I share some of the frustration that Minnesota feels like a school that underperforms a bit in academic and athletic rankings.
But expecting it to be among the elite of the elite public schools isn’t very realistic or just a matter of institutional will. It’s not as if we could be Cal if we just tried harder. It’s a problem at least partially based on demographics.
To be an elite university, you need to be exclusive. To be exclusive, you need a lot more people wanting to go there than you have spots. Unless you’re an established Ivy school or something similar, you need some reason to get people clamoring to get in. In that respect, it helps to have a large and/or growing population of in-state students.
The top 10 P5 public schools are: Cal, UCLA, Michigan, UVA, UF, UNC, Texas, Wisconsin, Illinois, Georgia Tech. All but Wisconsin (no. 20) and Virginia (no. 12, and near the northeast corridor) are in the top 10 most populous states, and I don’t think that’s coincidence.
What about the 6 states nearest to Minnesota in population: Maryland, Colorado, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana. The U is behind only Wisconsin and (just barely) Maryland of those state’s ~9 flagship universities. Really, as the 23rd best public school (not just 23rd best flagship) in the 22nd most populous state (one that many consider unlivable tundra), Minnesota arguably over performs academically—you have to consider that many states have multiple public flagships. And that’s just undergrad. Minnesota generally does better in grad school/research ranking.
So yeah, I want Minnesota to be “better” but I don’t expect it—or need it—to be a place where our grads are regularly beating out Michigan bros for spots at Cravath or Goldman Sachs. It’s a good school we should be proud of.
That said, I absolutely think we could climb to top ~15 public schools with some real focus. We should at least be able to do what Wisconsin has done. One way to do that? Win some football/basketball games and get more national exposure. Ski-U-Mah!