I think Durham has possibly changed since some MN posters went there? Didn’t it used to be the case that you would write your top College choice only on the application? These days, they have to rank all 17 colleges in order of preference. What this means is a much more balanced state / independent cohort across all the colleges, it’s no longer the case that the Bailey colleges are more “rah” than the Hill colleges for this very reason. They balance out the sporty ones, the science-types, the potential “rahs”, the state intake erected etc across colleges in an attempt to minimise the OPs concerns.
Also, so what if many / most are “Oxbridge rejects?” About 80% of those who have the grades to apply to Oxbridge will be rejected and this is a matter of fact. They all have to go somewhere! They will obviously still go on to get top grades at other unis. The fact they are “Oxbridge rejects” at Durham means one thing - a university intake with all A* / A grades! What’s bad about that? Would you rather be at a uni that attracts those with more mediocre grade profiles and where nobody had resilience to apply to Oxbridge in the first place?
There will be just as many Oxbridge rejects at Imperial, LSE etc too. Hardly does them any harm!
The fact is, Durham often comes third or in the top 5 for most subjects in the uni league tables. This is why it’s popular and why it attracts many students who, on another day and with a fair wind blowing, might have been accepted to Oxbridge. It’s hardly an exact science!
There will be Oxbridge rejects at other unis too such as Bristol, Bath, Manchester, Warwick, UCL, Exeter etc etc. So what? A uni with less or no Oxbridge rejects only suggests that it’s less appealing to the most able students.
It’s a very pretty, historic town and very peaceful. Could be considered a bit too small for some.