r6_philly wrote:Geneva wrote:Valid point. On the other hand, I have been accepted to a bunch of T14s that TLS wisdom suggests I shouldn't have bc of the tardiness of my applications. E.g. I applied to Berkeley right before deadline and was accepted despite being out of state and having less than stellar numbers. People on TLS said that it wasn't worth the application fee to apply at that point, and yet...in. Incidents like these make me question the importants of timing.
If you buy a powerball ticket and win the jackpot, does that mean it's easier to win the lottery than what other people say? If you place 1 bid on a biglaw firm at OCI and get an offer, does it mean it's easier to land a biglaw job than people say? If you don't study for torts at all and score a A+, does it mean it's eaiser to score a A+ than other people say?
People are not making arbitrary conclusions. The schools themselves explain how "rolling admissions" relate to timing of the application. Your counterexample illustrate exceptions to the general understanding of how the admission process works.
You can search the threads or browse school website FAQs to see how the timing affects candidate chances.
If I could see statistics showing the 25-50-75 percentile GPA/LSAT/URM status for candidates accepted that applied to ___ school "early", "on time", and "late" in the season, and see a significant difference based on timing, I would revise my opinion. Given that a lot of ppl on TLS/LSN post numbers that they acknowledge are fudged and that we appear to lack the (verified) data required to accurately model the risk of applying late, it seems wrong to take such extreme positions and perpetuate them as fact. Is applying late ideal? Obviously not. Is a gamechanger? Not necessarily.
I said incidents like my Berkeley acceptance make me QUESTION the importance of timing, not that timing is irrelevant. I would just like to see some data to back up the claims about timing made on this forum.