Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )

Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Michigan (Sticker)
43
43%
Penn (Sticker)
28
28%
Illinois (Full Ride)
28
28%
 
Total votes: 99

User avatar
megaTTTron
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby megaTTTron » Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:53 am

kk19131 wrote:Again, ALL the original post says is that the poster wants to end up in Chicago.

Why in the world are you all telling him to take out $100,000+ in loans to attend Michigan or Penn over a full ride at Illinois? It makes NO sense. It seems like everyone here is assuming he wants to go into biglaw.

If this is what passes for the future of the legal community then I'm truly scared.


I voted for penn. i represent the legal community. be afraid. be very afraid. :mrgreen:

User avatar
FlightoftheEarls
Posts: 858
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby FlightoftheEarls » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:12 pm

Veyron wrote:Reading comp fail? I said was almost as good as Michigan for Chicago but better in terms of gainful employment overall. Don't just spam me with #s bro, apply law to facts.

Reading comp? Are you kidding? Both points 1 (Penn is better for overall gainful employment) and 2 (Penn is almost comparable to Michigan for Chicago) directly addressed that. I mean, I get that you're excited to have taken your 1L exams and recite cool little tips you've heard to sound like a big awesome law student on these boards, but I keep getting the feeling you're in over your head here.

rayiner wrote:The self-selection argument is a poor one. NYC firms at Michigan OCI aren't suddenly going to start taking twice as many students as they usually do just because students are shut out of the usual "more difficult and desirable" markets. Firms by and large go into T14s with some expectation that they'll be calling back X number of people and offering X' number of people. That's why it helps to have big pipelines into firms with big classes.

Think of it from the perspective of someone who just wants a biglaw job out of OCI. What is the credited OCI strategy? Bidding up and down NYC on firms with big summer classes. Everyone I know that did something different had trouble, while even below-median people by and large were okay if they bid NYC. If that's your OCI strategy, what do you want in a school? A ton of NYC interview slots, and a ton of callback slots at those big NYC firms. Penn had a ridiculous number of interview slots at places like Debevoise, DPW, Paul Weiss, etc, firms which are still taking 50+ SAs. Each bid on one of those firms is high-yield, putting you in play for a large number of openings. Meanwhile, bidding on a firm like Foley that might have a half a dozen summers firmwide is very risky - even if they are less grade sensitive, they are just plain oversubscribed. One mistake during an interview or callback (eg: not being enthusiastic enough about the chosen market) might sink you.

Call it hearsay and anecdote if you want, but that's the best anyone really has to go on right now and having gunned OCI myself, and knowing people who did at the various schools, I have formed a firm conclusion that Penn students were in a good position this year.

First, you're not the only one who has gunned OCI on these boards. As a Michigan student who has also gunned OCI and was offered in several markets (including both SF and NYC), I'm in at least as good of a position to answer this as you are. For the record, students were bidding NYC V10s between slots 25-30 as backups and getting almost all of them. Most still had open signups that morning to get extra interview slots, since they had like 8-10 rooms of interviewers each. Michigan students don't rush to NYC like they do at other schools, but that does not mean it's not available for those that want it. You keep implying that you've heard anecdotes about interview slots, and I'm not quite sure if you've actually heard that Michigan has limited slots for these firms or whether you're just assuming that because we only put about half as much of our class into NYC as Penn. Let me be clear - the slots are there for students who want them, probably no different than Penn (or NU, for that matter).

Second, it really is not a poor argument. It would be a poor one if all markets were created equal. As it is, our students at the median target NYC (and the rare few above it who want to return home to NYC), but that's about it. You see, when the GPAs required for better markets are noticeably higher and median kids can get NYC, you have a ton of students above-median that could have NYC if they had wanted, but instead opt to go to better markets. So what you're now suggesting is that firms, who seem to find students at similar points within each class to be of comparable or sufficient "quality" as to hire them, would (1) suddenly only take the top students at Michigan who begin trying to get NYC biglaw, (2) the other, median students who were just as "qualified" as the Penn students still being hired will suddenly be left out, while (3) these median "quality" Penn students will continue to get the same number of spots? Color me extremely skeptical, but I'm pretty damn positive that the recruiting pipeline within firms would adjust to bring in more higher "quality" students at the expense of other schools where they were getting average "quality" students.

Your big focus seems to be on the established numbers, but the number of students going to a market aren't dictated by the number of slots a firm has for these students; to the contrary, the firms dictate these slots based on how many students are interested in each market from each school. If those interests change, there's no reason to think that firms won't make room for higher "quality" students from Michigan. I don't buy your argument for a second, and I think we can both see the gaping holes in it.

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby Ragged » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:56 pm

Hey Flight, can you tell a poor 0L what you would consider "better markets" than NYC and why is NYC considered a fallback? I always thought that NYC was most desirable.

User avatar
mez06
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby mez06 » Sun Dec 26, 2010 2:17 pm

ok ok, I voted for Illinois Full-Ride. Only because that's the most practical and sanely intelligent decision to make. But giving in to our humanistic flaws, I'd probably chose Michigan and advise you to do the same.

Behind all of our good deeds and liberal views of righteousness, we're all secretly whores--of prestige that is. And plain out whores for others...or most. Same thing.

User avatar
Reedie
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:46 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby Reedie » Sun Dec 26, 2010 2:55 pm

My guess is that Michigan is your best choice. None of these options are wrong, however. I'd also doubt that this represents the full field of your options. Go visit and see where you will enjoy being.

Edit: A bit for info, according to NALP 32 Illinois employers interviewed at Illinois. 37 interviewed at Michigan. 10 interviewed at Penn. Nonetheless I'd bet there are more small firms in Chicago accessible out of Illinois than Michigan.

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby BruceWayne » Sun Dec 26, 2010 3:23 pm

Ragged wrote:Hey Flight, can you tell a poor 0L what you would consider "better markets" than NYC and why is NYC considered a fallback? I always thought that NYC was most desirable.


That's because you've been reading TLS. NYC is considered a fallback at top 14 schools outside of Columbia, NYU, Penn, and Cornell because a lot of the students at the other top 14 schools don't want to work there, and because it's easier to gt a job there (mainly because there are a ton of firms in NYC). NYC is only the "most desirable market" if you: 1. have some sort of personal interest in NYC or 2. You're interested in transactional work. It's significantly harder to work in DC and California than it is NYC; a lot of the work done in DC is considered more desirable than NYC. And a lot of people prefer California to NYC for QOL reasons.

User avatar
FlightoftheEarls
Posts: 858
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby FlightoftheEarls » Sun Dec 26, 2010 3:59 pm

BruceWayne wrote:
Ragged wrote:Hey Flight, can you tell a poor 0L what you would consider "better markets" than NYC and why is NYC considered a fallback? I always thought that NYC was most desirable.


That's because you've been reading TLS. NYC is considered a fallback at top 14 schools outside of Columbia, NYU, Penn, and Cornell because a lot of the students at the other top 14 schools don't want to work there, and because it's easier to gt a job there (mainly because there are a ton of firms in NYC). NYC is only the "most desirable market" if you: 1. have some sort of personal interest in NYC or 2. You're interested in transactional work. It's significantly harder to work in DC and California than it is NYC; a lot of the work done in DC is considered more desirable than NYC. And a lot of people prefer California to NYC for QOL reasons.

Yup, this is a good summary. Don't get me wrong - NYC is a great market in a lot of respects. I actually ultimately picked it over a comparable SF firm because I want to do transactional (M&A/Project Finance, specifically), and NYC is a better market for that practice area. My practice-area preferences aside, NYC typically has longer hours and a higher cost of living. The firms in smaller markets where summer class sizes are not as large are notorious for being more selective. Firms based in SF, DC and Chicago will often have soft GPA "requirements" that are noticeably above that of New York, and the most of the higher-ranked students often prefer these "better" markets because they'll get equal pay, work fewer hours (higher QOL), have a lower COL, and get to be a bigger fish in their respective ponds.

There's nothing wrong with NYC as a market, but the law review students at a lot T14 schools don't shoot for NYC for these reasons. Sorry for not providing this explanation earlier - I was caught up in discussing this with Rayiner and assumed that people knew this. I certainly didn't when I was in your spot, so that's my bad.

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby Ragged » Sun Dec 26, 2010 5:26 pm

Thanks Bruce and Flight. That was helpful.

RTFM
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:45 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby RTFM » Tue Dec 28, 2010 2:47 am

People who have already posted know a lot more about actual job placement statistics than I do, but just to add an opinion based on personal experience I'd say that if you know you want to practice in Illinois you'd be better off at Illinois with $$$ than Michigan at sticker. I have worked for two different biglaw firms in the past and a huge chunk of their summer associates were from Illinois. I have friends at Michigan, on the other hand, who said that it's been really hard for them/classmates to land those positions in Chicago because it's harder for them to make any connections. Ultimately, I don't think that Michigan would any doors in Chicago that Illinois wouldn't, and Illinois is free. If you think you'll change your mind later and might want to practice somewhere else in the country, that's a different story.

I also got good money at Illinois (but not a full ride) and I will (hopefully) be contemplating a similar decision.

User avatar
johnnyutah
Posts: 1709
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:00 pm

Re: Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride)

Postby johnnyutah » Tue Dec 28, 2010 2:54 am

RTFM wrote:I have worked for two different biglaw firms in the past and a huge chunk of their summer associates were from Illinois. I have friends at Michigan, on the other hand, who said that it's been really hard for them/classmates to land those positions in Chicago because it's harder for them to make any connections.

Credited. Personal connections > school rank (as I have discovered to my dismay).




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addie1412 and 1 guest