Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
LoganCouture
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:48 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby LoganCouture » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:01 pm

.
Last edited by LoganCouture on Tue Apr 28, 2015 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby beepboopbeep » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:22 pm

Emma. wrote:Median at UChi with SF ties will have zero problems getting multiple offers in SF.


Having known someone in this exact position who struck out - median, bid only SF/SV, lived in Bay Area entire life before law school - I would hesitate before giving this advice. And that's coming from someone headed to LA out of UChi next summer. SF came off as super parochial--I'm actually pretty curious how many SA slots there are in that market in total. It can't be that many, right? UofC does a lot better placing into Cali biglaw than people who don't go here or haven't looked at the numbers would realize, but I'd still imagine that Stanford, and to a lesser degree Berkeley, still do better with that market.

That said, I also agree with the posters above who are like, don't treat this money from your SO as free money. Which OP seems to understand, but other posters don't. Stanford is not "32k" more expensive than UofC here. It is 130k. The money coming from OP's SO is real money. If the choice here is between what looks like a Ruby/Cafaro, tuition at Berk, and half tuition at Stanford--and was phrased that way in the original post, rather than including the $ from OP's SO--I think people would be responding a little differently.

Weebay's posts are the most accurate IMO. People saying "no sense considering UofC when 100% sure you want to work in NorCal" are clueless. People saying "SF is guaranteed from Chicago at median" are being irresponsible and would not give the same advice if someone put out a SF/SV-only bid list in our OCI thread. Back on topic, though: tuition + stipend + still a great chance of getting back. Obviously more security going with Stanford. Worth 130k more? Your call OP.

User avatar
Emma.
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby Emma. » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:27 pm

beepboopbeep wrote:
Emma. wrote:Median at UChi with SF ties will have zero problems getting multiple offers in SF.


Having known someone in this exact position who struck out - median, bid only SF/SV, lived in Bay Area entire life before law school - I would hesitate before giving this advice. And that's coming from someone headed to LA out of UChi next summer. SF came off as super parochial--I'm actually pretty curious how many SA slots there are in that market in total. It can't be that many, right? UofC does a lot better placing into Cali biglaw than people who don't go here or haven't looked at the numbers would realize, but I'd still imagine that Stanford, and to a lesser degree Berkeley, still do better with that market.

That said, I also agree with the posters above who are like, don't treat this money from your SO as free money. Which OP seems to understand, but other posters don't. Stanford is not "32k" more expensive than UofC here. It is 130k. The money coming from OP's SO is real money. If the choice here is between what looks like a Ruby/Cafaro, tuition at Berk, and half tuition at Stanford--and was phrased that way in the original post, rather than including the $ from OP's SO--I think people would be responding a little differently.

Weebay's posts are the most accurate IMO. People saying "no sense considering UofC when 100% sure you want to work in NorCal" are clueless. People saying "SF is guaranteed from Chicago at median" are being irresponsible and would not give the same advice if someone put out a SF/SV-only bid list in our OCI thread. Back on topic, though: tuition + stipend + still a great chance of getting back. Obviously more security going with Stanford. Worth 130k more? Your call OP.


I don't know. My year we had an extraordinary number of kids who were interested in SF/SV. Literally no one stuck out, and that included folks below median.

User avatar
LoganCouture
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:48 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby LoganCouture » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:30 pm

.
Last edited by LoganCouture on Tue Apr 28, 2015 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:42 pm

I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby beepboopbeep » Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:11 pm

lc39 wrote:Thanks for your response -

It's Ruby vs. full tuition at Berkeley vs. 75% tuition at Stanford. On mobile but I can edit OP to clarify later.

I just want to say that I really appreciate everyone who has weighed in thus far.


My understanding is Ruby tends to equal no debt assuming a 2L SA - if anyone who has one can chime in, that'd be helpful. I will say that you can undercut UofC's CoL estimates substantially. Like I'm taking out ~8-10k/yr less than their official figures. Not sure if the same is true at Stanford/Berk, but if living with SO at one, I imagine that'd be a big help.

I don't think you NEED good grades from UofC to get SF biglaw - I would imagine some folks with strong backgrounds and median and ties do end up making it. But you probably do need them to feel comfortable bidding SF aggressively, and even then I'd be hesitant given the size of the market. I spent probably 15% of my bids on SF firms with top 5% grades and didn't get an offer there, but I had zero ties and no relevant background so obviously the situation is completely different for OP. And if OP is comfortable with LA biglaw for a couple years before trying to lateral, I would say UofC is a no brainer - they were way less picky, and the possibility of no debt is huge.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9647
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby jbagelboy » Sat Apr 04, 2015 3:06 pm

Ruby is the logical choice

If you need to remain in SF physically for the relationship to endure, obviously that's a different conversation

WhiskeynCoke
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:12 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby WhiskeynCoke » Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:26 pm

First, congratulations on your absolutely incredible options. B does not give many full rides and Chi is paying you to attend. Needless to say, we are all jealous.

Honestly, for your goals, there really is no wrong choice here. I think you'll have no problems getting back to SF/SV from Chi, given your substantial Bay Area ties, Stanford UG, and SO (if he's gonna be working in the Bay). If anyone asks "why Chicago" you've got a great reason - you took the best offer.

I would really just base this on where you want to live for the next 3 years and which school's "vibe" you liked the best. If you'd rather live in the Bay Area, I'd probably pick Berkeley. I don't think S is worth the extra $ given your goals, but it wouldn't be an objectively wrong choice either. If you don't mind living in Chi, an extra $15k/yr in your pocket sounds pretty sweet.

Good luck with your decision.

WhiskeynCoke
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:12 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby WhiskeynCoke » Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:33 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.


Having gone through B's most recent OCI, I can assure you that SF/SV are not nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be. I had a few SF offers and ended up accepting one. I also know many people well below median who had multiple SF/SV offers.

A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:34 pm

WhiskeynCoke wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.


Having gone through B's most recent OCI, I can assure you that SF/SV are not nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be. I had a few SF offers and ended up accepting one. I also know many people well below median who had multiple SF/SV offers.

A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.


Are these shitty firms? "Biglaw firms" for the most part still require good grades for SF/SV.

Look, we're just citing the most recent biglaw/fed clerkship stats for Boalt that we have - which is 56%. Good chance OP will strike out of "biglaw" in SF/SV. That said, I don't know if it matters if you don't have any debt/minimal debt because biglaw sucks everywhere, so why do biglaw in the first place, but Stanford still gives you a much better shot at "biglaw" if that's what you want.

User avatar
bearsfan23
Posts: 1529
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:19 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby bearsfan23 » Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:03 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:
WhiskeynCoke wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.


Having gone through B's most recent OCI, I can assure you that SF/SV are not nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be. I had a few SF offers and ended up accepting one. I also know many people well below median who had multiple SF/SV offers.

A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.


Are these shitty firms? "Biglaw firms" for the most part still require good grades for SF/SV.

Look, we're just citing the most recent biglaw/fed clerkship stats for Boalt that we have - which is 56%. Good chance OP will strike out of "biglaw" in SF/SV. That said, I don't know if it matters if you don't have any debt/minimal debt because biglaw sucks everywhere, so why do biglaw in the first place, but Stanford still gives you a much better shot at "biglaw" if that's what you want.


As a Chicago 2L who just went through OCI, BigLawAssociate, as usual, is full of shit. Getting SF/SV from Chicago really isn't very difficult.

Considering BigLaw Associate went to Cardozo, I'm not sure why he thinks his opinion is relevant here

bsdfree
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 6:26 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby bsdfree » Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:26 pm

WhiskeynCoke wrote:A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.


This is very true. SF/SV firms tend to have smaller summer classes than comparable firms in NYC. That, combined with what I can describe most simply as "California culture", means it's less a numbers game and more about numbers + fit + experience.

Another factor worth mentioning is that there seems to be a larger proportion of market paying boutiques in SF/SV than in NYC. And not just the super-elite types like Keker and MTO. I know several recent grads who chose these even though they had biglaw offers. This may be one reason why ">100 attorney firms" may not be the best measurement to place value in.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15508
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby Tiago Splitter » Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:42 pm

bsdfree wrote:I'd much rather be median (or below) at Berkeley Law than the same rank at Chicago if my goal was NorCal. The less selective/less elite (but still market paying) firms in SF/SV will go to SLS and Berkeley OCI, but they won't go to Chicago's.

bsdfree wrote:Another factor worth mentioning is that there seems to be a larger proportion of market paying boutiques in SF/SV than in NYC. And not just the super-elite types like Keker and MTO. I know several recent grads who chose these even though they had biglaw offers. This may be one reason why ">100 attorney firms" may not be the best measurement to place value in.

You seem a little too confident about all of these market paying jobs in NorCal with either fewer than 100 attorneys, minimal grade selectivity, or both. Can you name a handful of these firms and how many summer associates they hire each year?

User avatar
Emma.
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby Emma. » Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:49 pm

bsdfree wrote:The less selective/less elite (but still market paying) firms in SF/SV will go to SLS and Berkeley OCI, but they won't go to Chicago's.


There's a pretty long list of SF/SV firms/offices that show up to Chicago's OCI. Importantly, there is invariably more of these firms at OCI than there are students interested in the Bay Area.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Apr 04, 2015 9:38 pm

bearsfan23 wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:
WhiskeynCoke wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.


Having gone through B's most recent OCI, I can assure you that SF/SV are not nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be. I had a few SF offers and ended up accepting one. I also know many people well below median who had multiple SF/SV offers.

A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.


Are these shitty firms? "Biglaw firms" for the most part still require good grades for SF/SV.

Look, we're just citing the most recent biglaw/fed clerkship stats for Boalt that we have - which is 56%. Good chance OP will strike out of "biglaw" in SF/SV. That said, I don't know if it matters if you don't have any debt/minimal debt because biglaw sucks everywhere, so why do biglaw in the first place, but Stanford still gives you a much better shot at "biglaw" if that's what you want.


As a Chicago 2L who just went through OCI, BigLawAssociate, as usual, is full of shit. Getting SF/SV from Chicago really isn't very difficult.

Considering BigLaw Associate went to Cardozo, I'm not sure why he thinks his opinion is relevant here


:?: I wouldn't have gotten biglaw or networked my way into the "upper class" out of Carbozo.......once again, poors being dumb.

I just wish law students wouldn't give terrible advice simply because they go to said law school and have "school pride".

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 3864
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby rpupkin » Sat Apr 04, 2015 9:50 pm

beepboopbeep wrote:People saying "no sense considering UofC when 100% sure you want to work in NorCal" are clueless.

I wrote that. Although I don't have the benefit of the wisdom that beepboop acquired through four quarters of study in Hyde Park, I have participated in summer associate hiring at two firms—one in Southern California and one in Northern California. Both firms hired students from Stanford, Chicago, and Berkeley. Grade cutoffs for Chicago and Berkeley were the same. (Yes, we are able to roughly approximate class rank despite the fact that both schools have weird grading systems.) Both firms would dip a little deeper into SLS's class.

I think UChi is a great school and its graduates do well in California. I am, however, a little skeptical of statements like: "Everyone with ties who wants SF big law gets it." Over the years on TLS, I've seen the identical statement in relation to at least CLS, UChi, NYU, Michigan, Duke, Cornell, NU, UT, and UCLA. I'm sure everyone who writes it means it—a lot of people have really successful friends from San Francisco, I guess. But I'm skeptical. I've known people from SLS who couldn't get SF big law, and I doubt that UChi possesses some kind of unicorn magic that guarantees spots in SF's relatively small summer classes.

As for the "what's the real COA" issue, I'm the one who urged the OP not to count her SO's contribution like it was a scholarship. At the same time, I think it is fair to factor in cost savings from living together. Rent is an expense that the SO will have regardless of whether the OP is in the Bay Area or Chicago. If the OP lives with her SO in the Bay Area (instead of paying for rent in Chicago), that's money saved. Also, a long-distance relationship usually means a lot of travel, which is an added expense.

Look, I'm taking the OP at her word: her SO will live and work in the Bay Area, she wants to live in the Bay Area, and her goal is to get a job in the Bay Area. In light of those considerations, I really don't think it makes sense to go to Chicago for law school.

WhiskeynCoke
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:12 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby WhiskeynCoke » Sat Apr 04, 2015 10:32 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:
WhiskeynCoke wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.


Having gone through B's most recent OCI, I can assure you that SF/SV are not nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be. I had a few SF offers and ended up accepting one. I also know many people well below median who had multiple SF/SV offers.

A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.


Are these shitty firms? "Biglaw firms" for the most part still require good grades for SF/SV.

Look, we're just citing the most recent biglaw/fed clerkship stats for Boalt that we have - which is 56%. Good chance OP will strike out of "biglaw" in SF/SV. That said, I don't know if it matters if you don't have any debt/minimal debt because biglaw sucks everywhere, so why do biglaw in the first place, but Stanford still gives you a much better shot at "biglaw" if that's what you want.


We get it. Big law sucks, you married rich, we're all poors, and everyone's going to strike out. This shtick is not helpful to the OP and is getting pretty old. OP, who appears to have done her/his homework, doesn't need your help interpreting the numbers on LST.

Not only are the available numbers from a mid-recession OCI, the numbers don't tell the whole story anyway. Corporate work in the Bay is booming right now and this is a much different hiring climate.

As a URM / Stanford UG, OP will be a very desirable candidate in the Bay, even with so-so grades. If OP can pull off at least 2 Hs at B, I guarantee s/he will have multiple SF/SV offers, unless s/he is very social awkward. Why do I say this? Because I personally know lots of people in this position who had multiple offers.

OP, don't listen to BiglawAssociate. Listen to people who have actually gone through OCI at the schools you're considering and can speak from experience.

Edit: If you consider Vault firms (including V10) that pay market "shitty," then sure, they went to shitty firms.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:14 am

WhiskeynCoke wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:
WhiskeynCoke wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:I know someone who is from Northern California, Berkeley/Stanford ugrad, UChicago law grad from a couple years ago who also struck out in SF....ain't as easy as it seems. I think Stanford definitely has a leg up for SF biglaw, but if you want biglaw from Chicago/Berkeley you probably need good grades.

Berkeley placed like 56% into biglaw in the most recent data (second worst behind Georgetown out of the T-14) and I doubt the people with the worst grades out of that 56% got SF biglaw.....I think odds are very likely that you will strike out of SF biglaw from both schools.

That said if your SO can easily pay for COL, I'd probably go to Stanford. Although I think that's a shitload of money and it's very expensive to live in the Bay Area (and engineers don't really make that much)...so you won't be buying a house any time soon.


Having gone through B's most recent OCI, I can assure you that SF/SV are not nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be. I had a few SF offers and ended up accepting one. I also know many people well below median who had multiple SF/SV offers.

A lot of SF/SV firms seem to care a lot more about "fit." If they like you, they can be willing to overlook lackluster grades.


Are these shitty firms? "Biglaw firms" for the most part still require good grades for SF/SV.

Look, we're just citing the most recent biglaw/fed clerkship stats for Boalt that we have - which is 56%. Good chance OP will strike out of "biglaw" in SF/SV. That said, I don't know if it matters if you don't have any debt/minimal debt because biglaw sucks everywhere, so why do biglaw in the first place, but Stanford still gives you a much better shot at "biglaw" if that's what you want.


We get it. Big law sucks, you married rich, we're all poors, and everyone's going to strike out. This shtick is not helpful to the OP and is getting pretty old. OP, who appears to have done her/his homework, doesn't need your help interpreting the numbers on LST.

Not only are the available numbers from a mid-recession OCI, the numbers don't tell the whole story anyway. Corporate work in the Bay is booming right now and this is a much different hiring climate.

As a URM / Stanford UG, OP will be a very desirable candidate in the Bay, even with so-so grades. If OP can pull off at least 2 Hs at B, I guarantee s/he will have multiple SF/SV offers, unless s/he is very social awkward. Why do I say this? Because I personally know lots of people in this position who had multiple offers.

OP, don't listen to BiglawAssociate. Listen to people who have actually gone through OCI at the schools you're considering and can speak from experience.

Edit: If you consider Vault firms (including V10) that pay market "shitty," then sure, they went to shitty firms.


Being Mexican isn't that big of a boost for hiring purposes.

Also how do you know I didn't go to one of these schools? Once you actually WORK, you don't really give a shit about "school pride". If you can post Berkeley's most recent OCI numbers and percentages who got "biglaw" firms in SF/SV then feel free.

The numbers we post and discuss in pretty much every thread is from the same year where Berkeley placed 56%.......if we can judge other schools on these numbers (including Stanford/Chicago), then I think it's fair to do that here.

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby beepboopbeep » Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:03 am

rpupkin wrote:
beepboopbeep wrote:People saying "no sense considering UofC when 100% sure you want to work in NorCal" are clueless.

I wrote that. Although I don't have the benefit of the wisdom that beepboop acquired through four quarters of study in Hyde Park, I have participated in summer associate hiring at two firms—one in Southern California and one in Northern California. Both firms hired students from Stanford, Chicago, and Berkeley. Grade cutoffs for Chicago and Berkeley were the same. (Yes, we are able to roughly approximate class rank despite the fact that both schools have weird grading systems.) Both firms would dip a little deeper into SLS's class.

I think UChi is a great school and its graduates do well in California. I am, however, a little skeptical of statements like: "Everyone with ties who wants SF big law gets it." Over the years on TLS, I've seen the identical statement in relation to at least CLS, UChi, NYU, Michigan, Duke, Cornell, NU, UT, and UCLA. I'm sure everyone who writes it means it—a lot of people have really successful friends from San Francisco, I guess. But I'm skeptical. I've known people from SLS who couldn't get SF big law, and I doubt that UChi possesses some kind of unicorn magic that guarantees spots in SF's relatively small summer classes.

As for the "what's the real COA" issue, I'm the one who urged the OP not to count her SO's contribution like it was a scholarship. At the same time, I think it is fair to factor in cost savings from living together. Rent is an expense that the SO will have regardless of whether the OP is in the Bay Area or Chicago. If the OP lives with her SO in the Bay Area (instead of paying for rent in Chicago), that's money saved. Also, a long-distance relationship usually means a lot of travel, which is an added expense.

Look, I'm taking the OP at her word: her SO will live and work in the Bay Area, she wants to live in the Bay Area, and her goal is to get a job in the Bay Area. In light of those considerations, I really don't think it makes sense to go to Chicago for law school.


Fair response and I absolutely defer to your experience. I also had the same skepticism you expressed about 2014's "everyone who wants it gets it" w/r/t UofC - having known people in my class who wanted it and definitely did not get it (and who are still searching). But also as someone who'll graduate with fairly substantial debt even with a decent scholarship - the penalty for striking out seems so much worse with 100k+. No one is coming here and saying SLS won't give the OP the best chance at making SF/SV biglaw. But I think a lot of skepticism comes into play when it's potentially 0 debt versus more than that.

And Ruby is a very good chance at 0 debt, from my understanding (again: open call to anyone who has one). Even if OP can live with his/her SO while attending SLS, there's no guarantee that his/her SO will continue to be employed where they are currently working, will want to stay living in the same area, etc. That's all for the OP to judge. My only contribution, ultimately: CA biglaw does happen from UofC for sure, and in pretty good quantity (but probably not as assured as the other UofC posters have made it out to be, at least given my experiences and those of my friends). Almost definitely not as much as from SLS, and it's up to OP to weigh that appropriately. Just don't undervalue the freedom of not owing anything.

iliketurtles123
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby iliketurtles123 » Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:09 am

I think this is 60/40, leaning towards Chicago over Stanford.

For me, Berkeley is out. Even if your SO pays for your COL, that's still money that's going into your education.

Overall, I wouldn't pick based on biglaw numbers. Whether you choose Berkeley or Stanford, you're (most likely) getting a job. I'd choose based on where you'd be most happy for the next 3 years.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby 2014 » Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:33 pm

I'll tone down my 100% odds statement in light of Beeps anecdote to the contrary but the fact that rpupkin says UCB and UChi had the same cutoff (taking his at face value, whether they can be approximated is material for another thread) has to speak volumes. Intra-class competition matters and while a grade threshold is really important almost equally important is the battle for limited callback slots. If the threshold is "median" or whatever Cali schools are going to have far more people at or over it competing for firms you want than you will at UChi. The real issue comes if Chicago has a "median" cutoff while SLS has none which I admit is plausible and even I am not stupid enough to blindly tell someone to go to UChi over SLS in light of that (see my response on the other SLS/UChi thread on page 1 - I said "SLS and it isn't close")

The real issue here is cost. You can give SLS some sort of quantifiable bump for marginally better odds from lower cutoffs and some sort of abstract bump for weather and SO but the difference in COA is a real thing. Your SO paying rent anyway is important as rpupkin said but you also have to consider the chance you guys break up (shit happens) and the extra cost from you being there (food, utilities, entertainment, bigger apartment, diff location). All that taken into account I think it very likely UChi is better in light of the 70k or whatever differential with the caveat that if your relationship with your SO is contingent on going to SLS then by all means do that and don't look back.

User avatar
LoganCouture
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:48 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby LoganCouture » Sun Apr 05, 2015 8:12 pm

.
Last edited by LoganCouture on Tue Apr 28, 2015 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9647
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby jbagelboy » Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:46 am

2014 wrote:I'll tone down my 100% odds statement in light of Beeps anecdote to the contrary but the fact that rpupkin says UCB and UChi had the same cutoff (taking his at face value, whether they can be approximated is material for another thread) has to speak volumes. Intra-class competition matters and while a grade threshold is really important almost equally important is the battle for limited callback slots. If the threshold is "median" or whatever Cali schools are going to have far more people at or over it competing for firms you want than you will at UChi. The real issue comes if Chicago has a "median" cutoff while SLS has none which I admit is plausible and even I am not stupid enough to blindly tell someone to go to UChi over SLS in light of that (see my response on the other SLS/UChi thread on page 1 - I said "SLS and it isn't close")



I'm certain it depends on the firm, but there's no way it's this stark (median to bottom of class). I'm always incredibly skeptical of shit like this. Keker obviously has cutoffs at both SLS and Chi. Orrick, by contrast, might be pretty fungible for both. Maybe Quinn dips a little lower at Stanford than Chicago but there's still "a cutoff" range in theory at both.

also are we including SV/menlo park or really just market street

User avatar
LoganCouture
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:48 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby LoganCouture » Mon Apr 06, 2015 3:03 pm

.
Last edited by LoganCouture on Tue Apr 28, 2015 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LSATneurotic
Posts: 982
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:27 pm

Re: Stanford vs. Berkeley vs. Chicago

Postby LSATneurotic » Mon Apr 06, 2015 3:20 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:Stanford is likely to be only 32K more than Chicago.

she'll have money in the bank after SA, so more thank 32k




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media, thriller1122 and 8 guests