TheDeadFlagBlue

I think Wisconsin strictly dominates UT-Austin for labor overall but UT-Austin is almost competitive for those particularly interested in macro labor (Sahin is at UT-Austin). This is to say that I feel very confident that you will specialize in macro labor, I think this is a tough call. If you like labor more generally, I do not think it is tough.

Brown is very sick (or bad) for sending out rejections first. I am now in the bizarre situation of wondering if I am an "IA" - wtf is this.

Good luck in the interview!

I'll elaborate more on what I said because I think I may have been a bit too harsh, though what I will say at first will actually sound harsher: I think it's possible that you feel entitled to being accepted at a top 5 program and that you have yet to adjust to the fact that this not feasible this year. I do not think that your reasoning is rational. First, you have no way of being confident you'd be admitted to a target school next year (that's hard in any year, could be your LOR just isn't that great). Second, as others have pointed out, placements from top 5-20 programs are basically comparable to those from top 5 schools in terms of where top students place (the network benefits are there, peer effects less so, pedigree less so - latter two are non-trivial but do not seem like dealbreakers to me?). Your education won't be different, your stipend will be comparable etc. So not sure it makes sense to take an extra year on the basis that you could get into MIT or Harvard next year. If you want to take an extra year before embarking on a PhD for personal reasons, that makes a lot of sense to me. If you had a problem being accepted anywhere or were woefully short of your target, delaying a year makes sense to me. If the department that admitted you is a bad match, it also makes sense to wait another year. There are lots of great reasons to apply next year. I do not see any of these reasons reflected in your post. I see you exaggerating research findings in a way that is basically absurd, saying you are tired of being a RA, don't want to apply again but, whatever, some table buried in a paper is sufficient to justify it - what? I do not want to crucify you here or anything. Being rejected sucks, not achieving your objective is miserable. There is something almost humiliating about failing to get into your target school. You spend 3-6 years of your life aiming for it and it doesn't happen? It starts making you think pretty irrational things. In your case, you got into a top 12 program during a really bad year but it clearly isn't what you wanted deep-down. However, you still applied there, presumably because you'd be content going there, because it has something to offer etc. So is it actually a poor outcome or is it just suboptimal relative to your ideal scenario? If I have advice, it's to think this over to think about what you actually want here, meditate on it etc.

Rejected by Illinois after being accepted by Duke - admissions are extremely random! Seems that they are targeting a cohort of 8 (yikes) and that could explain why. I would imagine they typically have an incoming cohort of 20 students or so.

I think it makes sense to do this if you are pessimistic about your prospects as a researcher and believe that you are a lemon. If you are optimistic and believe you have immense potential, it makes no sense whatsoever to do this. Edit: I am pretty sure that Heckman and Moktan applies to journals, not PhD programs so I have no idea where your reasoning is coming from? If you look at placements, plenty of candidates from top 5-20 schools get superb job offers!

I think it would be rational for universities in the US to commit to total normalcy by the start of the semester barring some unforeseen mutation given vaccine trends but, as of late, I've had worries that the fall semester and almost certainly "math camp" will be very compromised. This is based on noticing that the objective of "zero COVID" is oddly widespread in some camps (it's obviously totally unreasonable) and I worry that some institutions will hold onto those objectives for far too long. I wouldn't seek to defer in that case but it would be a bummer.

While I understand the impulse behind posts like this, I also think it's obviously unreasonable. I'm not going to decline to give other offers full consideration to reduce overall stress levels for a few weeks. I don't expect anyone to do this tbh - the costs of being matched with the wrong program are staggering! Edit: after some thought, I can see how delaying can produce worse matches for applicants pulled off the WL with less notice late in the game so I think I was being somewhat unfair, apologies.

I could be misunderstanding this but I think accepting 1/4th of a normal class size is somewhat worse than accepting 1/4th of normal intake. Even at Harvard, a few admitted will select MIT or some other top school.

My two cents on being "implicitly rejected": I think following GC is a good way to figure this out but, after doing that for two weeks, I now realize that I gained nothing from learning whether or not I was implicitly rejected.

Accepted by Duke (apparently in the 1st round, which makes sense given my funding package). This is an absurd outcome for me and demonstrates the randomness of the process. I have not gone on gradcafe in 5 days but, from what I can gather, I am probably on a path to being rejected like a dog from lots of schools that would ordinarily be my targets (UCSD, UCLA, Cornell, Davis). I feel this way because Duke is the only school I've heard from in the past week. Making things more absurd is the fact that I only applied to Duke because it was suggested by a letter writer and I do not recall anything about applying to Duke, it wasn't noteworthy to me. I honestly would routinely forget that I applied there (probably says more about the number of schools that I applied to). I'm very happy with this though! Good luck to the rest of you!

It seems to be real. I guess I have to hope that I am on WL for UCSD.

If I did, it was an accident. I only quoted you and disagreed to offer an alternative perspective that people rarely hear (the idea that taking classes while working full-time can be risky).

I will give an alternative viewpoint: I do not recommend taking classes while working unless you are very confident you will succeed (you have a very strong GPA and some system in place) or are on the workaholic end of the slacker-workaholic continuum. It is not easy to work a full-time job that is more intellectually intensive while also learning about Analysis.

I am not paying too much attention to Minnesota because I did not apply there but I would not be shocked if they are done with acceptances, given that the last batch seems to be mostly unfunded (?). I guess that is an (cruel) alternative to WL? Wonder what others think. I am concerned that the pile of GC acceptances might be thin if acceptances tank a bit and that some schools might be done already.