Thinking of choosing Nottingham over Cambridge - am I crazy?

Sorry but this is plain wrong. We all know that Fortune 500 companies use a list of target schools and if you are not a student/graduate of one of those you don't even make the first cut. Also, people attending top PhD programs typically have masters from prestigious schools and/or stellar undergrad backgrounds from equally prestigious schools. It is not always the case as connections/recommendations and such play a large role too but if you look at the CVs of current PhD students at the world top 10 universities you will often see masters from Oxbridge, LSE, UCL or other foreign unis that have reputed masters programs with strong placement records.

As I clarified in my second post, I was speaking about within academic circles because that is my own area of interest, rather than how they are judged by the public or businesses. Looking for a job in the former, it is very much about who you studied under, that your department suited your specialisation and demonstrating that your past research is related to what you propose to study next. Maybe what you suggest is indeed how the Fortune 500 works.

Speaking as a fellow master's applicant, postgrads aren't about ranking tables, university reputations, nice architecture, or famous people who once studied there. All master's are equally respected on a CV, whether from Oxford or Oxford Brooks

This just isnt true - if you want to do a PhD afterwards then yes, the supervisor is one of the most important things, but for any industry job the university brand name is important. Also going to a higher ranked university gives you a better chance of working with a big name in the field (unlike a PhD, you dont apply to work with a particular person for your Masters so there is a bit of luck when it comes to who you get).

Remember that a Masters is also about the taught courses though; someone who passed a Masters from Cambridge is likely to be a stronger candidate than someone who passed a Masters from a 'less difficult' university, all other things being equal.

Thank you for clarifying. Indeed for PhD graduates, the advisor is hugely important as he essentially finds a job for his graduating students. So in principle a famous supervisor at an unknown university can work for the student, but let's face it, it is often the case that the best universities as ranked by league tables are the ones that have the top academics as well.

I've applied to Cambridge and Nottingham to study for a Masters. I've visted them both and prefer Nottingham because it was less formal and seemed I'd have more fun there than at Cambridge. I've got mates at Nottingham and spent a few weekends there and I've had a great time like the fact it is a prestigious university but at the same time it's relative informal and the students know how to party and have a good time. However, part of me thinks I'd be made to turn down an offer from Cambridge due to its prestige - a Masters from Cambridge would look good on my C.V.

What do you think? Would i be crazy to turn down an offer from Cambridge for a place at Nottingham?

Go to Nottingham if that's where you really want to go. Cambridge is hard work, and so more likely that you wouldn't be able to do well if your heart wasn't fully into it.

At the Masters level I'm much less sure that this is true.

I'm not certain what Cambridge is upto with its MPhil programmes but they increasingly seem to be admitting several times as many students as could possibly be accommodated for further research, with a significant (and presumably passing) proportion of these from China and the Middle East. The course specifications seldom look very terribly exacting: they're almost all of them only 9 months, and even this seems to be two 8 week terms of teaching, during which you might write 2 x 3000 word assessed essays per term, with the Easter term given over to guided supervision of a dissertation often shorter than is required for Masters degrees elsewhere.

I dunno, it seems to be a moneyspinner financially supporting the provision made for those below and above (Bachelors students and Doctoral candidates). Where Japanese used to be content with visting Cambridge and buying a T-shirt, Chinese seem to want to stay for a bit and get a certificate. And at 15 grand a time the university seems ready to accommodate that want.

Really? Thought it would be difficult because I met someone who did his MA in Cambridge and said he was working ALL the time. But I suppose if you're right, then it's a another reason not to pick Cambridge over Notts. The idea of being a 'moneyspinner' for the other students at the university just isn't appealing.

I honestly think people should go wherever they want to. It's a difficult choice when friends and relatives all push you toward what seems to be the most obvious decision. I recently firmed Edinburgh over Durham for English lit (undergrad) and most people were SHOCKED. I mean, it's not such a big deal, ultimately it's important to go where you think you'll be happiest.

At the Masters level I'm much less sure that this is true.

I'm not certain what Cambridge is upto with its MPhil programmes but they increasingly seem to be admitting several times as many students as could possibly be accommodated for further research, with a significant (and presumably passing) proportion of these from China and the Middle East. The course specifications seldom look very terribly exacting: they're almost all of them only 9 months, and even this seems to be two 8 week terms of teaching, during which you might write 2 x 3000 word assessed essays per term, with the Easter term given over to guided supervision of a dissertation often shorter than is required for Masters degrees elsewhere.

I dunno, it seems to be a moneyspinner financially supporting the provision made for those below and above (Bachelors students and Doctoral candidates). Where Japanese used to be content with visting Cambridge and buying a T-shirt, Chinese seem to want to stay for a bit and get a certificate. And at 15 grand a time the university seems ready to accommodate that want.

You won't regret it. The difference at postgrad level is vastly, vastly overstated.

Academically there won't probably be that much of a difference but as discussed for almost 4 pages now, the difference is in the perception by outsiders.

How come you want to know if this isn't real? Just want to see the raging arguments that ensue ?