I respectfully disagree with your opinion (and that's okay, we can't agree on everything). Here's some thoughts from a med school applicant who has yet to be accepted to MUMed (I don't have as much ethos than Monkitty).
Who ever said that Mizzou is just another state school? Who ever said that prestige will be the focus? For most students state schools are more affordable than say SLU or other private institutions and maybe their only option to get a medical education. Why would state school med students be less competitive because STEP 1 (which is only one out of three STEP exams) became pass/fail? All specialties in medicine are important, and just tying one's test score with specialty of choice is a toxic way of viewing medicine. Specialties will still be competitive, and there will be ways for other students not attending T20s to have an even playing field (so as we hope). STEP 1 being P/F will not solve all of our problems, namely what will take its place or what will happen with residency placements, but being a former gunner (since my freshman year of undergrad I realized how shortsighted it is to compete and compare oneself to others) it is one small step to solve a toxic competitive classroom environment. Ultimately for that, it is the culture of education that should change.
And finally, MUMed has a innovative and unique curriculum which leads to great STEP scores (and clinical performance according to an interviewer I had). Standardized test scores do not (and should not) define how prestigious an institution is.
I don't think anyone is knocking Mizzou or the quality of physicians it produces, just the opposite in fact.
Personally, I don't think Step 1 says anything about how good of a doctor someone will be, but I do think it at least shows who's willing to work exceptionally hard, and that's one area where Mizzou students obviously excelled. I know there are all kinds of crazy formulas PDs used to stratify their applicants, but Step 1 scores were always a huge factor across the board. It's just a shame to see that factor taken away when Mizzou students performed so well historically.
Yes, removing an objective way to compare students (Step 1) will shift the focus to other available metrics, but I can't imagine a scenario where "prestige" of an institution just doesn't matter. Is it the only thing that PDs will look at? Of course not. But I would argue that prestige will also influence other important factors as well... a letter from a big name in a particular field will likely be easier to obtain for someone attending Harvard, just because they tend to attract a lot of big names. Same for ease of obtaining meaningful research and networking opportunities.
I don't subscribe to a gunner philosophy or see my classmates as "the competition," but the reality is that many of us will be shooting for the same residency spots. So now, with even more focus on obtaining research and performing well on rotations, I worry that this change in Step 1 will actually lead to a more competitive atmosphere as students try to stand out. While I 100% agree that medical culture is toxic and needs to change (just look to the physician suicide rate for proof), I'm just not convinced this move will have the intended effect.
As long as residencies are receiving a thousand applications for ten spots, holistic review just won't be a thing. It's not realistic. We'll have to wait and see how PDs respond to this change, but I have a hard time believing that it won't hurt Mizzou students since it's taking away an area where we really shined. If I wasn't a part of the class of 2024, I'd find this whole mess fascinating... I'd be on my couch with a bowl of popcorn watching the drama unfold! But as one of the guinea pigs... it definitely makes me more anxious than excited.
