I agree with this sentiment. I am an incoming 1L at Syracuse, but even that was iffy for me on whether I should retake the LSAT. While I do not agree with the rankings snobs that rank means everything, becasue I believe once you get beyond the top 15 or so, the differences between the #30 school and #100 school are pretty small. However, I think the return on investment point is well taken. I think Syracuse will pay off, though Roger Williams would be another story. You get to a point where these T4 admissions standards are so low that employers just dont' respect them. To quote a Columbia educated undergrad professor of mine: "You have to realize that if you take out $100,000 in loans, you have to pay that back. In all honesty the only way to do that is to make a good living, and statistically speaking you won't do that going to a lowly ranked school." Finally, I spoke with Tulsa Law soon to be 2L the other day... He hates it, his grades are mediocre and he has no summer internship and said he honestly debated not returning for year 2. I don't say this to be snobby, but sometimes you gotta give up the dream.
I think that Sammyjenkins makes a point that these tier 4 schools usually don't offer a return on the investment that students put into them. All one has to do is look at the stats of most tier 4 schools. BTW, I'm not trying to be an elitist a-hole, I'm merely trying to make a point. Honestly, I wouldn't go to law school if I only got accepted to a tier 4.