Tiago Splitter wrote:asdfdfdfadfas wrote:Tiago Splitter wrote:asdfdfdfadfas wrote:Based on the numbers of Fedclerk+Biglaw, I'd say you have a 50/50 chance of not getting either of those. Remember that some of those 50% who did get those jobs had connections. So we are talking, without connections, from a statistical standpoint, you have less than a chance of a coin flip of getting Biglaw even if you get T-14.
I think GFox is too optimistic but this goes too far in the other direction.
I was referencing statistically from the class of 2014, I believe. I don't have the numbers right in front of me, but I ran the statistics for T-14 Biglaw+Fed from the spreadsheet and it's around 50%. Granted, obviously you have better odds the better school you go to.
I think it might be higher than 50%, but even if it isn't you have to account for the fact that a meaningful percentage of people don't shoot for biglaw. Outside of maybe GULC (and I guess Michigan maybe can't figure them out) the vast majority of people in the T-14 who want biglaw are getting it.
Regarding going because you want to be an attorney: no one is just dying to be a biglaw associate. People do it because law schools is a straightforward way to a respectable career and a decent income, but there's nothing really unique about this job that differentiates it from lots of others for people who just want the decent UMC life. It does make sense to go to law school if you really want to be an attorney if you want to do something that can only be done as a lawyer, like be a public defender or prosecutor or judge or something.
You are probably right and maybe I am just being ultra conservative. I do not like the idea of my outcome being based on the generosity of people in biglaw hiring me or I am stuck with 150K+ in debt and looking at 40-50k a year. That is my big dilemma with law school. I don't like taking risks or putting myself in a financial position that may take years to break even.