Also, as a thought experiment, what would Chicago look like if the investment and focus on the College’s change was less intense? Let’s say the College capped expansion at ~5500 (rather than 7000), made more modest investments in dorms, gyms, etc., and it’s ranking was, say, 13th rather than 6th.
Let’s also say the admins, instead of falling in line with peers and making a pilgrimage to U.S. News, continued to shrug at the rankings.
Let’s say also O’Neill and Behnke stayed on, and the admissions process wasn’t pumped on steroids.
In short, what would the College look like? The applicant boom in the 90s and 2000s would still buoy Chicago (as it did, say, Reed). If a place like Reed has a 30% accept rate, is it feasible to think Chicago would, right now, probably have a 15-20% accept rate, and a 40-50% yield?
What would the harm have been? The market for top schools is so intense I doubt Chicago would’ve spub into the backwater. Would it be doom and gloom in Hyde Park these days, but for the shining lights of Nondorf and crew?