Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:48 pm

Kronk wrote:trollololol @ Duke and Cornell students getting jobs in California.


We sent just under 30 people there this summer. Over 25% were V25 firms and almost 60% were V100.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:55 pm

quakeroats wrote:
Kronk wrote:trollololol @ Duke and Cornell students getting jobs in California.


We sent just under 30 people there this summer. Over 25% were V25 firms and almost 60% were V100.


16-17 people in V100 firms in CA? Well, you shut me up.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby beachbum » Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:22 pm

Kronk wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
Kronk wrote:trollololol @ Duke and Cornell students getting jobs in California.


We sent just under 30 people there this summer. Over 25% were V25 firms and almost 60% were V100.


16-17 people in V100 firms in CA? Well, you shut me up.


Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:29 pm

beachbum wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?


Besides that's it's pretty dang low, mang?

QO is making the assertion that Duke is the best choice if you want to work in California. Just thought that was a little laughable if Duke is only placing 16-17 people in V100 firms in CA (not all of which pay 160k, anyway). My guess is that most if not all of those people are from California or have strong ties.

Don't really think that number qualifies as a leg up over Cornell or Michigan.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby beachbum » Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:45 pm

Kronk wrote:
beachbum wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?


Besides that's it's pretty dang low, mang?

QO is making the assertion that Duke is the best choice if you want to work in California. Just thought that was a little laughable if Duke is only placing 16-17 people in V100 firms in CA (not all of which pay 160k, anyway). My guess is that most if not all of those people are from California or have strong ties.

Don't really think that number qualifies as a leg up over Cornell or Michigan.


No, it certainly doesn't prove that Duke is any better than its peers. But I wouldn't say it's any worse, either. Considering Duke's small class size and relatively small contingent of students aiming for CA, I really don't see any reason to be discouraged by these numbers. If anything, it seems to suggest that, with CA ties, Duke can get you back to CA.

But, yes, you're gonna have a hard time finding a job in LA or SF/SV without ties, just as you would from Duke's peers. If you don't have any connections to CA, you'd probably be better off heading to Boalt or taking money at UCLA or USC.

fingersxd
Posts: 643
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby fingersxd » Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:51 pm

Kronk wrote:
beachbum wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?


Besides that's it's pretty dang low, mang?

QO is making the assertion that Duke is the best choice if you want to work in California. Just thought that was a little laughable if Duke is only placing 16-17 people in V100 firms in CA (not all of which pay 160k, anyway). My guess is that most if not all of those people are from California or have strong ties.

Don't really think that number qualifies as a leg up over Cornell or Michigan.


I think this is a good point. Getting a CA job depends so much on ties that for any school outside the west coast, it's CA placement YoY will depend on the number of students that year who are from CA/have strong ties there, rather than anything else (holding class rank, interviewing ability, etc. equal).

Realistically, I think far fewer Cornell grads have ties to, or interest in, working in CA compared to Duke or Michigan. Also, given Michigan's size and number of alums in CA, I think networking, etc. might be easier and so would lean towards Michigan (slightly) solely on that basis.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:13 pm

fingersxd wrote:
Kronk wrote:
beachbum wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?


Besides that's it's pretty dang low, mang?

QO is making the assertion that Duke is the best choice if you want to work in California. Just thought that was a little laughable if Duke is only placing 16-17 people in V100 firms in CA (not all of which pay 160k, anyway). My guess is that most if not all of those people are from California or have strong ties.

Don't really think that number qualifies as a leg up over Cornell or Michigan.


I think this is a good point. Getting a CA job depends so much on ties that for any school outside the west coast, it's CA placement YoY will depend on the number of students that year who are from CA/have strong ties there, rather than anything else (holding class rank, interviewing ability, etc. equal).

Realistically, I think far fewer Cornell grads have ties to, or interest in, working in CA compared to Duke or Michigan. Also, given Michigan's size and number of alums in CA, I think networking, etc. might be easier and so would lean towards Michigan (slightly) solely on that basis.


Michigan (class size 350ish) placed 11/38 CA students in V100 jobs last year. That's 29%. I'd use this year's stats, but Michigan hasn't seen fit to release them.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... forweb.pdf

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:28 pm

quakeroats wrote:
fingersxd wrote:
Kronk wrote:
beachbum wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?


Besides that's it's pretty dang low, mang?

QO is making the assertion that Duke is the best choice if you want to work in California. Just thought that was a little laughable if Duke is only placing 16-17 people in V100 firms in CA (not all of which pay 160k, anyway). My guess is that most if not all of those people are from California or have strong ties.

Don't really think that number qualifies as a leg up over Cornell or Michigan.


I think this is a good point. Getting a CA job depends so much on ties that for any school outside the west coast, it's CA placement YoY will depend on the number of students that year who are from CA/have strong ties there, rather than anything else (holding class rank, interviewing ability, etc. equal).

Realistically, I think far fewer Cornell grads have ties to, or interest in, working in CA compared to Duke or Michigan. Also, given Michigan's size and number of alums in CA, I think networking, etc. might be easier and so would lean towards Michigan (slightly) solely on that basis.


Michigan (class size 350ish) placed 11/38 CA students in V100 jobs last year. That's 29%. I'd use this year's stats, but Michigan hasn't seen fit to release them.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... forweb.pdf


Assuming that there were no repeats in those firms listed. It's not like they showed how many recruits got taken by those locations, just that some did. For all you know they may have had 2 students at all of those firms and had 22 V100 SAs.

Either way, 11 v. 16-17, class size arguments, etc. At such a small scale all those stats are worthless. Proclaiming an advantage for Duke in CA off of them is absurd. For all we know, there were more Duke students with CA ties last year that applied to those firms. For all we know Michigan students got 25 SAs in California but go SAs they'd rather have in NYC (same goes for Duke--who knows?). For all we know you're using the firm stats @ Duke and the self-reported stats at Michigan. Neither school has a big enough presence in CA to chalk it up to anything at all.

woeisme
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:39 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby woeisme » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:39 pm

BruceWayne wrote:
You really love Cornell but they aren't particulary good for anything except working in NYC biglaw. I know that this website claims that those are the only jobs that matter/in existence, so that's all one should be concerned about, but still, it's really not great at anything but that. Other than the NYC thing, Cornell isn't really any different from a school like Texas, Vanderbilt, or UCLA. In some ways worse when you take into account that basically any school within the top 20 gives you a decent shot at NYC. Whereas Texas, Vanderbilt, and UCLA all give you an in door to 3 very insular markets. The true answer to this guy's question is whichever school he can pull off top quarter grades. Because firms will want the same grades from each school (with the exception of the firms that don't hire from one of the 3. And the only school of the 3 that I know a significant number of firms that don't hire from is Cornell--significant number of DC firms, southern firms, midwestern firms).


Seriously? You realize this is like saying that Northwestern is only good for Chicago biglaw or something, right? Or do you believe that too? Look, it's not so much that I really love Cornell, it's more that there are a pocket of people who espouse the kind of claims that you do without any statistics or data at all. It's blind leading the blind so I try to do my part given that I'm a Cornell grad and have some knowledge on this. The thing is that Cornell is a small school and since so many people self select to NYC, its presence isn't as dominant elsewhere. That hardly suggests that people don't hire Cornellians. Even if firms don't come to OCI, that's not to say that Cornellians wouldn't get invited in for interviews. I have first hand experience on this whereas you don't. Not sure why you're hating so much, but if there's anything I can do to help you feel better lemme know.

woeisme
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:39 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby woeisme » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:40 pm

bk1 wrote:
BruceWayne wrote:Clearly the post went over your head.


Nah I think you just give shitty advice.


Concur

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:40 pm

Kronk wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
fingersxd wrote:
Kronk wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the problem with that number?


Besides that's it's pretty dang low, mang?

QO is making the assertion that Duke is the best choice if you want to work in California. Just thought that was a little laughable if Duke is only placing 16-17 people in V100 firms in CA (not all of which pay 160k, anyway). My guess is that most if not all of those people are from California or have strong ties.

Don't really think that number qualifies as a leg up over Cornell or Michigan.


I think this is a good point. Getting a CA job depends so much on ties that for any school outside the west coast, it's CA placement YoY will depend on the number of students that year who are from CA/have strong ties there, rather than anything else (holding class rank, interviewing ability, etc. equal).

Realistically, I think far fewer Cornell grads have ties to, or interest in, working in CA compared to Duke or Michigan. Also, given Michigan's size and number of alums in CA, I think networking, etc. might be easier and so would lean towards Michigan (slightly) solely on that basis.


Michigan (class size 350ish) placed 11/38 CA students in V100 jobs last year. That's 29%. I'd use this year's stats, but Michigan hasn't seen fit to release them.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... forweb.pdf

Assuming that there were no repeats in those firms listed. It's not like they showed how many recruits got taken by those locations, just that some did. For all you know they may have had 2 students at all of those firms and had 22 V100 SAs.

Either way, 11 v. 16-17, class size arguments, etc. At such a small scale all those stats are worthless. Proclaiming an advantage for Duke in CA off of them is absurd. For all we know, there were more Duke students with CA ties last year that applied to those firms. For all we know Michigan students got 25 SAs in California but go SAs they'd rather have in NYC (same goes for Duke--who knows?). For all we know you're using the firm stats @ Duke and the self-reported stats at Michigan. Neither school has a big enough presence in CA to chalk it up to anything at all.


You're absolutely right. For all we know, there's a secret wing at Munger filled with hundreds of Michigan 2Ls.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:44 pm

quakeroats wrote:You're absolutely right. For all we know, there's a secret wing at Munger filled with hundreds of Michigan 2Ls.


trollololol

Dude, your stats are super raw. They don't account for any repeats, even in D.C., Chicago, and Detroit. We sent 3 Boalt 2Ls to Davis Polk in NYC this summer. Yet you present your "11/38" number like it's fact. You have no idea if there are repeat Michigan students at any of those firms, or if that is even a complete list of employment for last year. Don't pretend like you do.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:50 pm

Kronk wrote:
quakeroats wrote:You're absolutely right. For all we know, there's a secret wing at Munger filled with hundreds of Michigan 2Ls.


trollololol

Dude, your stats are super raw. They don't account for any repeats, even in D.C., Chicago, and Detroit. We sent 3 Boalt 2Ls to Davis Polk in NYC this summer. Yet you present your "11/38" number like it's fact. You have no idea if there are repeat Michigan students at any of those firms, or if that is even a complete list of employment for last year. Don't pretend like you do.


Perhaps it's off by one or two people. Again the difference was 60/30. That's a lot of leeway. In any case, ambiguities should be construed against the school that provided the crappy accounting.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:58 pm

quakeroats wrote:
Kronk wrote:
quakeroats wrote:You're absolutely right. For all we know, there's a secret wing at Munger filled with hundreds of Michigan 2Ls.


trollololol

Dude, your stats are super raw. They don't account for any repeats, even in D.C., Chicago, and Detroit. We sent 3 Boalt 2Ls to Davis Polk in NYC this summer. Yet you present your "11/38" number like it's fact. You have no idea if there are repeat Michigan students at any of those firms, or if that is even a complete list of employment for last year. Don't pretend like you do.


Perhaps it's off by one or two people. Again the difference was 60/30. That's a lot of leeway. In any case, ambiguities should be construed against the school that provided the crappy accounting.



I think you are missing the point. Namely, that none of those schools have any presence in CA worth bragging about. They have such a little presence that any perceived difference between the two has more to do with the people applying (eg are they from CA? Than it does with the school).

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby AreJay711 » Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:01 pm

Idk, CA doesn't look that bad from MI.

Image

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:26 pm

AreJay711 wrote:Idk, CA doesn't look that bad from MI.

Image


They sure do like to cram multiple years together. I wonder why?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18419
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby bk1 » Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:27 pm

quakeroats wrote:They sure do like to cram multiple years together. I wonder why?


Because nobody nowhere got CA in 2010?

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:11 pm

quakeroats wrote:They sure do like to cram multiple years together. I wonder why?


I imagine for the same reason you like to claim that there might only be 1 or 2 Michigan students at the same firm as one of their classmates. And the same reason you like to use stats like "percentage of students who were in the V100 of the people who chose to work in California" like it means anything at all. By that standard, we would have to conclude that Michigan places 30% worse than Duke into firms in CA, but wayyyyyy better than Duke at PI and Government organizations in California, while placing similar numbers into BigLaw and PI overall in the nation. Guess California is just fickle like that.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:28 pm

Kronk wrote:
quakeroats wrote:They sure do like to cram multiple years together. I wonder why?


I imagine for the same reason you like to claim that there might only be 1 or 2 Michigan students at the same firm as one of their classmates. And the same reason you like to use stats like "percentage of students who were in the V100 of the people who chose to work in California" like it means anything at all. By that standard, we would have to conclude that Michigan places 30% worse than Duke into firms in CA, but wayyyyyy better than Duke at PI and Government organizations in California, while placing similar numbers into BigLaw and PI overall in the nation. Guess California is just fickle like that.


The only thing it really proves is that we send a lot of people to California as a percentage of our class. My point is that if your options are Michigan, Duke and Cornell you should choose Michigan if you want Chicago and Duke if you want D.C., the South, California, Texas and probably NYC too, but there we're pretty to Cornell. And by the way, we've sent about the same number to CA each year since 2007.


Graduating Class 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005
New York 43 52 42 53 51 48
Washington D.C. 31 37 37 41 36 31
North Carolina 27 24 19 25 28 23
California 22 24 21 23 14 16

http://www.law.duke.edu/career/resources/facts

Isn't that more helpful than an annoying graphic that hides more than it reveals?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18419
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby bk1 » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:35 pm

quakeroats wrote:My point is that if your options are Michigan, Duke and Cornell you should choose Michigan if you want Chicago and Duke if you want D.C., the South, California, Texas and probably NYC too, but there we're pretty to Cornell.

Round and round we go!

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:37 pm

bk1 wrote:
quakeroats wrote:My point is that if your options are Michigan, Duke and Cornell you should choose Michigan if you want Chicago and Duke if you want D.C., the South, California, Texas and probably NYC too, but there we're pretty to Cornell.

Round and round we go!


Sorry I forgot to add Detroit and Lansing to the Michigan column.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:41 pm

lol @ around 20 people per year in the class being a lot. Really can't keep up this argument since it seems to be WHOOSHING you, but suffice it to say that if you want to work in California, you'll be equally served at the bottom half of the T14 schools for the most part. There isn't a statistically significant advantage at any school and most of it probably has to do with who wants to work in CA and who has the necessary grades / ties.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:52 pm

Kronk wrote:lol @ around 20 people per year in the class being a lot. Really can't keep up this argument since it seems to be WHOOSHING you, but suffice it to say that if you want to work in California, you'll be equally served at the bottom half of the T14 schools for the most part. There isn't a statistically significant advantage at any school and most of it probably has to do with who wants to work in CA and who has the necessary grades / ties.


Why do you keep going back to numbers that aren't adjusted for school size? We usually place over 10% of our class in California. If you really want a Michigan-class-size-adjusted number, then we sent 42 people to California last year.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28095
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby Kronk » Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:20 pm

quakeroats wrote:
Kronk wrote:lol @ around 20 people per year in the class being a lot. Really can't keep up this argument since it seems to be WHOOSHING you, but suffice it to say that if you want to work in California, you'll be equally served at the bottom half of the T14 schools for the most part. There isn't a statistically significant advantage at any school and most of it probably has to do with who wants to work in CA and who has the necessary grades / ties.


Why do you keep going back to numbers that aren't adjusted for school size? We usually place over 10% of our class in California. If you really want a Michigan-class-size-adjusted number, then we sent 42 people to California last year.


Who said I wasn't adjusting for class size? Not to mention you counted 38 organizations from California that Michigan sent students to. So Michigan probably sent as many or more to California as Duke did. No matter how you cut it, Duke has no statistically significant advantage over Michigan, and I think it's pretty dumb to imply there is any advantage either way.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Best for Big Law: UMich, Duke, or Cornell?

Postby quakeroats » Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:01 pm

Kronk wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
Kronk wrote:lol @ around 20 people per year in the class being a lot. Really can't keep up this argument since it seems to be WHOOSHING you, but suffice it to say that if you want to work in California, you'll be equally served at the bottom half of the T14 schools for the most part. There isn't a statistically significant advantage at any school and most of it probably has to do with who wants to work in CA and who has the necessary grades / ties.


Why do you keep going back to numbers that aren't adjusted for school size? We usually place over 10% of our class in California. If you really want a Michigan-class-size-adjusted number, then we sent 42 people to California last year.


Who said I wasn't adjusting for class size? Not to mention you counted 38 organizations from California that Michigan sent students to. So Michigan probably sent as many or more to California as Duke did. No matter how you cut it, Duke has no statistically significant advantage over Michigan, and I think it's pretty dumb to imply there is any advantage either way.


They did send more students to California, they just sent fewer to V100 firms both as a percentage and in absolute terms.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: lymenheimer and 2 guests