Anyone choose Penn over Chi? Forum

[glewz]

I'm hearing a lot of "2 rankings difference is minimal," but it is still the case that firms prefer CCN over MVPB for many markets. Also, in the long run, chances of high level clerking are better for Chi. Chi is consistently ranks 4-6 and is still on a different class level compared to penn.

Also, are you sure you're not letting yourself become biased by a small # of a$$holes you met at Chi? Just sayin...I have a few friends @ Chi who are really chill & sociable, and I think a lot of Chi's rep is overstated.

MVPB is not a category that exists. B places like 20% of students into biglaw via OCI. Penn places like 50% (both pick up more via non-OCI channels obvi, but still)

In the long run, your chances of high level clearing are better from Chi but your chances of career mobility are better from Penn, both because the alumni network is better and because the school credential transfers more easily to non-legal fields. Again, what do you care about? Your answer should determine where you go.

On your first comment, B does fit into MVP more and more, esp since they are second to only S on the west coast.

And yeah, regardless of how we define MVP or MVPB, we can still agree (I think from your 2nd comment) that Chi LT is definitively >.

[Veyron]

I'm hearing a lot of "2 rankings difference is minimal," but it is still the case that firms prefer CCN over MVPB for many markets. Also, in the long run, chances of high level clerking are better for Chi. Chi is consistently ranks 4-6 and is still on a different class level compared to penn.

Also, are you sure you're not letting yourself become biased by a small # of a$$holes you met at Chi? Just sayin...I have a few friends @ Chi who are really chill & sociable, and I think a lot of Chi's rep is overstated.

MVPB is not a category that exists. B places like 20% of students into biglaw via OCI. Penn places like 50% (both pick up more via non-OCI channels obvi, but still)

In the long run, your chances of high level clearing are better from Chi but your chances of career mobility are better from Penn, both because the alumni network is better and because the school credential transfers more easily to non-legal fields. Again, what do you care about? Your answer should determine where you go.

On your first comment, B does fit into MVP more and more, esp since they are second to only S on the west coast.

And yeah, regardless of how we define MVP or MVPB, we can still agree (I think from your 2nd comment) that Chi LT is definitively >.

Are you kidding? Chi LT is definitely > for academia maybe. Once you have biglaw, its the alumni network and the connections that you've made with your classmates that matter most (for a career in the private sector, both for firm mobility and client development). Your argument basically boils down to "Chicago is a better school because it places slightly better into clerkships"

Have you SEEN the kind of kids that come out of Chicago? Probably the people you would least find value in having in your network.

Edit: We're both talking from the POV of our schools' paradigms. I could care less about clerking, you could care less about the buisness of law. And that's why we both ended up were we did.

[Badger3920]

I'm hearing a lot of "2 rankings difference is minimal," but it is still the case that firms prefer CCN over MVPB for many markets. Also, in the long run, chances of high level clerking are better for Chi. Chi is consistently ranks 4-6 and is still on a different class level compared to penn.

Also, are you sure you're not letting yourself become biased by a small # of a$$holes you met at Chi? Just sayin...I have a few friends @ Chi who are really chill & sociable, and I think a lot of Chi's rep is overstated.

Can't say that I'd lose sleep (or hesitate for a minute) on chosoing a school I don't really want to go to over a school that I would rather attend, because I paused to place a lot of importance on a massive 'off-chance' that I'd spend a year doing some circuit court clerking.

However, again - that's for the op to decide. If his dreams/goals include joining the handful of folks that clerk on a circuit court or higher - then I suppose he needs to consider if it's acceptable to forgo (how ever much?) a boost he might gain from Chi. If he does well at Penn, that door is definitely open to him in any case. If he doesn't do well at Penn, he probably would have performed similarly at Chi - and he wouldn't then be clerking anyway.

[glewz]

I'm hearing a lot of "2 rankings difference is minimal," but it is still the case that firms prefer CCN over MVPB for many markets. Also, in the long run, chances of high level clerking are better for Chi. Chi is consistently ranks 4-6 and is still on a different class level compared to penn.

Also, are you sure you're not letting yourself become biased by a small # of a$$holes you met at Chi? Just sayin...I have a few friends @ Chi who are really chill & sociable, and I think a lot of Chi's rep is overstated.

MVPB is not a category that exists. B places like 20% of students into biglaw via OCI. Penn places like 50% (both pick up more via non-OCI channels obvi, but still)

In the long run, your chances of high level clearing are better from Chi but your chances of career mobility are better from Penn, both because the alumni network is better and because the school credential transfers more easily to non-legal fields. Again, what do you care about? Your answer should determine where you go.

On your first comment, B does fit into MVP more and more, esp since they are second to only S on the west coast.

And yeah, regardless of how we define MVP or MVPB, we can still agree (I think from your 2nd comment) that Chi LT is definitively >.

Are you kidding? Chi LT is definitely > for academia maybe.

oh sorry - I didn't actually read that last comment of your thoroughly. Chi LT is > for academia And for higher level clerking (SCOTUS / CoA). For post-grad, if OP is determined to go NYC biglaw, Penn might be a good idea (and even then it is arguable). But In terms of nation-wide reputation, Chi is obviously > Penn for every other significant market.

For Penn's alumni network & transferability, I assume that you're pointing to Wharton - OP has a minimal chance of getting VC, PE, IBD, or Consulting at the high levels without an MBA. OP's best shot would be in-house @ one of those shops, and in that scenario a Chi degree > Penn. This is Especially the case if OP has worked for years in law...so I honestly don't know why this point is being brought up. And it also should be noted that Chi's Booth school is still considered extremely top notch.

Evaluating so objectively that Penn's alumni network > Chi pretty ridiculous IMHO...Chi has been in T6 since when the rankings began? Doesn't that point to the contrary?

[deathviaboredom]

:/

[deathviaboredom]

:/

[glewz]

Can't say that I'd lose sleep (or hesitate for a minute) on chosoing a school I don't really want to go to over a school that I would rather attend, because I paused to place a lot of importance on a massive 'off-chance' that I'd spend a year doing some circuit court clerking.

However, again - that's for the op to decide. If his dreams/goals include joining the handful of folks that clerk on a circuit court or higher - then I suppose he needs to consider if it's acceptable to forgo (how ever much?) a boost he might gain from Chi. If he does well at Penn, that door is definitely open to him in any case. If he doesn't do well at Penn, he probably would have performed similarly at Chi - and he wouldn't then be clerking anyway.

Oh I definitely agree on the whole comfort/environment thing. At the same time, I would suck it up for 3 years to go to Harvard over Columbia (assuming no $ for either) even if I hated MA & loved NYC. I mean...it's 3 years, and I'm in the library most of the time anyways.

Does depend on OP, obv. The way I see it, it's just like voting for a politician: Set a list of criteria, evaluate which ones carry greater weight based on pers. pref --> If this was done numerically, then just sum it up...and even intangibles can be assigned #.

[Veyron]

Chi is obviously > Penn for every other significant market.

Not my market. Not D.C. (at least according to one V100 partner). Don't know about others but I think people tend to exaggerate minute differences in ranking.

You think that a school ranked 6th known as a place its former students suffered thru has a better alumni network than a school ranked 7 that has a tight knit and loyal alumni network by virtue of being ranked one spot higher? This lack of understanding about the the way that the real world works perfectly exemplifies Chicago.

My argument also has little to do with Wharton (except to the extent you can develop relationships with people and professors who might be able to feed you buisness in the future by taking some classes there and going to mixers). Many of my classmates COME from hedge funds, Ibanks, etc. Thats the kind of buisness-minded person we take. Some will go back, others will join firms, others will start firms, others will do law for a while and then move in-house at a company similar to the one they left or start a buisness. Down the road, if I start my own firm or am trying to bring in buisness so that I can make partner, I'd rather have access to one of these people than some SCOTUS clerk --> professor. You also have to factor in the alumni network of the school as a whole including undergrad and all the graduate schools, not just the law school.

.....i think i want PI

Why are you still in this thread, I thought we had FIRMLY established that your personality is pure Chicago.

Chi's LRAP is stelllaarrr

Chicago's LRAP is better if you are going straight to PI, Penn's is better if you are going firm --> PI.

[Badger3920]

Can't say that I'd lose sleep (or hesitate for a minute) on chosoing a school I don't really want to go to over a school that I would rather attend, because I paused to place a lot of importance on a massive 'off-chance' that I'd spend a year doing some circuit court clerking.

However, again - that's for the op to decide. If his dreams/goals include joining the handful of folks that clerk on a circuit court or higher - then I suppose he needs to consider if it's acceptable to forgo (how ever much?) a boost he might gain from Chi. If he does well at Penn, that door is definitely open to him in any case. If he doesn't do well at Penn, he probably would have performed similarly at Chi - and he wouldn't then be clerking anyway.

Oh I definitely agree on the whole comfort/environment thing. At the same time, I would suck it up for 3 years to go to Harvard over Columbia (assuming no $ for either) even if I hated MA & loved NYC. I mean...it's 3 years, and I'm in the library most of the time anyways.

Does depend on OP, obv. The way I see it, it's just like voting for a politician: Set a list of criteria, evaluate which ones carry greater weight based on pers. pref --> If this was done numerically, then just sum it up...and even intangibles can be assigned #.

I'm agree with most of what you said, excluding (to whatever extent you asserted) the idea that Columbia vs Harvard is very much like choosing between Penn and Chi. I think the jump from Columbia to Harvard is probably a bit more of an obvious one than Penn to Chi. I think those two slots in the rankings matter (2 and 4) than do the two slots between 5 and 7. How much they matter though, as you touched on, is entirely personal. I'd forgo Harvard if I had compelling reasons to be in NYC. Given that, I'd forgo Chicago for Penn with compelling reasons without losing any sleep.

These seem like really important decisions at the time you have to make them. In retrospect, the op will look back on this decision (hopefully) and chuckle a little bit about how nervous he was. You can sort through elite schools all day, but at the end of the day - after you've compared all of the differences, it's hard to pick incorrectly if you have no strong persuasion one way or another.

[Veyron]

Can't say that I'd lose sleep (or hesitate for a minute) on chosoing a school I don't really want to go to over a school that I would rather attend, because I paused to place a lot of importance on a massive 'off-chance' that I'd spend a year doing some circuit court clerking.

However, again - that's for the op to decide. If his dreams/goals include joining the handful of folks that clerk on a circuit court or higher - then I suppose he needs to consider if it's acceptable to forgo (how ever much?) a boost he might gain from Chi. If he does well at Penn, that door is definitely open to him in any case. If he doesn't do well at Penn, he probably would have performed similarly at Chi - and he wouldn't then be clerking anyway.

Oh I definitely agree on the whole comfort/environment thing. At the same time, I would suck it up for 3 years to go to Harvard over Columbia (assuming no $ for either) even if I hated MA & loved NYC. I mean...it's 3 years, and I'm in the library most of the time anyways.

Does depend on OP, obv. The way I see it, it's just like voting for a politician: Set a list of criteria, evaluate which ones carry greater weight based on pers. pref --> If this was done numerically, then just sum it up...and even intangibles can be assigned #.

I'm agree with most of what you said, excluding (to whatever extent you asserted) the idea that Columbia vs Harvard is very much like choosing between Penn and Chi. I think the jump from Columbia to Harvard is probably a bit more of an obvious one than Penn to Chi. I think those two slots in the rankings matter (2 and 4) than do the two slots between 5 and 7. How much they matter though, as you touched on, is entirely personal. I'd forgo Harvard if I had compelling reasons to be in NYC. Given that, I'd forgo Chicago for Penn with compelling reasons without losing any sleep.

These seem like really important decisions at the time you have to make them. In retrospect, the op will look back on this decision (hopefully) and chuckle a little bit about how nervous he was. You can sort through elite schools all day, but at the end of the day - after you've compared all of the differences, it's hard to pick incorrectly if you have no strong persuasion one way or another.

CLS --> H is a different matter entirely. Many markets have one cutoff for 3-14 and a different cutoff for the trinity. See, e.g. (large parts of) the California market.

[deathviaboredom]

.

[Veyron]

Chi is obviously > Penn for every other significant market.

.....i think i want PI

Why are you still in this thread, I thought we had FIRMLY established that your personality is pure Chicago.

Chi's LRAP is stelllaarrr

Chicago's LRAP is better if you are going straight to PI, Penn's is better if you are going firm --> PI.

my personality is chicago? and you know this from an internet forum?

it's not a better fit. the people seem kinda, not unmotivated, but not intellectually motivated.

also - there's a sea of B+s, which I HATE

Can I just tell y'all that I've LITERALLY been described as "wonky." Rather recently, too.

IS A SOCIAL FEAR A REASON TO TURN DOWN SUCH AN EXCELLENT SCHOOL??

QED

[Badger3920]

Can't say that I'd lose sleep (or hesitate for a minute) on chosoing a school I don't really want to go to over a school that I would rather attend, because I paused to place a lot of importance on a massive 'off-chance' that I'd spend a year doing some circuit court clerking.

However, again - that's for the op to decide. If his dreams/goals include joining the handful of folks that clerk on a circuit court or higher - then I suppose he needs to consider if it's acceptable to forgo (how ever much?) a boost he might gain from Chi. If he does well at Penn, that door is definitely open to him in any case. If he doesn't do well at Penn, he probably would have performed similarly at Chi - and he wouldn't then be clerking anyway.

Oh I definitely agree on the whole comfort/environment thing. At the same time, I would suck it up for 3 years to go to Harvard over Columbia (assuming no $ for either) even if I hated MA & loved NYC. I mean...it's 3 years, and I'm in the library most of the time anyways.

Does depend on OP, obv. The way I see it, it's just like voting for a politician: Set a list of criteria, evaluate which ones carry greater weight based on pers. pref --> If this was done numerically, then just sum it up...and even intangibles can be assigned #.

I'm agree with most of what you said, excluding (to whatever extent you asserted) the idea that Columbia vs Harvard is very much like choosing between Penn and Chi. I think the jump from Columbia to Harvard is probably a bit more of an obvious one than Penn to Chi. I think those two slots in the rankings matter (2 and 4) than do the two slots between 5 and 7. How much they matter though, as you touched on, is entirely personal. I'd forgo Harvard if I had compelling reasons to be in NYC. Given that, I'd forgo Chicago for Penn with compelling reasons without losing any sleep.

These seem like really important decisions at the time you have to make them. In retrospect, the op will look back on this decision (hopefully) and chuckle a little bit about how nervous he was. You can sort through elite schools all day, but at the end of the day - after you've compared all of the differences, it's hard to pick incorrectly if you have no strong persuasion one way or another.

CLS --> H is a different matter entirely. Many markets have one cutoff for 3-14 and a different cutoff for the trinity. See, e.g. (large parts of) the California market.

Aside from your assertions of cutoffs (which I have no reason to disbelieve, as it sounds likely) - that's pretty much what I was saying. Given that, I can see choosing against H if you had good reasons for doing so. I think, given that, I would need even less compelling reasons to forgo Chi for Penn. Your statement seems to support this idea.

Little damage is done in either decision frankly (unless you're hell bent on clerking for the Supreme Court). Otherwise, it comes down to how well you do during your 1L year, and where you land in your class. That will decide your future success much moreso than making the correct choice between schools like Chi or Penn.

Oddly enough, and somewhat demonstrative of how the anxiety in this discussion is probably without warrant, I had a pretty decent job during my 1L summer at a fed dist ct in CA. The externs I worked with included someone from Chi and Penn. I had no problem subsequently landing a biglaw 2L summer associate position in CA, and by the looks of the email list for the other summer associates, nor did H, S, Penn etc.

[Veyron]

^ Yah, I see what you're saying. That sounds pretty much correct. If you look at firm bios its pretty clear that these sort of fine distinctions are pretty much irrelevant. You only worry about them now because you have nothing else to worry about. Once you enter law school you'll obsess over find distinctions in your grades instead .

[glewz]

Can't say that I'd lose sleep (or hesitate for a minute) on chosoing a school I don't really want to go to over a school that I would rather attend, because I paused to place a lot of importance on a massive 'off-chance' that I'd spend a year doing some circuit court clerking.

However, again - that's for the op to decide. If his dreams/goals include joining the handful of folks that clerk on a circuit court or higher - then I suppose he needs to consider if it's acceptable to forgo (how ever much?) a boost he might gain from Chi. If he does well at Penn, that door is definitely open to him in any case. If he doesn't do well at Penn, he probably would have performed similarly at Chi - and he wouldn't then be clerking anyway.

Oh I definitely agree on the whole comfort/environment thing. At the same time, I would suck it up for 3 years to go to Harvard over Columbia (assuming no $ for either) even if I hated MA & loved NYC. I mean...it's 3 years, and I'm in the library most of the time anyways.

Does depend on OP, obv. The way I see it, it's just like voting for a politician: Set a list of criteria, evaluate which ones carry greater weight based on pers. pref --> If this was done numerically, then just sum it up...and even intangibles can be assigned #.

I'm agree with most of what you said, excluding (to whatever extent you asserted) the idea that Columbia vs Harvard is very much like choosing between Penn and Chi. I think the jump from Columbia to Harvard is probably a bit more of an obvious one than Penn to Chi. I think those two slots in the rankings matter (2 and 4) than do the two slots between 5 and 7. How much they matter though, as you touched on, is entirely personal. I'd forgo Harvard if I had compelling reasons to be in NYC. Given that, I'd forgo Chicago for Penn with compelling reasons without losing any sleep.

These seem like really important decisions at the time you have to make them. In retrospect, the op will look back on this decision (hopefully) and chuckle a little bit about how nervous he was. You can sort through elite schools all day, but at the end of the day - after you've compared all of the differences, it's hard to pick incorrectly if you have no strong persuasion one way or another.

CLS --> H is a different matter entirely. Many markets have one cutoff for 3-14 and a different cutoff for the trinity. See, e.g. (large parts of) the California market.

Sorry fellas - I knewwww this was going to surface - I totally believe that the difference between HYS & other schools is way more significant than Chi & Penn. Just illustrating the point about forgoing comfort, sorry for the confusion.


@V "Edit: We're both talking from the POV of our schools' paradigms. I could care less about clerking, you could care less about the buisness of law. And that's why we both ended up were we did."

I agree

[Xifeng]

.

[deathviaboredom]

.

[sonervous88]

i asked a family member and was like "okay whatever you say that is what i'm going to do" and they picked a school and i realized suddenly that i didn't want to go and that that school was no longer really an option. funny how that works.

[Xifeng]

.

[czelede]

Yeah I agree with what's been said above. Go to Chicago.

You seem like you really like the intellectual (dare I say) RIGOR of Chi. The only thing you seem to be afraid of is making new friends and the social scene. Don't worry. I know a few people going to Chi that are awesome people and I'm sure you'll find your niche.

You love law/econ, Posner, and you said you're not sure you'll make friends at Penn. And if you really feel that Penn students aren't intellectual enough, you belong at Chi

BUT maybe im making that up and am really just elitist and love the CHi name and that the professors are harv-level, and really I'm not academically rigorous and DYINGGG.

I went to a TTT u-grad. Idk what intellectual rigor is.

I just really like nerds, not the learning, per se.

I think it seems you are leaning towards Chi here but are just afraid of the atmosphere. Don't be! I know plenty of people there that are normal and friendly. And you said it yourself - the faculty and the prestige are outstanding. I mean come on, they have POSNER! Who does Penn State have?

[deathviaboredom]

.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Everyone keeps talking about Chicago's superior "higher level" clerkship placement. Can anyone share this data? I mean, it's one thing if we're talking about SCOTUS clerks - I think Penn students will concede that Chicago has an advantage there. But do we have any actual data that shows Chicago's superiority in COA placement, relative to Penn?

I guess what I'm asking is this: For the average student heading to Penn or Chicago who only wants an Article III clerkship (I say "only" rather tongue-in-cheek, because I think very few 0Ls realize just how difficult even district court clerkships are be to obtain - 3 out of every 4 of your future classmates won't be competitive for them), is there anything that I haven't seen circulating on TLS besides the SCOTUS numbers or Chicago's "4-6 USNews ranking" that is leading people to insist that Chicago is superior?

If this is all based on the SCOTUS numbers, that's fine - we should just say so then, instead of trying to pretend like SCOTUS clerkships measure COA placement any better than regular old Article III placement. If it is not, can anyone share this data? I'm specifically asking those who have stated that in this thread - Glewz and Younger Abstention.

[glewz]

Everyone keeps talking about Chicago's superior "higher level" clerkship placement. Can anyone share this data? I mean, it's one thing if we're talking about SCOTUS clerks - I think Penn students will concede that Chicago has an advantage there. But do we have any actual data that shows Chicago's superiority in COA placement, relative to Penn?

I guess what I'm asking is this: For the average student heading to Penn or Chicago who only wants an Article III clerkship (I say "only" rather tongue-in-cheek, because I think very few 0Ls realize just how difficult even district court clerkships are be to obtain - 3 out of every 4 of your future classmates won't be competitive for them), is there anything that I haven't seen circulating on TLS besides the SCOTUS numbers or Chicago's "4-6 USNews ranking" that is leading people to insist that Chicago is superior?

If this is all based on the SCOTUS numbers, that's fine - we should just say so then, instead of trying to pretend like SCOTUS clerkships measure COA placement any better than regular old Article III placement. If it is not, can anyone share this data? I'm specifically asking those who have stated that in this thread - Glewz and Younger Abstention.

The difference in statistics for CoA is negligible - SCOTUS is a different matter as you've mentioned, in which Chi is likely > Penn.

Edit: Though if all else were equal and my goals were CoA, I'd choose Chi

[FlightoftheEarls]

Everyone keeps talking about Chicago's superior "higher level" clerkship placement. Can anyone share this data? I mean, it's one thing if we're talking about SCOTUS clerks - I think Penn students will concede that Chicago has an advantage there. But do we have any actual data that shows Chicago's superiority in COA placement, relative to Penn?

I guess what I'm asking is this: For the average student heading to Penn or Chicago who only wants an Article III clerkship (I say "only" rather tongue-in-cheek, because I think very few 0Ls realize just how difficult even district court clerkships are be to obtain - 3 out of every 4 of your future classmates won't be competitive for them), is there anything that I haven't seen circulating on TLS besides the SCOTUS numbers or Chicago's "4-6 USNews ranking" that is leading people to insist that Chicago is superior?

If this is all based on the SCOTUS numbers, that's fine - we should just say so then, instead of trying to pretend like SCOTUS clerkships measure COA placement any better than regular old Article III placement. If it is not, can anyone share this data? I'm specifically asking those who have stated that in this thread - Glewz and Younger Abstention.

The difference in statistics for CoA is negligible - SCOTUS is a different matter as you've mentioned, in which Chi is likely > Penn.

Edit: Though if all else were equal and my goals were CoA, I'd choose Chi

Yes, I've recognized that Chicago > Penn for SCOTUS placement. But where are you getting the COA stats comparison?

[glewz]

Everyone keeps talking about Chicago's superior "higher level" clerkship placement. Can anyone share this data? I mean, it's one thing if we're talking about SCOTUS clerks - I think Penn students will concede that Chicago has an advantage there. But do we have any actual data that shows Chicago's superiority in COA placement, relative to Penn?

I guess what I'm asking is this: For the average student heading to Penn or Chicago who only wants an Article III clerkship (I say "only" rather tongue-in-cheek, because I think very few 0Ls realize just how difficult even district court clerkships are be to obtain - 3 out of every 4 of your future classmates won't be competitive for them), is there anything that I haven't seen circulating on TLS besides the SCOTUS numbers or Chicago's "4-6 USNews ranking" that is leading people to insist that Chicago is superior?

If this is all based on the SCOTUS numbers, that's fine - we should just say so then, instead of trying to pretend like SCOTUS clerkships measure COA placement any better than regular old Article III placement. If it is not, can anyone share this data? I'm specifically asking those who have stated that in this thread - Glewz and Younger Abstention.

The difference in statistics for CoA is negligible - SCOTUS is a different matter as you've mentioned, in which Chi is likely > Penn.

Edit: Though if all else were equal and my goals were CoA, I'd choose Chi

Yes, I've recognized that Chicago > Penn for SCOTUS placement. But where are you getting the COA stats comparison?

You can find this online @ USNews or some other authority. Here's a TLS article for 2009 stats. All you need to do is google clerkship statistics...

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =1&t=75513