Daisy

This is a very specific case and you're basically saying that advisor trumps school. If this is completely true then school rankings wouldn't matter because people would only care about professors. I'm sure this happens, but it's the exception not the rule. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that 9 out of 10 times people would chose Stanford or MIT over UCLA or Cornell, at least for quant. Maybe this is not true for strategy and CB, but if this is the case it's probably not a good idea to put strategy, CB and quant all in the same ranking. From the quant side the groups presented are kinda misleading. Maybe this is the problem after all, since there are people here who seem to like it.

doubt it

Hello friends! I'm planning to apply for Quantitative Marketing programs this year (and hopefully start in 2019). I came up with a list of departments where faculty research topics that interest me. The thing is, I have only a very rough idea of how these departments compare in terms of ranking. I looked at the UTD and US news rankings, but I'm not sure if the first one takes into account department size and the second one is an MBA ranking (which is maybe some kind of b-school prestige ranking?). I would like to know the opinion of folks around here. How would you rank the following schools: Minnesota, Rochester, Toronto, Michigan, Southern California, UCSD, Maryland, Wash U (Olin)? Are they even in the same tier (top 10, 20, 30)? Also if anybody can contribute with information we would normally have only after enrolling (or visiting), it would be greatly appreciated. For example, I heard the attrition rate at Chicago Booth is high, Wisconsin and Minnesota are in regions really cold while San Diego and Berkeley have perfect weather, Columbia is located in a very expensive region, Rochester is very specialized, etc.

accidentally started 2 threads. Mods, please delete this one! Sorry!