Big 10.

</p>

<p>Pray tell, what Northwestern sport has a “popular following”? Oh…you must be a big fan of women’s lacrosse.</p>

<p>And the Pac 10 is just as recognized as the Big 10, if not more so: especially with respect to NCAA championships.</p>

[IBclass06]

<p>

@interestingguy

The fact that Northwestern does better than HYPS (MIT students are usually not interested in this sort of thing) in the Fulbrights should tell you something about the prestige (or lack thereof) of this award.

Nonsense. Fulbrights are perfectly respectable awards. In many ways, they’re a great deal more practical/useful than the Rhodes.</p>

<p>The problem with using Fulbrights as a measure, as I have said time and again, is that they are not equal. Getting a Fulbright to the UK is much, much more impressive than a Fulbright to Albania. Furthermore, most universities include graduate students and sometimes even professors in their Fulbright numbers, because unlike the Rhodes and Marshall, it is not limited to undergrads.</p>

<p>More useful is the overall combination of award production, which I analyzed earlier:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/798325-rhodes-marshall-truman-nsf-fulbright-scholars-private-universities.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/798325-rhodes-marshall-truman-nsf-fulbright-scholars-private-universities.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[interestingguy]

<p>

Quote:
Originally Posted by interestingguy
The fact that Northwestern does better than HYPS (MIT students are usually not interested in this sort of thing) in the Fulbrights should tell you something about the prestige (or lack thereof) of this award. </p>

<p>Nonsense. Fulbrights are perfectly respectable awards. In many ways, they’re a great deal more practical/useful than the Rhodes.

</p>

<p>Respectable/Practical/Useful /= Prestigious. HTH.</p>