This article presents a critical perspective on the rankings of Canadian universities published by Maclean's magazine in 1999. A cluster analysis of the rankings showed that, in many cases, universities are clustered together in a manner different from their classification or final ranking by Maclean's. It also revealed that these groupings are often decided by variables not realistically measurable by students, such as frequency of medical grants or measures of library holdings. Several pitfalls in the ranking procedures for the 1999 data are summarized. As has been observed in the past, Maclean's data cannot be logically or empirically useful to students evaluating universities. Further issues related to effects of the ranking procedures are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]