<p>
</p>
<p>Doubtful for several reasons. First and foremost, no one particularly cares that a school was once ranked in the top 10 of USNWR. That idea was what prompted my absurd hypothetical where someone hires you because of where your school once ranked. Second, the strength of the top schools largely predates USNWR. Third, USNWR is, if anything, derivative of portability, not the reverse. That is, USNWR is based on ranking various factors, and those factors play a large part in determining portability. USNWR recognizes those factors in its rankings, it does not cause them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So is Berkeley. But fine, we can look at Vandy or USC, I don’t mind. [url=<a href=“http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=vanderbilt&show=chars&sub=location]Vandy[/url”>http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=vanderbilt&show=chars&sub=location]Vandy[/url</a>] puts the substantial majority of its graduates into Tennessee. [url=<a href=“http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=usc&show=chars&sub=location]USC[/url”>http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=usc&show=chars&sub=location]USC[/url</a>] puts nearly everyone into California. The T14, even at the bottom, puts graduates where they want to go. Once you drop into the next level, be it UT, Vandy, USC, or whatever, schools put graduates where the school is located.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>More helpful that #3 too.</p>
<p>@The Brian: To some extent, if location is more important than opportunity, you are better off going to a regional school. So, if someone wanted to live in CA, a GULC graduate will have better options for employment, but they might be elsewhere. A USC grad will have poorer options, but they’ll tend to cluster in CA.</p>