Stories of TTT people who made it Forum

[MoonDreamer]

MoonDreamer = high-quality new troll. I like the anti-elitist shtick.

I think you are correct. Seems to be all over the place just inciting people.

I am just expressing my opinion.

[Anonymous User]

MoonDreamer = high-quality new troll. I like the anti-elitist shtick.

I think you are correct. Seems to be all over the place just inciting people.

I am just expressing my opinion.

ugh your opinions suck ugh

[wbrother]

Everyone knows that associates aren't worth 160k to start

Everyone except the firms paying those rates, obviously - unless you think their salary schedule is motivated by charity or something like that.

And I'll ask it again - do you think that there's so little difference between TTT and T14 grads that they could be swapped en masse without employers being able to tell a significant difference?

And how about the correlation between the GPA/LSAT numbers for a school's student body and those same students' bar passage rate?

Of course dood! Haven't you seen suits? Bruh on that show doesn't even have a JD and he does a great job!

[MoonDreamer]

Everyone knows that associates aren't worth 160k to start

Everyone except the firms paying those rates, obviously - unless you think their salary schedule is motivated by charity or something like that.

And I'll ask it again - do you think that there's so little difference between TTT and T14 grads that they could be swapped en masse without employers being able to tell a significant difference?

And how about the correlation between the GPA/LSAT numbers for a school's student body and those same students' bar passage rate?

Of course dood! Haven't you seen suits? Bruh on that show doesn't even have a JD and he does a great job!

+1

[Anonymous User]

Know a girl who was top 3 (no journal though) from a strong regional TTT. She couldn't get a job for a year until she begged her roommate, who happened to work in state government. She now does government appellate work.

Grades mean nothing in some TTTs. Contacts are paramount.

[MoonDreamer]

Know a girl who was top 3 (no journal though) from a strong regional TTT. She couldn't get a job for a year until she begged her roommate, who happened to work in state government. She now does government appellate work.

Grades mean nothing in some TTTs. Contacts are paramount.

Usually though top 10% at "strong regional TTTs" get good jobs.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have any idea of ~ how many alternates there are per firm? If a firm has 14 preselects, will there be 14 alternates? 7? 28?

[blsingindisguise]

Usually though top 10% at "strong regional TTTs" get good jobs.

Nope. Not if you're talking about true TTTs (third-tier schools). Maybe top 1-2%.

[blsingindisguise]

scoring high on the LSAT is cool and means something but it alone does not justify the difference in outcome. There's other skills that are critical to law practice that aren't being measured...writing skills, oral communication, creativity, business acumen, etc. I dont even know why i'm explaining this. Everyone knows that associates aren't worth 160k to start and that on average they aren't significantly better than a significant percentage of their non-biglaw counterparts.

Writing skills and oral communication are unquestionably linked to the skills tested by the LSAT, and would also likely be reflected as part of GPA (there are exceptions). I went to a T2, and on average I find the people who graduate from better schools to be more competent and better lawyers as well. That doesn't mean I'd assume a graduate of a lower-ranked school isn't smart or capable (I'd have to think pretty poorly of myself if so), but if I had to pick an associate at random and I knew nothing except that one pool was Columbia and another was Cardozo, I'd pick from the Columbia pool every time.

Law school admissions are imperfect, but they're about as meritocratic as it gets -- there's not much weight given to things like "admissions essays" like in college (really just a chance to show off your expensive or underprivileged "experiences") or "extracurricular activities." You can be a scrappy kid from your local directional state university, and all you have to do is score really highly on a test and get good grades in college, and you're in at a T-6. If you can do those things, it's a decent indicator of your verbal and logical ability and your work ethic. Not a perfect indicator, but probably the best we have.

[buddingjd]

Usually though top 10% at "strong regional TTTs" get good jobs.

Nope. Not if you're talking about true TTTs (third-tier schools). Maybe top 1-2%.

^ +1. Transferred from a TTT where the OCI included 9 firms, all from the city the school was in. The firms usually hired 0-1 people from this TTT, and weren't exactly great with the offer percentages.

[romothesavior]

scoring high on the LSAT is cool and means something but it alone does not justify the difference in outcome. There's other skills that are critical to law practice that aren't being measured...writing skills, oral communication, creativity, business acumen, etc. I dont even know why i'm explaining this. Everyone knows that associates aren't worth 160k to start and that on average they aren't significantly better than a significant percentage of their non-biglaw counterparts.

Writing skills and oral communication are unquestionably linked to the skills tested by the LSAT, and would also likely be reflected as part of GPA (there are exceptions). I went to a T2, and on average I find the people who graduate from better schools to be more competent and better lawyers as well. That doesn't mean I'd assume a graduate of a lower-ranked school isn't smart or capable (I'd have to think pretty poorly of myself if so), but if I had to pick an associate at random and I knew nothing except that one pool was Columbia and another was Cardozo, I'd pick from the Columbia pool every time.

Law school admissions are imperfect, but they're about as meritocratic as it gets -- there's not much weight given to things like "admissions essays" like in college (really just a chance to show off your expensive or underprivileged "experiences") or "extracurricular activities." You can be a scrappy kid from your local directional state university, and all you have to do is score really highly on a test and get good grades in college, and you're in at a T-6. If you can do those things, it's a decent indicator of your verbal and logical ability and your work ethic. Not a perfect indicator, but probably the best we have.

Good post.

[MoonDreamer]

scoring high on the LSAT is cool and means something but it alone does not justify the difference in outcome. There's other skills that are critical to law practice that aren't being measured...writing skills, oral communication, creativity, business acumen, etc. I dont even know why i'm explaining this. Everyone knows that associates aren't worth 160k to start and that on average they aren't significantly better than a significant percentage of their non-biglaw counterparts.

Writing skills and oral communication are unquestionably linked to the skills tested by the LSAT, and would also likely be reflected as part of GPA (there are exceptions). I went to a T2, and on average I find the people who graduate from better schools to be more competent and better lawyers as well. That doesn't mean I'd assume a graduate of a lower-ranked school isn't smart or capable (I'd have to think pretty poorly of myself if so), but if I had to pick an associate at random and I knew nothing except that one pool was Columbia and another was Cardozo, I'd pick from the Columbia pool every time.

Law school admissions are imperfect, but they're about as meritocratic as it gets -- there's not much weight given to things like "admissions essays" like in college (really just a chance to show off your expensive or underprivileged "experiences") or "extracurricular activities." You can be a scrappy kid from your local directional state university, and all you have to do is score really highly on a test and get good grades in college, and you're in at a T-6. If you can do those things, it's a decent indicator of your verbal and logical ability and your work ethic. Not a perfect indicator, but probably the best we have.

Good post.

I won't go into why this isn't a good post (mainly because I'll probably get banned again for speaking my mind) but this is not a good post.

[Danger Zone]

GOOD ONE

[Mce252]

I'm at a TTT. Two offers from V75 firms after this summer. If I had to start all over, I would do it all the same again, including the choice not to transfer to a t14. I won't have any debt when I graduate so the less valuable degree was worth it to me.

[hephaestus]

GOOD ONE

[Anonymous User]

Is a T25 bottom feeder pretty much in the same boat as TTT kids (with the exception of the lucky few TTT kids at the very top of the class)?

Not thrilled with my 1L performance, but thankfully I'll have virtually no debt.

[Anonymous User]

I'm at a TTT. Two offers from V75 firms after this summer. If I had to start all over, I would do it all the same again, including the choice not to transfer to a t14. I won't have any debt when I graduate so the less valuable degree was worth it to me.

Yeah because you did fine. If we could accurately predict where in the curve we would fall before starting law school, we would not be having these debates.

[Mce252]

I'm at a TTT. Two offers from V75 firms after this summer. If I had to start all over, I would do it all the same again, including the choice not to transfer to a t14. I won't have any debt when I graduate so the less valuable degree was worth it to me.

Yeah because you did fine. If we could accurately predict where in the curve we would fall before starting law school, we would not be having these debates.

Well, no. My point was that even if my grades had been mediocre/poor, attending the TTT was worth it because I would graduate without debt. I felt that having a TTT degree with no debt and no job was better than having a t14 degree with $150,000 or more in debt and still a chance I wouldn't find a well-paying job.

[MoonDreamer]

Is a T25 bottom feeder pretty much in the same boat as TTT kids (with the exception of the lucky few TTT kids at the very top of the class)?

Not thrilled with my 1L performance, but thankfully I'll have virtually no debt.

No. T25 is a lot better. You have a much better network of alumni, etc.

[froglee]

Man the GC at my small agency, and I've seen two so far, both went to TTT school. One graduated in 2002 from said law school. Making $225-$250k 9-6 and fairly young. Womp. I'm jealous.

So you are opening a thread to look for encouragement, so you can have some wishful thinking that you can succeed with your TTT shit degree?

How opening a thread asking who won a lottory ticket?

[romothesavior]

scoring high on the LSAT is cool and means something but it alone does not justify the difference in outcome. There's other skills that are critical to law practice that aren't being measured...writing skills, oral communication, creativity, business acumen, etc. I dont even know why i'm explaining this. Everyone knows that associates aren't worth 160k to start and that on average they aren't significantly better than a significant percentage of their non-biglaw counterparts.

Writing skills and oral communication are unquestionably linked to the skills tested by the LSAT, and would also likely be reflected as part of GPA (there are exceptions). I went to a T2, and on average I find the people who graduate from better schools to be more competent and better lawyers as well. That doesn't mean I'd assume a graduate of a lower-ranked school isn't smart or capable (I'd have to think pretty poorly of myself if so), but if I had to pick an associate at random and I knew nothing except that one pool was Columbia and another was Cardozo, I'd pick from the Columbia pool every time.

Law school admissions are imperfect, but they're about as meritocratic as it gets -- there's not much weight given to things like "admissions essays" like in college (really just a chance to show off your expensive or underprivileged "experiences") or "extracurricular activities." You can be a scrappy kid from your local directional state university, and all you have to do is score really highly on a test and get good grades in college, and you're in at a T-6. If you can do those things, it's a decent indicator of your verbal and logical ability and your work ethic. Not a perfect indicator, but probably the best we have.

Good post.

I won't go into why this isn't a good post (mainly because I'll probably get banned again for speaking my mind) but this is not a good post.

You weren't banned for "speaking your mind," you were banned for shitting up the on-topics.

Though I do enjoy your anti-elitism schtick, especially with that strong, smooth finish of unending jealousy and butthurt. It's a good look.

[paglababa]

Man the GC at my small agency, and I've seen two so far, both went to TTT school. One graduated in 2002 from said law school. Making $225-$250k 9-6 and fairly young. Womp. I'm jealous.

So you are opening a thread to look for encouragement, so you can have some wishful thinking that you can succeed with your TTT shit degree?

How opening a thread asking who won a lottory ticket?

Read the rules before posting. I'll let this thread live because it's interesting no matter how stupid the idea behind it is.

The idea behind it is not stupid, because the idea was never stated. I'm not sure you can gauge what the idea behind it is without making assumptions. I'll dispel these assumptions below:

This thread is for interesting responses, as youv'e agreed. 1. It is not to encourage anyone to go to TTT. 2. Neither is it to make people who are in TTT feel hopeful or delsuionial about any anecdotal evidence provided herein.

Just wanted to hear amusing stories of what (successfull) TTT grads are upto. We already know about the others.

That said, it would be more interesting to hear about TTT grads who graduated within the last 10 years, as opposed to 20-30 years ago.

Thanks.

Want to rethink that question?

[NotMyRealName09]

I ain't at no V100, but...

Went to MSU College of Law (when I matriculated it was 3rd tier, then moved up), graduated in 2010, working in large Detroit firm doing commercial litigation. Actually ended up graduating in the twelfth percentile, but didn't matter - during OCI it was 5th percentile, and that is all that mattered. Built a big house, the wife and I never worry about the price range of a resturant anywhere (and I like high-end booze), and life is good.

I had peers with equal resumes who struck out at OCI, and assuming you can be top of the class, the one deciding factor I saw - don't be a douche or a bitch, because that will tank you. But sometimes - it's luck. For me, an honest assessment - I had natural talent for law school and turned out to interview far better than I thought I would.

So I'd consider myself to had "made it" considering my prospects going into law school - but if you go to a lower tier school, you better have natural talent, be good at interviewing (which is just really formal socializing), be in the top 10% at OCI - and get fucking lucky.

Edit: My special snowflake story is not nearly as entertaining as seeing the mods hammer on a troll.

[Anonymous User]

Nice post. You make a good point on luck and formal socializing.

Do you have any specific tips on preparing for an interview or being a good interviewer? I always come off intense, boring, or not engaging enough. Normally, I prepare by going through practice questions and being able to talk about my resume and why I want to work there. But, it has not been as successful as I hoped.

Thanks

[NotMyRealName09]

Nice post. You make a good point on luck and formal socializing.

Do you have any specific tips on preparing for an interview or being a good interviewer? I always come off intense, boring, or not engaging enough. Normally, I prepare by going through practice questions and being able to talk about my resume and why I want to work there. But, it has not been as successful as I hoped.

Thanks

Do mock interviews if your school offers them - practice practice practice, and it has to be STRESSFUL practice - not friends, not your mom, and honestly - others might differ on this - but too much alone practice, you'll freak yourself out, fill up with too many canned answers, and then you won't "flow" as you should. It's so stressful you want to "prepare" - I know - but just look up your interviewer's bio and be off-the-cuff. That will distinguish you from the 10 other nervous students with canned answers.

You want a practitioner for a mock interview who wants to help you by being critical. I did one of these and the lady was like "don't say what you said, that was bad" and it was helpful.

And while I won't do this for you, I think there was a thread in the last few weeks I posted in discussing interviewing - I (and others apparently) have a theory about interviewing (i.e., it's like dating - confidence is key, be unavailable, leave them wanting more, you don't need them / they need you, etc.) and I know you could search my username and find it.

Shit, if I knew all those things I now realize are important to interviewing (and dating) back when I was single and young....I'll just say now I totally understand why nice guys lose and women love jerks.