Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

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

Chicago (sticker) vs. Virginia (sticker) for NYC BIGLAW

Chicago
88
84%
Virginia
17
16%
 
Total votes: 105

$$$$$$
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:08 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby $$$$$$ » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:38 pm

A&O wrote:
Also, UVa has a ton of people that do not want to practice in New York, so it may be easier to get because I think there is less competition.


How will DC's competitiveness not force more UVA students to target NYC in just the same way that the health of Chicago's legal market will force more Chicago students to target NYC?


It probably will, but im saying that a ton of uva students do not want to live in nyc doing biglaw after they graduate and will not be bidding on NY at all, except as a safety in a few cases. I'm sure the same is not true of Chicago, at least from what my friends there tell me.

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

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby BruceWayne » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:39 pm

A&O wrote:
BruceWayne wrote:
A&O wrote:Also, I don't understand the reasoning behind the OP having Harvard as a choice. Are URMs with 160/3.9 autoadmits at HLS?


If they're AA then yeah they're pretty close. That's why I was laughing when you were telling me what schools I was "trolling" for that I "couldn't" have been accepted to in an earlier thread.


I plugged her numbers into LSP, and it doesn't seem like she's getting into HYSCN, for the most part.

I don't know if the tool is inaccurate, and I'm not sure about what numbers do what these days. I haven't been in the admissions process for years now.



LSP is horribly inaccurate for URMS. A 160 3.9 AA applicant has at least a 50 percent shot at getting into Harvard; if they're male it's higher than that.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby A&O » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:40 pm

LSP is horribly inaccurate for URMS. A 160 3.9 AA applicant has at least a 50 percent shot at getting into Harvard; if they're male it's higher than that.


(1) That makes no sense. Why would URM males have an even higher chance than URM females, when URM females are even more underrepresented in the legal profession than URM males?

(2) A 50% chance is not auto-admit, as "ebonyesq" seems to be implying.

$$$$$$
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:08 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby $$$$$$ » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:42 pm

bk1 wrote:
A&O wrote:How will DC's competitiveness not force more UVA students to target NYC in just the same way that the health of Chicago's legal market will force more Chicago students to target NYC?


Because people are dumb and ignorant.


people will bid exclusively on dc sometimes and get nothing, they can't go back afterwards and apply to NY firms, you only have so many bids and if people really want DC, knowing how hard it is to get, they bid on all dc firms.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby A&O » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:43 pm

$$$$$$ wrote:
bk1 wrote:
A&O wrote:How will DC's competitiveness not force more UVA students to target NYC in just the same way that the health of Chicago's legal market will force more Chicago students to target NYC?


Because people are dumb and ignorant.


people will bid exclusively on dc sometimes and get nothing, they can't go back afterwards and apply to NY firms, you only have so many bids and if people really want DC, knowing how hard it is to get, they bid on all dc firms.


So... bk1 is right?

User avatar
EbonyEsq
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:06 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby EbonyEsq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:46 pm

A&O wrote:(1) That makes no sense. Why would URM males have an even higher chance than URM females, when URM females are even more underrepresented in the legal profession than URM males?


Someone, please put a hand.


A&O wrote:(2) A 50% chance is not auto-admit, as "ebonyesq" seems to be implying.


Image

$$$$$$
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:08 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby $$$$$$ » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:46 pm

A&O wrote:
$$$$$$ wrote:
bk1 wrote:
A&O wrote:How will DC's competitiveness not force more UVA students to target NYC in just the same way that the health of Chicago's legal market will force more Chicago students to target NYC?


Because people are dumb and ignorant.


people will bid exclusively on dc sometimes and get nothing, they can't go back afterwards and apply to NY firms, you only have so many bids and if people really want DC, knowing how hard it is to get, they bid on all dc firms.


So... bk1 is right?


dont know about ignorant, but yea, people are dumb if they do that shit

Kaitlyn
Posts: 149
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:06 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby Kaitlyn » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:46 pm

A&O wrote:
LSP is horribly inaccurate for URMS. A 160 3.9 AA applicant has at least a 50 percent shot at getting into Harvard; if they're male it's higher than that.


(1) That makes no sense. Why would URM males have an even higher chance than URM females, when URM females are even more underrepresented in the legal profession than URM males?

(2) A 50% chance is not auto-admit, as "ebonyesq" seems to be implying.


http://www.jbhe.com/news_views/65_gendergap.html

Of course, this only pertains to AA. I can't speak for other URM groups.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18414
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby bk1 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:47 pm

A&O wrote:(1) That makes no sense. Why would URM males have an even higher chance than URM females, when URM females are even more underrepresented in the legal profession than URM males?

(2) A 50% chance is not auto-admit, as "ebonyesq" seems to be implying.



IIRC, the reason is that AA males score lower on the LSAT than AA female, thus there are fewer 160+ AA males going around than there are AA females so the AA males are fought over harder.

I'd give that a 50% chance at each of HLS/CLS/NYU is pretty close to saying that a person will snag at least one.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby A&O » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:49 pm

Kaitlyn wrote:
A&O wrote:
LSP is horribly inaccurate for URMS. A 160 3.9 AA applicant has at least a 50 percent shot at getting into Harvard; if they're male it's higher than that.


(1) That makes no sense. Why would URM males have an even higher chance than URM females, when URM females are even more underrepresented in the legal profession than URM males?

(2) A 50% chance is not auto-admit, as "ebonyesq" seems to be implying.


http://www.jbhe.com/news_views/65_gendergap.html

Of course, this only pertains to AA. I can't speak for other URM groups.


Interesting. The more you know, I guess.

I like discussing this with you. EbonyEsq doesn't exactly seem like an educated person.

I'd give that a 50% chance at each of HLS/CLS/NYU is pretty close to saying that a person will snag at least one.


That's probably a more accurate way of putting things.

User avatar
EbonyEsq
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:06 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby EbonyEsq » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:53 pm

A&O wrote:I like discussing this with you. EbonyEsq doesn't exactly seem like an educated person.

Image

Kaitlyn
Posts: 149
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:06 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby Kaitlyn » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:56 pm

EbonyEsq wrote:
A&O wrote:I like discussing this with you. EbonyEsq doesn't exactly seem like an educated person.

Image


:lol: :lol: :lol:

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

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby BruceWayne » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:43 pm

A&O wrote:
LSP is horribly inaccurate for URMS. A 160 3.9 AA applicant has at least a 50 percent shot at getting into Harvard; if they're male it's higher than that.


(1) That makes no sense. Why would URM males have an even higher chance than URM females, when URM females are even more underrepresented in the legal profession than URM males?

(2) A 50% chance is not auto-admit, as "ebonyesq" seems to be implying.



WOW you're one of those people who thinks they know everything about everything--to the point where you go around spreading incredibly wrong information. I'd advise you to stop talking about this subject; you essentially revealed that you're as ignorant on the topic as people in the 1400's were about the shape of the earth. Anyone familiar with URM admissions can tell you that an AA male get's a considerably stronger boost than an AA female in the admissions game. And fwiw AA males are less represented than AA females in essentially every White collar profession (and in upper level education) than AA females. The fact that you didn't know that widely known statistic really reveals your lack of knowledge on the subject. There's nothing wrong with you not knowing that, but to go around posting like you somehow do is just irresponsible and ignorant. Just like I wouldn't go around telling you and others about what grades you need at HLS to get certain jobs, you shouldn't go around telling URMs about the admissions/job process.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby A&O » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:45 pm

There's no need to act offended. Where I didn't have knowledge about an issue, I made a point about it. Your response (along with EbonyEsq's) just demonstrates why you both seem to have little respect here. Kaitlin's, on the other hand, was educational, civil, polite, and informative.

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

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby BruceWayne » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:52 pm

A&O wrote:There's no need to act offended. Where I didn't have knowledge about an issue, I made a point about it. Your response (along with EbonyEsq's) just demonstrates why you both seem to have little respect here. Kaitlin's, on the other hand, was educational, civil, polite, and informative.


LMAO I guess you have a "high respect" level here on TLS-- Congratulations that's a real accomplishment! Do you have a high respect level on autoadmit.com too? If so I'm really floored!

You are also kidding yourself if you think that you came across like someone who was confused or ignorant on a subject. You came out making statements as if your comments were the defacto word on what you were talking about. Even though you have no idea what you're talking about.
Last edited by BruceWayne on Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby A&O » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:53 pm

You came out making statements as if your comments were the defacto word on what you were talking about. Even though you have no idea what you're talking about.


The post was in the form of a question. Questions are not statements.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby A&O » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:59 pm

Also, where I did make statements, and someone posted evidence to the contrary, I admit I'm wrong.

Responding with silly pictures and inflammatory language does you no good. Hopefully you'll have realized that before doing your exams.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby ahduth » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:25 pm

Fascinating.

The only thing I've really gathered from this thread is I want to have nothing to do with ebonyesq, there's more than enough immature posturing in the rest of my life. I can't even tell what you guys are arguing about through all the animated GIFs and smack talk. Why did that person go so crazy?

Of the schools she's gotten into, I can't see why the OP would go to UVA over Chicago, other than the weather. But yeah, Columbia, NYU, Harvard, Stanford and Yale would all trump Chicago. Good luck anyhow, Columbia and NYU seem to be coming up soon.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby Patriot1208 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:28 pm

ahduth wrote:Fascinating.

The only thing I've really gathered from this thread is I want to have nothing to do with ebonyesq, there's more than enough immature posturing in the rest of my life. I can't even tell what you guys are arguing about through all the animated GIFs and smack talk. Why did that person go so crazy?

Of the schools she's gotten into, I can't see why the OP would go to UVA over Chicago, other than the weather. But yeah, Columbia, NYU, Harvard, Stanford and Yale would all trump Chicago. Good luck anyhow, Columbia and NYU seem to be coming up soon.


I just read everything ebonyesq wrote in the voice of Martin Lawrence and that made the thread amusing.

albanach
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby albanach » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:22 pm

ahduth wrote:Of the schools she's gotten into, I can't see why the OP would go to UVA over Chicago, other than the weather.


Do you have any reasoning from that? The OP wants NYC BigLaw. The latest stats published by each school's website suggest UVa would be the place to go.

Chicago publishes geographic info for the class of 2008. 19% went into the Mid Atlantic region, NY, NJ and PA. From a class of 250, that's 48 places a year assuming every one of them went to New York City and every one of them entered BigLaw.

UVA publishes aggregate data for the classes of 2007-9. 224 graduates from the three year period are in firm jobs in New York City. That's 75 places a year and 50% more graduates entering NY BigLaw than Chicago each year. From a class size of 350, that's 21% where we know the graduates are getting firm jobs in NY.

UVa sent 30 grads to PA and have 11 in non firm jobs in NY over the three year period. If Chicago has similar numbers, that would reduce the number of graduates going to NY BigLaw to around 35/year - less than half what UVa sends.

Perhaps someone has more recent stats from each school? From what the websites say, however, UVa sends a higher percentage of graduates into NYC and in terms of numbers has at least a 50% larger alumni base there.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18414
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby bk1 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:24 pm

albanach wrote:
ahduth wrote:Of the schools she's gotten into, I can't see why the OP would go to UVA over Chicago, other than the weather.


Do you have any reasoning from that? The OP wants NYC BigLaw. The latest stats published by each school's website suggest UVa would be the place to go.

Chicago publishes geographic info for the class of 2008. 19% went into the Mid Atlantic region, NY, NJ and PA. From a class of 250, that's 48 places a year assuming every one of them went to New York City and every one of them entered BigLaw.

UVA publishes aggregate data for the classes of 2007-9. 224 graduates from the three year period are in firm jobs in New York City. That's 75 places a year and 50% more graduates entering NY BigLaw than Chicago each year. From a class size of 350, that's 21% where we know the graduates are getting firm jobs in NY.

UVa sent 30 grads to PA and have 11 in non firm jobs in NY over the three year period. If Chicago has similar numbers, that would reduce the number of graduates going to NY BigLaw to around 35/year - less than half what UVa sends.

Perhaps someone has more recent stats from each school? From what the websites say, however, UVa sends a higher percentage of graduates into NYC and in terms of numbers has at least a 50% larger alumni base there.


Self-selection, maybe you've heard of it?

albanach
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby albanach » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:29 pm

bk1 wrote:
Self-selection, maybe you've heard of it?


Well, sure that's possible, but it's just speculation. If I were making a decision, I think I'd prefer to use the numbers that are available. Elsewhere in the thread it was argued that UVa grads wanted to stay close to home and apply for jobs in DC.

Given DC is the top city for UVa grads, it certainly doesn't look like they're self selecting NYC in droves, and I can't really see why they'd do so any more than Chicago graduates.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby Patriot1208 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:32 pm

albanach wrote:
bk1 wrote:
Self-selection, maybe you've heard of it?


Well, sure that's possible, but it's just speculation. If I were making a decision, I think I'd prefer to use the numbers that are available. Elsewhere in the thread it was argued that UVa grads wanted to stay close to home and apply for jobs in DC.

Given DC is the top city for UVa grads, it certainly doesn't look like they're self selecting NYC in droves, and I can't really see why they'd do so any more than Chicago graduates.


Those numbers are meaningless. The numbers that matter are the gpa cutoff numbers for Vault level firms. Those give us a good idea of how low in the class the various Biglaw firms will deep when making offers. That is what really matters, not number of grads or percentage of grads. Also, a lot of UVA targets DC, but not a huge percentage end up in DC because of how much harder it is to get into as compared to NYC.

albanach
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby albanach » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:36 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:Those numbers are meaningless.


I disagree.

Patriot1208 wrote:The numbers that matter are the gpa cutoff numbers for Vault level firms. Those give us a good idea of how low in the class the various Biglaw firms will deep when making offers. That is what really matters, not number of grads or percentage of grads. Also, a lot of UVA targets DC, but not a huge percentage end up in DC because of how much harder it is to get into as compared to NYC.


Yes, those numbers would be helpful. Do you have them?

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Chicago vs. Virginia for NYC BIGLAW

Postby ahduth » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:40 pm

It was a general assumption based on prestige, but I asked a friend of mine who is a senior associate at a V50. Her first response was, who cares, they're both good schools. Then I specified that the person had asked us to choose between the two, and she said Chicago of course, the name is better and carries more weight. Her exceptions were Hunton and Williams and King and Spalding, which are both based in the south, and have huge UVA networks. She then mocked me for reading a message board where people were debating something so idiotic.

And that's really the correct response. They're both perfectly fine schools. What all those other people did is kind of irrelevant to you - if you expect the school's prestige to magically transport you into big law you're kind of a scrub anyhow.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests