For better or worse, US News rankings are the most popular, most widely reported and most impactful ranking system used by prospective undergrad applicants. That is without dispute. That is why schools almost without exception participate in the voluntary survey.
Rhetorically, if US News rankings are unimportant, then why did schools like emory, tulane, villanova, etc. try to cheat in the information reported to them? Why do college presidents tout them when the rankings are favorable. I won't bore you with the list of colleges that use the rankings in their marketing of the university- they are legion-, but here's johns hopkins press release
http://hub.jhu.edu/2013/09/10/us-news-annual-rankings
put out showing it moving up to #12. The same day as the rankings came out. What would cause a world class university like johns hopkins to do that this if the rankings were meaningless?
As for objective evidence that rankings matter, please see this harvard study:
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6834.html
Salience in Quality Disclosure: Evidence from the US News College
AUTHOR ABSTRACT
How do rankings affect demand? This paper investigates the impact of college rankings, and the visibility of those rankings, on students' application decisions. Using natural experiments from U.S. News and World Report College Rankings, we present two main findings. First, we identify a causal impact of rankings on application decisions. When explicit rankings of colleges are published in U.S. News, a one-rank improvement leads to a 1-percentage-point increase in the number of applications to that college. Second, we show that the response to the information represented in rankings depends on the way in which that information is presented. Rankings have no effect on application decisions when colleges are listed alphabetically, even when readers are provided data on college quality and the methodology used to calculate rankings. This finding provides evidence that the salience of information is a central determinant of a firm's demand function, even for purchases as large as college attendance.
The bottom line, US News is the first place the general public and prospective applicants look to to see if a school is good or sucks.
UConn's trajectory is inarguable. Can it surpass udub, texas, ohio state? As long as UConn using the incredible change in perception among the public over the past 15 years, especially the last 6-8 years, continues on this trajectory then it is an easy "yes."
Herbst is driving this perception, with concrete initiatives that really is taking academia by storm. Hiring away top professors during global economic uncertainty? Check. Providing billions in capital projects? Check. Orienting the university towards the hard sciences? Check.
And you know what is scary good? UConn hasn't even experienced the full impact of her decisions vis a vis us news rankings. The data is derived from 18 months ago.
Marketing to be successful needs to be simple. And simply, the prevailing view of UConn is that it is becoming world class. Long gone is the thrill of being New England's top public school. UConn is playing in a much deeper pond, the one populated by Cal, ucla, michigan, unc and uva. It isn't able to keep up. Yet. Investment plus top high school students plus incredible resident wealth? The pieces are there.
I really have no idea what you're talking about. Did you read my posts carefully? I certainly applauded UConn's rise in US News. But how often is this thing cited at this point? It's just tiring & only spells out part of the picture. BIG schools look at all levels of the university mission - the AAU things is not to be taken lightly, though I feel it's overstated.
Lastly, I've been quite clear on this board here since joining Boneyard: UConn to the BIG would be a sweet addition.