I am wondering just how bad that is. Compare an alternative. A School adopts new and expensive programs because it will help in the rankings game. But for the rankings these programs would not be adopted. It hires its own grads, introduces bar prep courses, admits fewer first year students, increases transfers, and calls everyone a professor. Now it accurately reports its new and more impressive numbers. Putting aside the possibility that the rankings may have induced the school to do the right thing for the wrong reasons, is the second school less corrupt than a false reporting school?
Maybe Villanova just got the result it wanted at a lower cost and with less waste.