Original post by EboracumWell done son.
If Candidate A goes to Oxbridge, and Candidate B goes to Aston, it doesn't then condemn Candidate B to be forever a worse student academically. Candidate B might work harder, and overtake Candidate A during the three years of university. Getting into Oxbridge is based on one good application, and one good interview. You have to have put together a good application at that particular moment and have to have performed well at that particular moment (of interview) in that particular room in front of those particular people, it isn't like arriving at the gates of heaven where a decision on entry defines the entire rest of your existence.
After that things are relative. I'd argue Russell Group (and other similar) universities aren't too far behind Oxbridge, a student going in to one of those who gets a First (which is really hard) is pretty elite. The question becomes at what point is the cut off. At what point does a First become lesser than a 2:1 from Oxbridge, I'd probably argue non-Russell (perhaps with the exception of St Andrews and Bath), although this purely plucking opinions out of the air, I've not studied at either of those so it does become hard to say.
So the crux is, I'd take the 2:1 from Oxbridge, but not over any university. I'd take a First from Durham, Bristol, York, Nottingham etc over a 2:1 from Oxbridge.
It's important to note Aston is still a very good university. And a 2:1 from Oxbridge is very good as well (the joker that said it wasn't, get your coat son).