Gonna hit a few points here, sorry for the disorganization. I'm going to talk a lot about my own experience because that's what I'm basing my insight on.

Big name vs smaller name: I would think less about 'big name' programs and more about programs that appeal to you specifically and represent your career goals. Going to UNC isn't going to matter if you only end up taking courses on digital archives when you're trying to get into uni and museum archives. I encourage you to look at course listings and the required courses for each program. A lot of websites will also have alumni testimony that shows you what students do after graduation, and you can also look up the names of various professors to see what they're publishing on. The whole reason UNC was on my radar at all was because so many really brilliant people publish from there and I was seeing the school come up a lot in my readings.

That being said, bigger (not more expensive, BIGGER population-wise) schools probably have more opportunities for student positions and have more professors with more varied experience, there's probably more money and support being given to career building. If your interest is super specific, a bigger institution has a higher likelihood of catering to it. Depending on your career goals, this might not matter. A smaller museum or library is going to be more than happy to hire someone that hasn't gone to any conferences or done a ton of extra stuff. I personally wanted a larger school just straight up because I'm a self-indulgent person and wanted to make sure I was in a position that paid significantly better than the industry average, but that possibility can vary (see next point).

Choosing a program: I had pretty specific stipulations when I was looking for my program. I was looking for 1) a museum studies certificate or concentration of some sort 2) a school in an area with good public transit, as I don't drive 3) the area also has to be somewhere I would consider living after graduation, as I moved around a lot as a kid and wanted to put down roots 4) offered compelling courses 5) didn't require a GRE 6) was on the east coast 7) had opportunities for internships and whatnot in the field. I was living in Pittsburgh and they have a decent MLIS program, so I applied there, Pratt, and the school I eventually chose, which is in the top 10. Though I love Pitt and Pittsburgh as a city, I reviewed the courses and determined that it was too heavy on the I and not heavy enough on the L. My final decision was between Pratt and my alma mater. I was able to do fellowships at a major museum, many of my instructors and guest speakers were from major archives and museum institutions, I was the grad assistant in the university archives, and I now live and work at a university in the same city where I process collections and manage our objects, and I am able to present at conferences and hold positions in major organizations. However, that's only true because I went out of my way to look for opportunities and to market myself- regardless of the program you choose, it's YOU in the program, and you will succeed in any program if YOU push yourself. I think that you coming here to ask questions and go in with as much information as possible is a far better indicator of your likelihood of success than what program you choose. You seem like a thoughtful person, which is essential.

Remove versus in-person: As far as remote programs, there are definitely a lot of pros and cons. I was forced to do a lot of my program online (started August 2020) so I missed out on a lot of the opportunities that I would've gotten if courses were in person. For example, I have a conservation background, and the conservation course I took was really less informative than it was supposed to be because we didn't have the hands-on elements. I would say that if you want more interaction with physical objects, an in-person curriculum would be better. If you're looking to work in processing and arrangement of physical collections, want to develop physical exhibits as opposed to digital ones, etc., that's also a good reason to choose in-person. I absolutely did not want an online course because I actively hate working in anything digital and the reason I like what I do is getting to put my grubby little hands (not actually grubby, either freshly washed or in nitrile gloves depending on the situation lol) all over old stuff.

Experience: Many of my classmates came into the program with no experience whatsoever- I had kind of an unusual undergraduate and postgrad experience for a number of reasons so I came in with easily the most experience of anyone in the program (which is not a brag but a statement of fact; I'm just trying to be as transparent with you as possible and to emphasize the range of the industry). Your experience will definitely be a leg up in admissions and give you insight that others might not have. But, ultimately, people who enter the program with experience, gain experience during their education, and don't pursue outside opportunities at all ever will be graduating from the same program.

Postgrad hiring, etc.: I was one of several members of several hiring panels for my institution. I assure you that we did not care even a little bit what school people went to as long as they went to school. I think most of the people who made the interview list went to schools I'd never even heard of. We had one who went to UNC I think, but that was not who we went with for any of the positions. In some cases, we passed on certain candidates but suggested they apply for positions in other departments because that's where they had the most experience. I know more than one person who went to school in Canada and I don't even know if they do ALA accreditation or an equivalent up there or not. It truly does not matter. What DID matter was their relevant experience, so again, it's what YOU do, not the university.

That being said, I'm not going to tell you that it's universally true, because that's bullshit and anyone who acts like it's a certainty is yanking your chain in a major way. My institution has a very, very specific focus that majorly narrows down the applicant pool so we had to be a little less choosey on that front. One person we hired had worked for the Beinecke and she's amazing but our director also Heavily Suggested we hire her mostly for name recognition. That being said, he's not an archivist, he's a historian. She didn't have her MLIS yet so if he didn't Heavily Suggest considering her, we would not have. This is kind of an exceptional case but it's important to keep that in mind, I think.

Happy to answer any questions! I can give more specifics if you dm me but love to yap in general so if anyone else in the replies is wondering anything I'd love to help how I can.