<p>Guarantee!</p>
<p>and btw this is just for JohnAdams, not Alexandre or however its spelled im not looking back pages. just JA.</p>
<p>andycollege please tell me that you did not just challenge me to this?</p>
<p>please tell me.</p>
<p>I will give you one chance to back out of your challenge and apologize</p>
<p>remember, we are talking about “elite” institutions here</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No such neediness exists. I am fully able to discuss what I consider to be strong points of an NU education without tearing down other schools. </p>
<p>But then, it’s the gracious and refined position to say “hey, there are a lot of really great elite schools out there.” It’s hardly refined to be all “yeah, well, MY school’s better than YOURS!” and to get all tangled up in minute differences when all of these schools, broadly speaking, are at the top. No one who has actually graduated college and is in the real world sees marked differences among the top 20 or so schools. They all have bright kids and great profs and they all provide lots of opportunities. When you graduate in '12 you’ll find that out.</p>
<p>I have no problem with kids becoming or wanting to become i-bankers, mgt consultants, hedge fund mgrs, etc. More power to them and I wish them success. I do have a problem with the concept that placement in those particular jobs is some kind of marker of “college eliteness,” because those are just some jobs among many and a college can easily be elite even if it’s not on GS (etc)'s radar screen. I find the focus on IB, MC, HF amusing as a marker of eliteness because quite often their clients are the “undistinguished state school” grads who have done well in the business world.</p>
<p>but hawkette, that is not what you said earlier was it?</p>
<p>you stated that your would recommend Rice over Harvard, Yale and Princeton any day for undergraduate school and one of the reasons was because of its athletics</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>but Pizzgirl, this is not what you have been saying earlier</p>
<p>would you want me to AGAIN copy/paste your comments in which you attacked high school kids whose dreams were to become investment bankers, consulants or eventually CEO’s of large public companies?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>JA,
</p>
<p>You’re doing something on here that I have not seen for quite a while. You actually make the Duke guys look humble. Princeton must be very proud. </p>
<p>How do you go in and out through a doorway with a head that big? Did they fix a room up for you in the barn or something??</p>
<p>hawkette, again we would like to hear from you how you are stating that Rice is a much better school for undergraduate than Harvard, Yale and Princeton, primarily because of its excellent baseball team…</p>
<p>makes a lot of sense to me</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>re Stanford vs. duke, forget that, please don’t get distracted from this important athletics thing,</p>
<p>Bring it JA bring it</p>
<p>that was the “most homosexual” thing ive ever typed in my life</p>
<p>Don’t take the bait, this andy is trying to distract you by dangling stanford out there, like a matador to a bull, in order to preserve his alleged superiority of Duke and its pro basketball program over princeton.</p>
<p>Don’t let this happen. Don’t let him divert you like that. </p>
<p>He works for hawkette.</p>
<p>it’s a trick.</p>
<p>mony,
Not a chance. I only hire from “elite” schools and, as JA has expertly proved, Duke is certainly not elite. :)</p>
<p>Duke v. Stanford - Is it even close?
<a href=“first%20in%20a%20series%20of%20200%20posted%20messages%20comparing%20Duke%20to%20Stanford”>I</a>*</p>
<p>First lets start with the amount of financial resources that Duke has compared to Stanford, both in absolute terms and on a per student basis.</p>
<p>Total Endowment - June 2009
3. Stanford = $12.6 billion
.
.
.
.
15. Duke = $4.4 billion</p>
<p><a href=“Page not Found”>Page not Found;
<p>As you can see, Stanford ranks 3rd in total endowment with a whopping $12.6 billion. Duke on the other hand not only fails to make the top 5 but it is not even in the top 10, and barely sits at #15 with $4.4 billion in endowment, 3 times less than Stanford and below such other heavyweights as Notre Dame.</p>
<p>On a per student basis, it gets even worse for Duke, as its mere $315,842 endowment per students puts it at #22, failing to even make the top 20. Stanford, on the other hand is ranked #7 with $707,121, more than DOUBLE Duke’s figure. From Hawkettes data:</p>
<p>Per Capita Endowment on 6/30/09 School
1 $1,682,581 , Princeton
2 $1,426,437 , Yale
3 $1,334,480 , Harvard
4 $870,680 , Pomona
5 $769,560 , Amherst
6 $757,500 , Swarthmore
7 $707,121 , Stanford
8 $689,025 , Williams
9 $662,185 , Rice
10 $657,591 , Caltech
11 $641,389 , Grinnell
12 $540,289 , Wellesley
13 $483,053 , Dartmouth
14 $417,296 , Notre Dame
15 $416,307 , W&L
16 $411,383 , U Richmond
17 $411,278 , U Chicago
18 $399,526 , Bowdoin
19 $353,538 , Smith
20 $339,352 , Emory
21 $329,795 , Claremont McK
22 $315,842 , Duke
23 $305,934 , Wash U
24 $299,070 , Bryn Mawr
25 $295,440 , Northwestern
26 $287,499 , Haverford
27 $287,333 , Macalester
28 $285,004 , Middlebury
29 $275,529 , Vassar
30 $271,876 , U Penn
31 $262,747 , Harvey Mudd
32 $261,120 , Hamilton
33 $258,655 , Carleton
34 $254,044 , Columbia
35 $245,257 , Colby
36 $243,339 , U TEXAS
37 $242,487 , Brown
38 $234,319 , Vanderbilt
39 $224,847 , Lafayette
40 $221,448 , Davidson
41 $218,566 , Scripps
42 $217,776 , Mt. Holyoke
43 $203,514 , Whitman
44 $197,688 , Colorado College
45 $197,225 , Colgate
46 $195,632 , Cornell
47 $192,064 , Oberlin
48 $168,972 , Holy Cross
49 $160,885 , UC BERKELEY
50 $157,553 , Sewanee</p>
<p>As much as JA is reviled for the “tone” ( as someone wrote ) of his posts, I do not find them elitist. They are, however, well written. His comments are all well researched, incisive,and his command of the written word is superb…refreshing in today’s digital age of “LOL” and “yea”, and calling each other “■■■■■■” especially this thread…I must say,regrettably, I haven’t been as impressed with his opponents, who claim to come from top institutions…I think if one reads JA’s posts with the same verbal acumen one purportedly has gotten on the SATs ( ?good indicator or not ? ),one could derive much less umbrage, and much more insight from his comments.</p>
<p>And to me, showing one’s love for one’s alma mater is not as great a sin as showing one’s lack of education (despite having gone to a"great" UG )…</p>
<p>^ I agree.</p>
<p>Ok, keep going. This hardly persuades me at the moment, as endowment proves to be only a small part of the “elite-ness” of a school. By this criteria, URichmond is leaps and bounds above Columbia, so I’m not sold. While, yes, I did ask for Duke vs Stanford, clearly this statistic is not incredibly convincing.</p>
<p>The size of a mans “genitals” does not dictate how great he is. Its not how well endowed you are that makes you elite.</p>
<p>Keep it coming.</p>
<p>^ Sorry for the quotes it keeps sensoring me.</p>
<p>"The size of a mans “genitals” "</p>
<p>Pretty much an analogy for this entire thread, no?</p>
<p>s-o-meone’s got a size problem…</p>