As noted by Yaah and others, generalized Path. dept., and thus Fellowship, rankings are simply nonsensical. Among the varying reasons:
1. No path dept. can claim to be #1, 2 or even 3 in all Path subspec areas.
2. Top-notch Fellowship training is not infrequently based on the qualifications of a leading specialist in the area. If (s)he moves, so does the "ranking".
3. Realize, that you should be looking for quality training. Not a "brand name" on your cv. Honestly, few people would really care.
Personally, I have two fellowships from different institutions. Both "brand name" in their fields. However, I wouldn't want to complete both at the same institution, due to varying strengths, and I have no basis to claim that they're better than other institutions, for the simple reason that I haven't completed Fellowships at other institutions. However, I do feel that I received really good training.
Post-Fellowship, it's a bit surprising how few people actually cared where I trained, despite the "brand names". It's a bit like trying to flaunt your AmEx Platinum card. It says something about your background, and it's nice to have, and gives some nice perks. But most of the time, people really don't comment on it, care, or even notice.
That being said, there's certainly some places I'd try to get into, for specific training. E.g. I'd prefer Colby (Mayo AZ) for Pulmonary, Epstein (JHU) for GU, Ladanyi (MSKCC) for molec. path., Fletcher (BWH) for soft tissue, etc. etc.
However, do note that I'd be looking for specific people to train me, not insitutions which necessarily are very good at everything they do. Also, as for Residency, you have to take other things into consideration. Some programs are primarily research-oriented. Others have significant amounts of scut work. Others again are semi-malignant. Things you just can't average out and put into a spreadsheet and grade for general consumption.
my guess would be andre the giant. i dunno his real name. 
