Anyone Else Hate 1965 Quarters?

Short answer: yes.

I see them all the time. Funny I've yet to find a 68 since starting a circulation set a year or so ago.

IMO the 1965 (and really up through 1972) quarters are the ultimate symbol of not just "what could've been", but rather, "What could you've spended with them." Well, with each passing year, I'm reminded of how much less you can get with this. Back when these were first issued, you could get a gallon of gas, a cheeseburger at a diner, a loaf of bread, the Sunday paper (SUNDAY, not the daily paper), a jumbo-sized cantaloupe, nearly two pounds of peppers or tomatoes, three onions, a high school football game, as well as a comic book and have a dime or even a bit more left over. Of course, a couple decades later the buying power was reduced to daily papers, arcade games, phone call at a booth, and a pack of gum. Nowadays, all you can get is a gumball, a pencil and/or a pen, and maybe a few things at a yard sale if you're lucky.

Even with that 1964 Nickel, you could have ridden a kiddie ride at an amusement park when it was AU/BU. People honestly look at them like a cent once did back when silent movies and Model T's were all the range, when an 1860's Indian cent wouldn't take much notice (unless if AU/BU like these early clads and when an 1877 would be treated like a 1950-D nickel would be today in terms of occasionally being found circulating).

Well even though most are averaging around a Fine, other dates like the 1966's are going the way of Barbers, with most AG-low VG in a decade or two, with a gradual rise of prices in higher grades likely forthcoming, but of course demand will always lag behind the silver era coinage.

I live for bicentennial coins.
But I will start holding on to 1965 for being the first clad coin.
That has to mean something sometime in the future.

I have wondered if a 65 through 67 SMS quarter was sent into a TPG,
would they ever grade it as a business strike?

Publishers of price guides move glacially. Until the early '90's all the clads were listed as being worth face value except in Unc where they all had the same premium of about double face value. They've made few changes since. They're all the same and all grossly undervalue the coins. On ebay it's not at all unusual to find various clads in circulated and uncirculated grades selling for far higher prices than the price guides.

They don't want to insult their "real" customers, most of whom don't like clads. Most collectors are still trying to wrap their heads around the idea that moderns are scarce in high grades and they might explode if they see a nice attractive 1969 quarter in AU listed at a couple of dollars.

Baby steps with the 2009-P and 2009-D nickels and dimes in AU+

It's simple. From where I sit, it only takes five words... From silver to junk clad! !

Funny, I was just thinking about this recently. I actually have grown to like the 1965-1969 quarters. Why? Because they show integrity and longevity. They were part of a new paradigm that had to be instituted. The new composition certainly gave the coins strength, as you can see when you find them in change with very little wear 50 years later.