My point is that there are very informed people who hold a school like Michigan in very high regard because they know and have worked with students and alums and have been impressed, and that's how they judge the "quality" of the school. There are very informed people in the realm of public interest and government, for example, who may have had better experiences with and been more impressed by students from Michigan than students from CCN, for any number of reasons, including the fact that (1) Mich may turn out more and better PI students because of their LRAP and PI focus and (2) equally or more qualified students often choose Mich over CCN because of its public interest support, LRAP, and generous scholarships. I guess you could call that biased if you want to, but everyone's opinion about these schools is subjective on some level. What makes one school "better" than another is in the eye of the beholder, on some level. So yes, I guess I would say that there are some informed and influential people out there who hold Mich in higher regard than CCN. And there are plenty of informed and influential people out there who hold the opposite view - perhaps significantly more people, hell. But this "huge" prestige difference is not true across the board.
I agree, but I think this logic would hold true for many, many, many schools (provided that the differential isn't too big). So like you could also then argue that Georgetown is held in higher regard than Virginia, or Cornell than Penn, or what have you. But yeah, I see your point. That's fair.