Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Attorney
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 11:52 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby Attorney » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:22 am

Whoah. Looks like the Chicago market flatlined for WUSTL, Illinois, and even Northwestern to some extent. But it was fine for U of Chicago? Also what is up with Cornell and Vanderbilt? Cornell shot to the top and Vandy shot down. And what the hell, W&L? Dropping to 10% is pitiful.

At least it holds true that WUSTL is always T25 for placement whether Chicago's economy is good or terrible... mostly because everyone below them in the same market moves even further down. ND performed considerably better than WUSTL this time though, interesting to see if it becomes a trend in the future. U.S. News has Chicago-targeting schools like Minnesota, Indiana, Iowa, and Wisconsin in their top 30 but their placement is barely T1 ITE.

T14-Chicago
Chicago 58.97 (#5)
Northwestern 44.37 (#11)
Michigan 42.47 (#9)
------------------
T25-Chicago
Notre Dame 23.84 (#22)
WUSTL 18.96 (#19)
Illinois 17.95 (#21)
------------------
T1-Chicago
Wisconsin 12.30 (#28)
Iowa 12.18 (#26)
Minnesota 11.97 (#22)
Ohio State 11.62 (#34)
Indiana <10 (#27)

seriously????
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:15 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby seriously???? » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:40 am

Desert Fox wrote:quote]

Class of 2011 is the first class that did OCI after the economy crashed.


For the class of 09 OCI, there was a minority thought that the economy was going to crash, if not already. So, the class of 11 OCI might be the first class when the whole nation acknowledged a crash, don't you think the class of 10 OCI was still cutback significantly because they already knew the economy tanked? One would think big business would know more about the economic climate well in advance of the general public.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby fatduck » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:40 am

seriously???? wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:quote]

Class of 2011 is the first class that did OCI after the economy crashed.

One would think big business would know more about the economic climate well in advance of the general public.

You would think that, but you would be wrong.

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby 2011Law » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

fatduck wrote:
seriously???? wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:quote]

Class of 2011 is the first class that did OCI after the economy crashed.

One would think big business would know more about the economic climate well in advance of the general public.

You would think that, but you would be wrong.


+1

Did you notice the big companies' profits tanking and big banks closing left and right?

seriously????
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:15 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby seriously???? » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:51 am

well, I was aware of the situation the fall of 07. Think Harvard will accept me now?

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby fatduck » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:52 am

seriously???? wrote:well, I was aware of the situation the fall of 07. Think Harvard will accept me now?

I'm confused, why aren't you a billionaire?

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby 09042014 » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:52 am

seriously???? wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:quote]

Class of 2011 is the first class that did OCI after the economy crashed.


For the class of 09 OCI, there was a minority thought that the economy was going to crash, if not already. So, the class of 11 OCI might be the first class when the whole nation acknowledged a crash, don't you think the class of 10 OCI was still cutback significantly because they already knew the economy tanked? One would think big business would know more about the economic climate well in advance of the general public.


1) Law firms are horribly managed. They don't know dick about the economy.

2) If everyone thinks the market is going to crash, it does immediately. That's how markets work.

It's a fact that the number of c/o 2011 summer associate spots was much less than 2010. Some firms had 0, yes 0 summers in 2011.

In Chicago there were only 40% of the spots in '11 that there for class of 2010. However, 2011 classes didn't get no offered nearly as much.

How the economy hit law school classes.

2005-2008: Got laid off
2009: NYC got no offered a little, everyone else just got deferred start dates. Some of them never started. 2009 data is bullshit because they counted differed people as employed. I bet some still haven't worked a day as a big law attorney.
2010: Rest of country got no offers, some deferred start dates, not as many
2011: OCI was fucking terrible. Though high offer rates, and probably no deferrals
2012: OCI was less horrible but still fucked.

seriously????
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:15 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby seriously???? » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:56 am

fatduck wrote:
seriously???? wrote:well, I was aware of the situation the fall of 07. Think Harvard will accept me now?

I'm confused, why aren't you a billionaire?


I was into no things material until three months ago. Besides, billionaire? you think too highly of me.

rundoxierun
Posts: 1893
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:46 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby rundoxierun » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:03 am

fatduck wrote:
seriously???? wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:quote]

Class of 2011 is the first class that did OCI after the economy crashed.

One would think big business would know more about the economic climate well in advance of the general public.

You would think that, but you would be wrong.


You would be shocked how out of touch company heads are with the details behind numbers. It is not at all uncommon for a President/VP to suggest that they can save like 350k in a given area and then you take a look at the numbers and see that there is only 450k of spend left and they would have to pretty much cease operations to meet that target..

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby JCougar » Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:37 am

MrAnon wrote:
JCougar wrote:
bk1 wrote:
JCougar wrote:It's highly unprofitable for big firms to hire new associates that leave after three years.


What? Isn't their hiring model based on the fact that new associates leave after several years?


They'd rather the people not leave. It's just a fact of life that many law graduates hate Biglaw so much that, despite the awesome salaries, they're going to leave anyways.

Unless you're at a prestigious white shoe firm that can bill you out for $300/hour or higher, most first and second-year associates are a net loss for big firms. Think about it. They bill you out at $200/hour, you have to bill 2000 hours/year. That's $400,000 dollars a year that they bring in. But clients are always complaining about hours that shouldn't have been billed, so naturally, they get discounts, etc. So these firms are really only pulling in $300-350K from your work.

In addition to your $160K salary, they have to pay for all your health and dental benefits, among other perks, plus they have to pay your secretary's salary and health benefits as well, which brings your total costs close to $300K. On top of that, they have to pay rent on your office space (usually in a prime rent area), and other firm overhead.

You won't turn a profit for your firm until your third or fourth year under normal circumstances. This is why firms are increasingly looking farther than just grades. They want associates that will stay for 8 years.


Rather they not leave? Wrong. Its a pyramid type organization. Even if one firm hires the brightest and most dynamic 8 law students in the nation at once, 7 years ago, it won't be able to make all 8 of them partner this year UNLESS each one has a book of business. Firms have always looked for characteristics beyond grades. What you might be trying to say is that they hope new associates might have some business contacts or family connections to bring some work to their firm, or that the associate is at least capable enough to develop such talent in short order.

The dumbest and most hated 1st year associate is profitable. If he is not profitable he would be kicked out. Total gross income on a first year in NYC is north of $500k. The idea that first years don't become profitable until year three is a myth. I'm not sure where people came up with that. Maybe at really horrid ID firms where the insurance clients don't want 1st years to bill this is how things work, but at firms of any prestige the first years are bright, dynamic and they bill. There are not that many discounts and writeoffs. In a small commercial lit case you might have a partner, a midlevel and a first year. All three individuals bill and show up on the invoice. For all the cost savings you have hard about clients do have money and dont want to lose a case and they will pay.


Rather they not leave ≠ rather they not make partner. The way these firms really profit is on their 4-8 year associates. They'd like you to stick around until then, and then dump you before you make partner.

I heard about the lack of 1-3 year associate profitability straight from more than one Biglaw partner's mouth.

And besides, if firms don't write hours off, how do you explain the data in this article?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 28234.html
Image

NC07
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:54 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby NC07 » Sat Feb 26, 2011 3:10 am

comparing WUSTL to Minn is pretty much comparing apples to oranges. Most of Minn's class is from Minn/ the upper midwest and are looking to practice in the Twin Cities area (where the firms still pay 110k and the quality of life/COL is much better than many areas of the country). The big firms there are not "NYC/CHI big," but rather 200-400 lawyers (some across multiple offices). As such, many of them won't be large enough for NLJ250 status. However, the market in TC is still 110k (with a couple firms still paying the old market of 120k). I do not know the figures for WUSTL, but I'm confident that there probably are not as many "locals" as there is at Minn (or Madison). Many of the students I know that have the credentials to go to (very top) NYC biglaw, honestly shutter at the idea of living in NYC (even at 160K). Also, a signifcant percentage of the class at Minn is married--many with children--and would rather raise their families in the upper Midwest. Finally, due to the numerous fortune 500 companies/ Mayo/ research opportunities, many Minnesotans tend not to leave Minnesota (this is true even in the legal field). Thus, I don't know if comparing WUSTL's biglaw placement to peer schools in the Midwest matter much, since many of students at those schools (except for maybe WUSTL) actually want to stay in that location. In all honesty, from GULC to Fordham, things aren't all that different. At any of those schools the top 10% are pretty much competitive for almost any job, whereas median and below (maybe even 1/3 and below) can't bank on OCI

NC07
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:54 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby NC07 » Sat Feb 26, 2011 3:34 am

Also, Minn is not a "Chicago-targeting" school. Not everyone in the Midwest wants to be in Chicago. Minn is a TC-targeting school (as the primary market--by far--the school targets is Minneapolis/St-Paul). In talking to folks from Madison and Iowa I find many of the students want to practice in their respective states. I'm confident that same is true of the other Midwestern schools (except for WUSTL and ND who target which target "outside" markets).

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby JCougar » Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:50 am

Not to be a homer, but the class of 2010 here did have a pretty decent showing in clerkships.

http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/21151.aspx

The Washington University in St. Louis School of Law has announced that 22 recent graduates have secured judicial clerkships this year, including those with U.S. Courts of Appeals judges for the 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 10th and Federal Circuits.

Other clerkships are with U.S. District Court judges in California, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri and Virginia; with a state supreme court justice in Wisconsin; and with judges on a number of other federal and state courts.

In all, WUSTL law school graduates secured clerkships in 13 different states and the District of Columbia. Eighteen clerks are 2010 graduates and four are alumni. Despite a difficult job market, the total number of law school graduates securing clerkships rose by more than 40 percent over 2009.

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby Blindmelon » Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:22 am

18 clerks of the graduating class, but no breakdown of how many of them were AIII.I assume they'll release that data eventually, until then, its pretty meaningless.

User avatar
Attorney
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 11:52 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby Attorney » Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:53 pm

NC07 wrote:comparing WUSTL to Minn is pretty much comparing apples to oranges. Most of Minn's class is from Minn/ the upper midwest and are looking to practice in the Twin Cities area (where the firms still pay 110k and the quality of life/COL is much better than many areas of the country). The big firms there are not "NYC/CHI big," but rather 200-400 lawyers (some across multiple offices). As such, many of them won't be large enough for NLJ250 status. However, the market in TC is still 110k (with a couple firms still paying the old market of 120k). I do not know the figures for WUSTL, but I'm confident that there probably are not as many "locals" as there is at Minn (or Madison). Many of the students I know that have the credentials to go to (very top) NYC biglaw, honestly shutter at the idea of living in NYC (even at 160K). Also, a signifcant percentage of the class at Minn is married--many with children--and would rather raise their families in the upper Midwest. Finally, due to the numerous fortune 500 companies/ Mayo/ research opportunities, many Minnesotans tend not to leave Minnesota (this is true even in the legal field). Thus, I don't know if comparing WUSTL's biglaw placement to peer schools in the Midwest matter much...

Points taken but even as WUSTL may have more of a national pull than Minnesota, there are certainly large numbers of people here on TLS who come to Minnesota from out-of-state and are expecting to be able to practice somewhere like Chicago when they graduate. Certainly, at the end of the day, the graduates of WUSTL practice predominantly in St. Louis and Chicago whereas the graduates of Minnesota practice mostly in Minneapolis-St. Paul and Chicago.

St. Louis and the Twin Cities are very similar in size, in fact the Minn-SP metro (3.3 million) is a bit larger than the St. Louis metro area (2.8 million). So I think it's not as much apples and oranges as you are letting on. It's not as if Minnesota is in a rural state with no Big Law presence and WUSTL is in NYC or something. Even if misguided 0Ls come to WUSTL expecting to practice in NYC, that's not going to be a reality for most.

You mentioned Madison, too. I find it even harder to believe that all the Wiscy graduates are looking to practice in Milwaukee but not Chicago. The school is <150 miles from Chicago, whereas WUSTL is 300 miles away from Chi-town.

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby MrAnon » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:18 pm

Please do not put the words "WUSTL" and "national" in the same sentence.

Unless you mean the nation of Missouri.

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby MrAnon » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:27 pm

Those charts reflect discounts, not writeoffs. Many large clients, like the type that lock in 20 million plus worth of work per year, will ask that rates be frozen from the previous year, in order to get a discount. They will ask this on all levels of associates and furthermore they will ask for a discount on the bill generally, like 5% or 10%. The firms arent exactly losing money on these deals. Funny that some partner tried to plead poverty with you over this. Oftentimes business owners will say anything to rationalize lower wages. Believe me, if firms in NYC were losing money on associates at any level then those associates would cease to be in flash. Having an army of 7th and 8th years hanging around the firm is no picnic from a billing standpoint either. There is only so much they can do. Work doesn't rise to the level of 7th year associate? Can't give it to them. Got to find someone who is billing level appropriate. There are only so many briefs for a 7th year can write. Lots of work involves day to day discovery issues, grinding drafting work.

NC07
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:54 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby NC07 » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:38 pm

Attorney wrote:
NC07 wrote:comparing WUSTL to Minn is pretty much comparing apples to oranges. Most of Minn's class is from Minn/ the upper midwest and are looking to practice in the Twin Cities area (where the firms still pay 110k and the quality of life/COL is much better than many areas of the country). The big firms there are not "NYC/CHI big," but rather 200-400 lawyers (some across multiple offices). As such, many of them won't be large enough for NLJ250 status. However, the market in TC is still 110k (with a couple firms still paying the old market of 120k). I do not know the figures for WUSTL, but I'm confident that there probably are not as many "locals" as there is at Minn (or Madison). Many of the students I know that have the credentials to go to (very top) NYC biglaw, honestly shutter at the idea of living in NYC (even at 160K). Also, a signifcant percentage of the class at Minn is married--many with children--and would rather raise their families in the upper Midwest. Finally, due to the numerous fortune 500 companies/ Mayo/ research opportunities, many Minnesotans tend not to leave Minnesota (this is true even in the legal field). Thus, I don't know if comparing WUSTL's biglaw placement to peer schools in the Midwest matter much...

Points taken but even as WUSTL may have more of a national pull than Minnesota, there are certainly large numbers of people here on TLS who come to Minnesota from out-of-state and are expecting to be able to practice somewhere like Chicago when they graduate. Certainly, at the end of the day, the graduates of WUSTL practice predominantly in St. Louis and Chicago whereas the graduates of Minnesota practice mostly in Minneapolis-St. Paul and Chicago.

St. Louis and the Twin Cities are very similar in size, in fact the Minn-SP metro (3.3 million) is a bit larger than the St. Louis metro area (2.8 million). So I think it's not as much apples and oranges as you are letting on. It's not as if Minnesota is in a rural state with no Big Law presence and WUSTL is in NYC or something. Even if misguided 0Ls come to WUSTL expecting to practice in NYC, that's not going to be a reality for most.

You mentioned Madison, too. I find it even harder to believe that all the Wiscy graduates are looking to practice in Milwaukee but not Chicago. The school is <150 miles from Chicago, whereas WUSTL is 300 miles away from Chi-town.


I think you're missing the point here...it's not that WUSTL has "more national pull" (either you have national pull or don't) than the other schools in the bottom of the top 25, it's more that more of their population is comprised of student's who are not from St. Louis. In this economy, many of these students would probably take a firm job in St. Louis; however, it's extremely hard to break into smaller markets if you're not from the region or have substantial ties to area (mortgage, family, things that make it hard for you to leave after 2-3 years). Moreover, the summer classes in the midwest or substantially smaller than the coastal firms. This forces a lot of students who would stay to look for jobs elsewhere As for Madison, yes, most of the students are from the upper midwest and want to stay there, with a large percentage of the student body wanting to work in state government--Madison is the capital, and it offers a ton of opportunities within the area. Once you start law school, you realize that every school not in the top 10 is regional. While you can certainly "grade out" of the market, you better be comfortable with idea of living in that area. Moreover, this idea of UCLA/USC/Texas/ Vandy being "national" is TLS fiction. These are great schools, but, again, the ONLY truly national schools are the top 5 and to a lesser extent the top ten.

WUSTL, like every other top tier school not in the top ten, is national for the top 5% (maybe 10%). I say this as someone in law school in the midwest. I

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby fatduck » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:39 pm

MrAnon wrote:Please do not put the words "WUSTL" and "national" in the same sentence.

Unless you mean the nation of Missouri.

It's all starting to make sense now.

User avatar
Attorney
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 11:52 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby Attorney » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:41 pm

NC07 wrote:
Attorney wrote:
NC07 wrote:comparing WUSTL to Minn is pretty much comparing apples to oranges. Most of Minn's class is from Minn/ the upper midwest and are looking to practice in the Twin Cities area (where the firms still pay 110k and the quality of life/COL is much better than many areas of the country). The big firms there are not "NYC/CHI big," but rather 200-400 lawyers (some across multiple offices). As such, many of them won't be large enough for NLJ250 status. However, the market in TC is still 110k (with a couple firms still paying the old market of 120k). I do not know the figures for WUSTL, but I'm confident that there probably are not as many "locals" as there is at Minn (or Madison). Many of the students I know that have the credentials to go to (very top) NYC biglaw, honestly shutter at the idea of living in NYC (even at 160K). Also, a signifcant percentage of the class at Minn is married--many with children--and would rather raise their families in the upper Midwest. Finally, due to the numerous fortune 500 companies/ Mayo/ research opportunities, many Minnesotans tend not to leave Minnesota (this is true even in the legal field). Thus, I don't know if comparing WUSTL's biglaw placement to peer schools in the Midwest matter much...

Points taken but even as WUSTL may have more of a national pull than Minnesota, there are certainly large numbers of people here on TLS who come to Minnesota from out-of-state and are expecting to be able to practice somewhere like Chicago when they graduate. Certainly, at the end of the day, the graduates of WUSTL practice predominantly in St. Louis and Chicago whereas the graduates of Minnesota practice mostly in Minneapolis-St. Paul and Chicago.

St. Louis and the Twin Cities are very similar in size, in fact the Minn-SP metro (3.3 million) is a bit larger than the St. Louis metro area (2.8 million). So I think it's not as much apples and oranges as you are letting on. It's not as if Minnesota is in a rural state with no Big Law presence and WUSTL is in NYC or something. Even if misguided 0Ls come to WUSTL expecting to practice in NYC, that's not going to be a reality for most.

You mentioned Madison, too. I find it even harder to believe that all the Wiscy graduates are looking to practice in Milwaukee but not Chicago. The school is <150 miles from Chicago, whereas WUSTL is 300 miles away from Chi-town.


Once you start law school, you realize that every school not in the top 10 is regional. While you can certainly "grade out" of the market, you better be comfortable with idea of living in that area. Moreover, this idea of UCLA/USC/Texas/ Vandy being "national" is TLS fiction. These are great schools, but, again, the ONLY truly national schools are the top 5 and to a lesser extent the top ten.

WUSTL, like every other top tier school not in the top ten, is national for the top 5% (maybe 10%).


That was exactly my point though, wasn't it. WUSTL and Minnesota are both regional placement schools that place predominantly in StL/M-SP and Chicago. Thus, their employment figures are absolutely comparable (i.e. neither is "national" and placing lots of folks in NYC, rather they are similarly regional as far as placement: hometowns + Chicago).

The "national pull" was for students (which you've already agreed with) not for placement.

NC07
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:54 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby NC07 » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:55 pm

You're right except about Minnesota targeting Chicago. Minn targets Minneapolis and thats pretty much it...some graduates do end up in Chicago, but not many. You're more likely find someone going to NYC biglaw than Chi biglaw although a few Chi boys come on campus for OCI--for NYC you have to fly out to them.

User avatar
YourCaptain
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby YourCaptain » Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:24 pm

Attorney wrote:Whoah. Looks like the Chicago market flatlined for WUSTL, Illinois, and even Northwestern to some extent. But it was fine for U of Chicago? Also what is up with Cornell and Vanderbilt? Cornell shot to the top and Vandy shot down. And what the hell, W&L? Dropping to 10% is pitiful.

At least it holds true that WUSTL is always T25 for placement whether Chicago's economy is good or terrible... mostly because everyone below them in the same market moves even further down. ND performed considerably better than WUSTL this time though, interesting to see if it becomes a trend in the future. U.S. News has Chicago-targeting schools like Minnesota, Indiana, Iowa, and Wisconsin in their top 30 but their placement is barely T1 ITE.

T14-Chicago
Chicago 58.97 (#5)
Northwestern 44.37 (#11)
Michigan 42.47 (#9)
------------------
T25-Chicago
Notre Dame 23.84 (#22)
WUSTL 18.96 (#19)
Illinois 17.95 (#21)
------------------
T1-Chicago
Wisconsin 12.30 (#28)
Iowa 12.18 (#26)
Minnesota 11.97 (#22)
Ohio State 11.62 (#34)
Indiana <10 (#27)


I generally don't have anything against WUSTL (I'll admit I like to poke fun but it's not like I don't think it's a fine school) I guess if I make fun of the school it's because of it being overrated w/r/t employment, as what Romo was saying a couple pages back.

I think it's generally incorrect to compare WUSTL to UIUC, and that the comparison is better to ND & GW.

Admittedly, I give WUSTL something of a pass because I have heard that it does better placing in its Midwestern markets with smaller firms than it does trying to reach into the V50.

As a proud member of splitter nation that didn't go to WUSTL, I feel it's pretty asinine to hate on splitters; if you 're a reverse splitter, they're bumping up your numbers, and if you think they won't do well, then it's weeding out competition.

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby Blindmelon » Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:43 pm

YourCaptain wrote:
I think it's generally incorrect to compare WUSTL to UIUC, and that the comparison is better to ND & GW.



Why? They're all peers.

User avatar
YourCaptain
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby YourCaptain » Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:55 pm

Blindmelon wrote:
YourCaptain wrote:
I think it's generally incorrect to compare WUSTL to UIUC, and that the comparison is better to ND & GW.



Why? They're all peers.


GW can place in NY, as could BU/BC. UIUC will have significant difficulty doing so, at least in comparison.

seriously????
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:15 am

Re: Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

Postby seriously???? » Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:23 pm

any non native st.louisians or non midwest people interested in collaborating on research with me? so WustL placement last year was 18%, and the year before that was 27%. I would not mind doing extensive research into the NLJ 250, finding where WUSTL kids are placing and what their backgrounds are. Who knows until the numbers are in. Say a large majority of the biglaw gigs are in places like St.Louis, Chicago, and Kansas city. As a non-midwesterner I say "OK, I would work there, as long as it pays." But I think one needs to look into these people's bios, and if an overwhelmingly majority of them are actually from the midwest, or those cities, it pretty much means that a non midwesterner only has a 5 percent shot at biglaw, which pretty much means that going to a local school may give one a better shot for a lower price. So again, anyone interested in splitting up the research of the NLJ250, and other types of jobs that kids at WUSTL get, please PM me. I'd rather not spend 10+hrs of research on this subject alone.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: EncyclopediaOrange and 4 guests