@kingloogie : I’m not gonna answer the other stuff because I don’t know enough (other than, I imagine that since jobs look for competencies and skills, most won’t over-rate GPA and will likely account for the intensity of something like QTM vs. a standard BBA for which many companies have an idea of what those GPAs should look like from a place like Emory. If you have a stronger quantitative and computational background than most students, that would likely be taken into account. Do NOT only focus on putting on a paper-based show of perfectionism. Do as well as you can in terms of that, but make sure you LEARN in the courses and via internships so that you can show off and discuss skills that separate you from other applicants. Note that it may also make you more versatile in terms of the types of jobs you could access post-grad), but the ranking thing is silly.
There is really no “fall from grace” with the rankings. I don’t know how they used to do the rankings, but I imagine that Emory was not as hurt by being a 2 year program as before because perhaps the “employer survey” (which means that, for one, the firms/employers must have experience recruiting the students) is weighted more than it used to, and Emory may have issues with the recruiting cycle because of this. I know one issue that they deal with now is that the recruiting cycle moved early, so this puts Emory at a slight disadvantage. There is also the “internship” metric that I imagine a 4 year program would have a huge advantage with. Despite all this, based upon the more holistic measurements and coverage done by say…a Poets and Quants, it seems Emory does as well or better than many of the schools that have been ranked the highest by businessweek. The placement is extremely strong and the start salaries are up there (especially considering the fact that it is in the south and that a huge chunk will place in the south), very close to all these 4 year programs that have ultra resticted admissions and cherry-pick high SAT/ACT scores from the get go (Emory just basically admits anyone that qualifies who has completed 2 years of college). It is what it is, the placement and starting salaries and whatever folks do afterwards matters, and it is doing pretty damned well in those areas (and this may be partly BECAUSE students spend 2 years in the college).
Here: Looks like I was right:https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-best-undergrad-business-schools/
The only area Emory hurts is the employer rank, which makes some sense. Not much you can do as a 2 year program. My guess is that some wished it was 4 years or something and that GBS wishes more were ready by time of recruitment (and the internship conversion rate would likely be better if more students perhaps interned multiple times for one company or something like that. Harder to do in a 2 year program).
Also, I’ve seen WUSTL in particular in some other rankings (and in some measurements done by P&Q) clean Emory’s clock, but it doesn’t in Businessweek. These don’t seem that reliable. Anything that is a strong ranking seems to suggest the school is doing fine. Like I am sure some of these places are fine schools and all, but unless I desperately value being housed in a business school for 4 years, I am not sure I would pick them over Emory just to say: “Well, it ranks high in X”.
Also, Penn is right below Emory (and performs even worse in “employer” surveys)! I wanna know how many students would use this information to pass Wharton over for Emory. I just wanna know. I don’t imagine Emory performing well in cross-admit battles. Make it make sense.