Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby rad lulz » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:06 pm

O dany boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling, from glen to glen, and down the mountainside...

User avatar
Bless
Posts: 533
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:32 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Bless » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:17 pm

Image

User avatar
JoeMo
Posts: 1518
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby JoeMo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 3:01 pm

Whenever I see Dany Boy all I can think of is Chumbawumba.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby PDaddy » Fri Mar 16, 2012 3:31 pm

romothesavior wrote:Arizona State is a school in the rise. WUSTTTL is a toilet in decline. Obvs. Oh and Texas ... I'd be surprised if they even have enough employers for an OCI next year.

Seriously I hope some of you 0Ls come back in a year or two and laugh at how hard y'all are spergging out over some meaningless rankings system compiled by a joke of a publication using highly sketchy metrics that no employer really cares about.


I agree! I believe the USNWR rankings are made up. I don't believe for one second that the reputational surveys are actually sent to any but the same "industry experts" every year. I also believe that USNWR manipulates its own data to get the desired outcomes.

Every school that climbs four or more spots is "on the rise" until it falls 10 spots...right back down to where it was before, or something akin to it. Indiana was "on the move", so was Illinois. Illinois was once #16 in the USNWR rankings, so what does it say that UIUC fell to the low-20's/high/30's, rose back to #23 or so, and now has recently fallen again? UC-Hastings was once #22 or 23 (I forget), and it was "on the rise"...yeah...back down to the mid-40's. U-Washington was once #23, and it fell down to the late-20's, then the late-40's, then rose back to the early-30's.

Now? Booyaa! U-Wash is #20. Can we trust it? Is it "on the move"? Recent history tells us that UC-Davis will be ranked back in the mid/late 30's in no time flat. This is all just musical chairs, manipulation to creat a different look so people aren't suspicious...so USNWR can continue to sell its TTTT magazine. But you notice that they don't tinker with their beloved T14, save for throwing the prisoners a smallbone last year and teasing them with Texas tying for #14. That won't happen again in the near future.

Except for some minor fluctuations, the top-30 is comprised of largely the same schools year-in and year-out: HYS, CCN, MVPB, DNCG, Texas, Vandy, UCLA, USC, Minnesota, GWU, BU, BC, WUSTL, N.D., Emory, Fordham, U-Washington, W & L, W & M, Illinois, Iowa, and UIUC.

Can anyone say "lipstick on a pig"?

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby PDaddy » Fri Mar 16, 2012 3:43 pm

PhiAlphaFLBeta wrote:After the T15, career prospects are mostly regional, so why spend 150k for a private school like Tulane when you can go to LSU for less than half the price. That's what I took from his advice.


In general you are correct, but conceptually Tulane is a really bad example. In fact, the concept doesn't apply. Tulane is one of four non-T14's that actually bucks the trend and can place graduates all over the country. The other three are Vandy, N.D. and Howard.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby stillwater » Fri Mar 16, 2012 3:45 pm

PDaddy wrote:
PhiAlphaFLBeta wrote:After the T15, career prospects are mostly regional, so why spend 150k for a private school like Tulane when you can go to LSU for less than half the price. That's what I took from his advice.


In general you are correct, but conceptually Tulane is a really bad example. In fact, the concept doesn't apply. Tulane is one of four non-T14's that actually bucks the trend and can place graduates all over the country. The other three are Vandy, N.D. and Howard.


They don't call Tulane the "Harvard of the Bayou" for nothing.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby PDaddy » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:01 pm

BearsGrl wrote:
Plus, no dude will get Rihanna. Unless your name is Chris Brown.



...wouldn't want her for a girlfriend, but I'd smash big-time.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby PDaddy » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:12 pm

T14 v. "T18"

The T14 concept seems a bit dead to me now. Although I believe the USNWR rankings are mostly BS, I do pay attention to the trends. The rationale behind the T14 concept is the noted staying power of a consortium of 14 schools that have been ranked within the top-14 since the inception of the rankings.

However, it turns out that four additional schools - Texas, Vandy, UCLA, and USC - actually have remarkable similar staying power within the more inclusive top-18. So why do we not just call the top-18 the T18?

Texas last year became the first school to crack the T14, and the other three have remained largely at #18 or above since UIUC dropped from #16.

There really is no T14, there's a T18. Minnesota and GWU really need to show more consistency before we can round it to T20, which would be really nice.

User avatar
chup
Posts: 23645
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:48 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby chup » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:17 pm

PDaddy wrote:T14 v. "T18"

The T14 concept seems a bit dead to me now. Although I believe the USNWR rankings are mostly BS, I do pay attention to the trends. The rationale behind the T14 concept is the noted staying power of a consortium of 14 schools that have been ranked within the top-14 since the inception of the rankings.

However, it turns out that four additional schools - Texas, Vandy, UCLA, and USC - actually have remarkable similar staying power within the more inclusive top-18. So why do we not just call the top-18 the T18?

Texas last year became the first school to crack the T14, and the other three have remained largely at #18 or above since UIUC dropped from #16.

There really is no T14, there's a T18. Minnesota and GWU really need to show more consistency before we can round it to T20, which would be really nice.

Please shut up.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby beachbum » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:20 pm

chup wrote:
PDaddy wrote:T14 v. "T18"

The T14 concept seems a bit dead to me now. Although I believe the USNWR rankings are mostly BS, I do pay attention to the trends. The rationale behind the T14 concept is the noted staying power of a consortium of 14 schools that have been ranked within the top-14 since the inception of the rankings.

However, it turns out that four additional schools - Texas, Vandy, UCLA, and USC - actually have remarkable similar staying power within the more inclusive top-18. So why do we not just call the top-18 the T18?

Texas last year became the first school to crack the T14, and the other three have remained largely at #18 or above since UIUC dropped from #16.

There really is no T14, there's a T18. Minnesota and GWU really need to show more consistency before we can round it to T20, which would be really nice.

Please shut up.


I can't tell if he's trolling or just really stupid. If trolling, he's remarkably consistent from one thread to another.

User avatar
R86
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:03 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby R86 » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:22 pm

:D
Last edited by R86 on Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Tom Joad » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:22 pm

YSH, T6, and T12 are all that exist.

User avatar
JoeMo
Posts: 1518
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby JoeMo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:43 pm

PDaddy wrote:T14 v. "T18"

The T14 concept seems a bit dead to me now. Although I believe the USNWR rankings are mostly BS, I do pay attention to the trends. The rationale behind the T14 concept is the noted staying power of a consortium of 14 schools that have been ranked within the top-14 since the inception of the rankings.

However, it turns out that four additional schools - Texas, Vandy, UCLA, and USC - actually have remarkable similar staying power within the more inclusive top-18. So why do we not just call the top-18 the T18?

Texas last year became the first school to crack the T14, and the other three have remained largely at #18 or above since UIUC dropped from #16.

There really is no T14, there's a T18. Minnesota and GWU really need to show more consistency before we can round it to T20, which would be really nice.


WTF IS THIS?????? Texas/Vandy/USC/UCLA troll!

User avatar
JoeMo
Posts: 1518
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby JoeMo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:44 pm

PDaddy wrote:T14 v. "T18"

The T14 concept seems a bit dead to me now. Although I believe the USNWR rankings are mostly BS, I do pay attention to the trends. The rationale behind the T14 concept is the noted staying power of a consortium of 14 schools that have been ranked within the top-14 since the inception of the rankings.

However, it turns out that four additional schools - Texas, Vandy, UCLA, and USC - actually have remarkable similar staying power within the more inclusive top-18. So why do we not just call the top-18 the T18?

Texas last year became the first school to crack the T14, and the other three have remained largely at #18 or above since UIUC dropped from #16.

There really is no T14, there's a T18. Minnesota and GWU really need to show more consistency before we can round it to T20, which would be really nice.


Also... Texas was never part of the T14. It was simply #14 last year but as you mentioned the T14 are the 14 that have never fallen out thus Texas doesn't count since it was only there for just a moment. Just enough to tease people like you that actually bought into the hype.

User avatar
padawanphil
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:42 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby padawanphil » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:48 pm

R86 wrote:Is T14 the schools ranked 1-14 or is it the 14 schools that have ever broken into the top 10 (or some shit like that...)?

1-14, and while their order changes some those 14 schools have always been 1-14

woeisme
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:39 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby woeisme » Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:56 pm

padawanphil wrote:
R86 wrote:Is T14 the schools ranked 1-14 or is it the 14 schools that have ever broken into the top 10 (or some shit like that...)?

1-14, and while their order changes some those 14 schools have always been 1-14


AND have all at some point been in the top ten. You're both right.

Cornellanister
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:26 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Cornellanister » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:05 pm

PDaddy wrote:T14 v. "T18"

The T14 concept seems a bit dead to me now. Although I believe the USNWR rankings are mostly BS, I do pay attention to the trends. The rationale behind the T14 concept is the noted staying power of a consortium of 14 schools that have been ranked within the top-14 since the inception of the rankings.

However, it turns out that four additional schools - Texas, Vandy, UCLA, and USC - actually have remarkable similar staying power within the more inclusive top-18. So why do we not just call the top-18 the T18?

Texas last year became the first school to crack the T14, and the other three have remained largely at #18 or above since UIUC dropped from #16.

There really is no T14, there's a T18. Minnesota and GWU really need to show more consistency before we can round it to T20, which would be really nice.


Lets just call it T250 and be done with it. That way all of us can feel special!

User avatar
Bless
Posts: 533
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:32 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Bless » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:15 pm

If you go to T14 you're getting big law and endless success.

If you are T15+, you're royally fucked.

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby 20160810 » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:21 pm

f7 wrote:Smells like buttermilk in here.

Was just thinking the same thing.

Anyone getting worked up over this foolishness has clearly not read the rest of PDaddy's body of work.

User avatar
Guchster
Posts: 1205
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:38 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Guchster » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:59 pm

f7 wrote:Smells like buttermilk in here.


cue racial butthurt

User avatar
Ded Precedent
Posts: 767
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:26 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Ded Precedent » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:59 pm

f7 wrote:Smells like buttermilk in here.

LOL.

User avatar
Renne Walker
Posts: 546
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:12 am

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Renne Walker » Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:11 am

The USNWR rankings are similar to the Nielsen TV ratings. In the case of Nielsen, they survey less than 1% of the population―the other 99% are irrelevant. Argue that flawed method as much as you want, the bottom line is, what Nielsen says is gospel, ditto USNWR. Advertisers pay the BIG bucks to the highest rated shows while the lower rated shows are cancelled. The difference, of course, is that the lower rated law schools are not cancelled, they just march on happily collecting their tuitions.

In a manner of speaking, law firms use USNWR the way advertisers use Nielsen. The T-14, are “must buys” with special consideration to YSH, T-6, and PBV. One could also argue that dropping out of Tier-1 is like having your show going from network to cable.

User avatar
DaftAndDirect
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 4:28 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby DaftAndDirect » Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:15 am

Renne Walker wrote:The USNWR rankings are similar to the Nielsen TV ratings. In the case of Nielsen, they survey less than 1% of the population―the other 99% are irrelevant. Argue that flawed method as much as you want, the bottom line is, what Nielsen says is gospel, ditto USNWR. Advertisers pay the BIG bucks to the highest rated shows while the lower rated shows are cancelled. The difference, of course, is that the lower rated law schools are not cancelled, they just march on happily collecting their tuitions.

In a manner of speaking, law firms use USNWR the way advertisers use Nielsen. The T-14, are “must buys” with special consideration to YSH, T-6, and PBV. One could also argue that dropping out of Tier-1 is like having your show going from network to cable.


I like this analogy.

But your egregious anti-Mich trolling makes my butt hurt.

User avatar
Pricer
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby Pricer » Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:44 am

DaftAndDirect wrote:
Renne Walker wrote:The USNWR rankings are similar to the Nielsen TV ratings. In the case of Nielsen, they survey less than 1% of the population―the other 99% are irrelevant. Argue that flawed method as much as you want, the bottom line is, what Nielsen says is gospel, ditto USNWR. Advertisers pay the BIG bucks to the highest rated shows while the lower rated shows are cancelled. The difference, of course, is that the lower rated law schools are not cancelled, they just march on happily collecting their tuitions.

In a manner of speaking, law firms use USNWR the way advertisers use Nielsen. The T-14, are “must buys” with special consideration to YSH, T-6, and PBV. One could also argue that dropping out of Tier-1 is like having your show going from network to cable.


I like this analogy.

But your egregious anti-Mich trolling makes my butt hurt.


Except that the advertising dollars fluctuate somewhat quickly and consistently with the ratings. As mentioned thousands of times before, a one year fluctuation in a school rankings is not going to affect OCI/hiring trends. I don't care if my school is #4 or #24, as long as the same employers continue coming with the same cutoffs, the ranking is irrelevant. I care about a job, not an arbitrary number to associate with my school.

User avatar
JusticeHarlan
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: Rankings are stupid. Calm down.

Postby JusticeHarlan » Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:14 am

Renne Walker wrote:The USNWR rankings are similar to the Nielsen TV ratings. In the case of Nielsen, they survey less than 1% of the population―the other 99% are irrelevant. Argue that flawed method as much as you want, the bottom line is, what Nielsen says is gospel, ditto USNWR. Advertisers pay the BIG bucks to the highest rated shows while the lower rated shows are cancelled. The difference, of course, is that the lower rated law schools are not cancelled, they just march on happily collecting their tuitions.

In a manner of speaking, law firms use USNWR the way advertisers use Nielsen. The T-14, are “must buys” with special consideration to YSH, T-6, and PBV. One could also argue that dropping out of Tier-1 is like having your show going from network to cable.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest