Quote from: Harvey Birdman - Attorney at Law on March 28, 2006, 05:00:39 PMQuote from: bloodbath on March 28, 2006, 04:56:20 PMTOTALLY FAKE! Denver did NOT move 25 spaces to 70 and no way did UNLV drop to tier 3. I'm calling BS on this based on those two facts alone. and why would there be a katrina footnote? I like how everyone is so cynical.. Seriously, it's good... You will all be good lawyers. However, in this situation, the fact remains that these are real.. Please go to the nearest bookstore and see for yourself. Or wait for them to go online April 1st.any chance you could just scan a little chunk of it (even just the top 3), just for some secondary verification.
Quote from: bloodbath on March 28, 2006, 04:56:20 PMTOTALLY FAKE! Denver did NOT move 25 spaces to 70 and no way did UNLV drop to tier 3. I'm calling BS on this based on those two facts alone. and why would there be a katrina footnote? I like how everyone is so cynical.. Seriously, it's good... You will all be good lawyers. However, in this situation, the fact remains that these are real.. Please go to the nearest bookstore and see for yourself. Or wait for them to go online April 1st.
TOTALLY FAKE! Denver did NOT move 25 spaces to 70 and no way did UNLV drop to tier 3. I'm calling BS on this based on those two facts alone. and why would there be a katrina footnote?
Quote from: Alamo79 on March 28, 2006, 04:56:30 PMDid anyone else notice that the Katrina footnote was marked as a "2" instead of a "1," as the first footnote is usually marked? While there are a number of possible explanations for this (such as another footnote on a previous page), it makes me wonder. And the formatting of the footnote also looks a little weird, placing it in the middle of some other unrelated info about sources, then about non-accredited law schools. Looks more real than anything else I've seen, but I'll only believe it fully when I see it on the US News site or in hard copy . . . Tulane's footnote is 2 and the description is 2. Where's the problem?
Did anyone else notice that the Katrina footnote was marked as a "2" instead of a "1," as the first footnote is usually marked? While there are a number of possible explanations for this (such as another footnote on a previous page), it makes me wonder. And the formatting of the footnote also looks a little weird, placing it in the middle of some other unrelated info about sources, then about non-accredited law schools. Looks more real than anything else I've seen, but I'll only believe it fully when I see it on the US News site or in hard copy . . .
Quote from: FSUGeoff on March 28, 2006, 04:49:40 PMQuote from: laurrk on March 28, 2006, 04:47:25 PMAw nuts, Syracuse dropped out of the top 100. Maybe I should rethink my options...?I know right, this make things complicated.
Quote from: laurrk on March 28, 2006, 04:47:25 PMAw nuts, Syracuse dropped out of the top 100. Maybe I should rethink my options...?I know right, this make things complicated.
Aw nuts, Syracuse dropped out of the top 100. Maybe I should rethink my options...?
Quote from: mschuell on March 28, 2006, 04:51:51 PMQuote from: FSUGeoff on March 28, 2006, 04:49:40 PMQuote from: laurrk on March 28, 2006, 04:47:25 PMAw nuts, Syracuse dropped out of the top 100. Maybe I should rethink my options...?I know right, this make things complicated.I'll preface my remarks by saying that this pretty much does Syracuse in for me, but they already were hanging by a thread.However, Syracuse was 3rd tier in the 2005 ratings, so they're probably just hovering between the bottom of the second tier and the top of the third - I doubt it'll affect one's employment prospects too much. Also, DePaul was third tier last round, and now they've moved all the up to #80.
I'm at work and can't see it. Can someone tell me Temple and Villanova's rank?
Where did you find this? Seems a bit odd to me actually. Berkeley jumps all the way to #8??!?!?! 11 to 8?
you people do know that theres' a new one out every freakin year. are you gonna transfer schools depending on next years ranking?