<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 you’re 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>Duke’s football sucks and there’s 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 aren’t that good.</p>
<p>UCLA is too big. Also, I dunno, I just don’t think LA is that nice of a city.</p>
<p>UT-Austin is probably a safe bet but the academics aren’t up to par with Stanford’s.</p>
<p>UW-Madison suffers from the same weather problems Michigan. It doesn’t 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, it’s in a horrible part of Chicago.</p>
<p>Northwestern has an absolutely beautiful campus, but the sports aren’t that great and I think its academics are over-hyped.</p>
<p>CalTech doesn’t have the school spirit or sports.</p>
<p>Anybody mentioned so far that I didn’t get to? </p>
<p>There you have it, Stanford tops the list for me.</p>
<p>UT Austin no doubt. Academically it’s great overall, more specifically the Plan II program and BHP are incredible and respected across the country. You can’t 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>That’s why I said if you emphasize men’s 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>I’m surprised UVa hasn’t 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 don’t know enough about UT-Austin or Michigan cuz I’ve never been to either, but from what I’ve 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 don’t 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>That’s a pretty good list.</p>
<p>
That’s going down a tricky path. Who says engineering is important but, say, public health isn’t? Certainly they’re 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 I’ve 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 it’s 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 doesn’t 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 i’ll 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 i’m 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 don’t 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 “well rounded” school.</p>
<p>Just like with athletics. You can say college football is engineering and business is mens basketball, a “well rounded” school needs these and they have weighted importance.</p>
<p>And to the guy that said Michigan’s athletics have sucked the past few years… WHAT?! I didn’t 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 can’t 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 can’t quote my ranking system, I don’t see why the US rankings should be used. Especially with the way some schools play the system.</p>
<p>Here’s what is going to take U of Michigan out of contention. It’s in #@$%ing Michigan for God’s 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 doesn’t matter if you have down years recently, for the OP’s experience to be good, it’s for him during the PRESENT while he ATTENDS. Living on the past don’t mean jack if your team is 4-8 for 3 consecutive years while you are enrolled. Why is football so big there? It’s got nothing else going for it. It’s 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, It’s 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 can’t deny that it is probably one of the best overall schools in the world. If the sports teams aren’t that good, graduate and go buy one with your degree from there.</p>
<p>■■■■■■■■ by the way. Don’t take anything serious on CC.</p>
<p>michigan.</p>
<p>but why did you mention mba, aren’t 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 Austin’s 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, you’re seriously mistaken. I am not bashing Austin, I love Austin – but I mainly brought up other cities to say your post was superfluous.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LA isn’t for everyone – but neither is San Francisco, New York, Chicago, etc…</p>
<p>I’m guessing you haven’t 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 (it’s 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 – 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. That’s why I ultimately chose USC over UCLA; USC might not be a tiny liberal arts school, but I never felt “lost” 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 “vibes” in terms of student happiness, school spirit, academic success and the “concern” 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 doesn’t know much about California to begin with.</p>
<p>The thing abut Austin is that it’s primarily a college town. I don’t think the same can be said for LA and SF because of their respective sizes. I’m 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>I’d say best all-around would be UT-Austin. But, I’m obviously a bit biased.</p>
<p>here’s 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 Austin’s night life, it may not be at the level that some major cities are, but it’s still really good and if you haven’t been to 6th street, you’re missing out.</p>
<p>I’d 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>