A tech tard on the Mike Leach post was extolling the virtues of Lubbutt and that got me thinking about what cities would be most attractive to live in. Try to take the school out of the equation (Austin would be 2nd to last on my list if not), try to take your maroon-tinted memories out of the equation, and if you're a young (or at least not an old) single guy, try to take the ladies out of the equation and consider the city alone.

My list:

1. Austin
2. Boulder

A big tie for CS, Columbia, Norman, and Lawrence...to me no one is better than the other save maybe the better weather in CS

7. Lincoln
8. Manhattan
9. Stillwater
10. Waco
11. Ames
12. Lubbock

p.s. - I have actually been to all of these cities and I think that you have to have at least spent a weekend in each to be able to rank them.

quote:

---

save maybe

---

Save maybe?

A place where it doesn't snow is definitely better than a place where it does if all other things are equal.

1. College Station (Its not even close as it is clearly the best city to live in)

2. Boulder
3. Austin
4. Lincoln
5. Norman
6. Stillwater
7. Waco
8. Lawrence
9. Manhatten
10. Ames
11. Columbia
12. Lubbock

Columbia at #11? Have you ever been there? That place is nice.

Waco is far and away the worst city to live in the Big XII. and it's not even close.

Columbia should be in the top 4.

I would definitely not put Columbia at #11. I live here now, and it's a great place to be. I'd put it in the top 5 at least.

When I visited Columbia for a football clinic, the people appeared to be snooty hippie types. Definitely not friendly like Texans.

Waco as a town isn't all that unless you want to establish your own religion but it is close enough to Dallas and Austin, so I am cool with that.

And Austin wins hands down 15/20 years ago (when it was more like Asheville and less like Houston) no contest. Too bad everyone and their mom discovered the secret that was Austin.

The people in Columbia are definitely not snooty. And the only hippies work at Shakespeares (but I will give you that those guys are extreme hippies). It sucks to have that be your only impression, because since I moved here, everyone has been really friendly and for the most part they are interested in where you're from, etc. Although it's freezing now, the weather here has been amazing this whole semester.

[This message has been edited by AggieGirl35 (edited 12/4/2008 12:36p).]

I have been to all 12 as well...

1. Austin
2. Boulder
3. Lincoln
4. Lawrence
5. Norman
6. Columbia
7. Stillwater
8. College Station
9. Waco
10. Manhatten
11. Lubbock
12. Ames

I loved my time in BCS during school, but honestly it does not seem like a great place to live full-time. Now that life does not revolve around beer (as much) and girls (married) I think I would go out of my mind there.

Austin and Boulder by far.

It's kind of funny to see most on here agreeing, despite the liberal politics of the two places.

college station is boring

i'll take austin, boulder and columbia please

quote:

---

snooty hippie types

---

Yet Austin and Boulder are high up on your list?

B-CS is a lousy place to be a single adult in your mid twenties. But is a great place to go to school and a very good place to raise a family.

nm

[This message has been edited by SwampFox (edited 12/4/2008 12:42p).]

Austin is still Texas proud and the infrastructure and entertainment venues is awesome!!!

Boulder has the scenery and I love the outdoors. The USAF presence is very strong in the communities and it reflects in the communities.

Columbia ... is nice.

As a native of Colorado, I can safely say that the vast majority of Aggies would hate living in Boulder proper. Boulder makes Austin look conservative. My list (and I've been to every town):

1. Austin
2. Lawrence
3. College Station
4. Lincoln
5. Columbia
6. Norman
7. Boulder
8. Ames
9. Stillwater
10. Manhattan
11. Waco
12. Lubbock

I added some cities..

1. Austin
2. Boulder
3. Columbia
4. College Station
5. Norman
6. Lawrence
7. Lincoln
8. Stillwater
9. Manhatten
10. Waco
11. Ames
12. New Delhi
13. Niamey
14. Baghdad
15. Moscow
16. Baku
17. Mexico City
18. Lubbock

here's a picture of a guy bathing in Lubbock

Colorado Ag is right. Boulder is a great town in terms of location. But the people are complete a-holes. I was there this summer for a while and all the proclaimed "hippies" who accept all are actually the worst about accepting anyone. Unless you look/act like them, you are nobody.

It's not even the "hippies" that are the worst part - it's the limousine liberals and their associated snobbery and patronizing attitudes. Boulder sucks. The location and town are awesome, but it would need to be repopulated with decent people before I could live there.

I have lived in Lawrence, College Station, and Lubbock at different times in my life. I have also visited Austin extensively and just recently spent some time in Columbia. Out of those, I would rate the following:

1) Austin
2) Lawrence
T3) College Station/Columbia
1,984,847.3) Lubbock

quote:

---

Waco is far and away the worst city to live in the Big XII. and it's not even close.

---

Agreed. Lubbock is awesome compared to Waco.

the entire damn state of Colorado seems to have this misplaced "I'm better than you" opinion of themselves

That's interesting to hear. I have only been there (Boulder) a couple of times for 3 days at a time.

I have been to Columbia twice, once in September and once in January. If I had only been there in September, I might rank it #2. In fact, the only reason why I have College Station so high is because of the weather...if not, I would rank it below Lawrence and Columbia.

Columbia snooty? Someone hasn't been to Columbia methinks. Nice place. Stephens College ftw.

quote:

---

the entire damn state of Colorado seems to have this misplaced "I'm better than you" opinion of themselves

---

this, times a billion.

at least if you lived in Waco, you could go to DFW or Austin to get away from it. if you want to get away from Colorado, you have to go to Kansas or Nebraska.

Lubbock is still the worst, though.

What is so great about BCS weather? It is in a swamp and it never rains

If you were to take the school out of the equation then college station would be the equivalent of giddings

quote:

---

If you were to take the school out of the equation then college station would be the equivalent of giddings

---

judging that i don't even know where that is, i'll take your word

Lubbock is kinda boring once you get too far away from the college dives close to the tceh campus. NOTHING around town at all for long radius.

BCS is pretty nice, over all. Not the best location (30 miles further west towards somerville would have been awesome), but town is small enough to be comfortable and big enough to have some amenities. Reasonably close to austin DFW and Houston. Without the HUGE A&M campus, it would be another average small city, though.

Austin is great with regards to location and culture (for the most part). Hard to argue with hill country.

Boulder. Scenic, pretty, but Coloradans on the east slopes of the rockies (outside Denver) are some stuck up snots. West side colorado folks are nicer.

Ames - bland, like the rest of Iowa, but nice enough.

Manhattan = see Ames, but the aggieville area was pretty OK.

Waco = Armpit.

Lawrence = Haven't been there, or don't remember having been there, so won't pass judgement.

Norman = flat, boring, and close to the crime capital of Sucklahoma: South and east Ok City.

Lincoln = never been there. I imagine it is rather like Ames or Manhattan.

Columbia = Pretty nice, actually, but no Austin. Liberal, though.

Stillwater = See Ames, manhattan, etc. Not BAD, but just boring.

[This message has been edited by MouthBQ98 (edited 12/4/2008 1:42p).]

Whether they like it or not, Boulder is suburban Denver. Aging hippies live there because they want to surround themselves with people who look and act the same. A few years back, Boulder rejected a rail proposal connecting the city to Denver. The real reason - they didn't want city folks (aka blacks and hispanics) coming into town. That's liberal love for you.

Amen. I've been there several times. They like to keep to their own, and we all know the granola eating tree hugger types love to live close to (and therefore overrun) the very nature they so love to "protect", but only if it has clear running streams, fir trees, and mountains. Nice place to visit, but don't plan on staying long term if you don't have a closet full of Birkenstocks already.

[This message has been edited by MouthBQ98 (edited 12/4/2008 1:45p).]

quote:

---

The real reason - they didn't want city folks (aka blacks and hispanics) coming into town.

---

Same reason Littleton and Englewood didn't want the light rail...which made me laugh. Are they worried someone's going to steal their TVs and what not...and then wait for and eventually get on a train? Unreal.