YP at Michigan is DISGUSTING Forum

[CardinalRules]

I understand the dook approach... PR anyone who doesn't write a Why Duke or seems genuinely interested in attending.

I can personally verify that this "dook approach" is not universally true at Duke.

In response to the comment about the drivel: unfortunately, the highly controversial and contentious nature of law school admissions (witness this thread) means that the chances of getting a truly straight-up response from any official source are probably even slimmer than the chances of getting into Yale.

[los blancos]

There is absolutely nothing more humorous than reading comments from a doucher who was held/waitlisted/rejected by m*ch*g*n profuse his/her outright love for the school, only to get shit on by all the even bigger douchers who will actually be attending that ****hole. You all deserve one another. Go Bucks.

.... you really can't think of anything more humorous? I'm not impressed by your sad sense of humor.

Also, I hhaaaaaaaatte Terrelle Pryor.

tOSU hate is always, always credited.

[los blancos]

I understand the dook approach... PR anyone who doesn't write a Why Duke or seems genuinely interested in attending.

I can personally verify that this "dook approach" is not universally true at Duke.

there are exceptions to everything, but you don't get as many people screaming bloody murder, and you certainly don't see LSN trends where for a given GPA your chances are "better" with a lower lsat score. might be part of why dook's yield sucks.

[Shlonster]

Yale just YP'd me. 155/2.5. I mean WTF?

DISGUSTING

[bees]

It is probably a bad idea to admit someone who has 180/4.3, super briliant, but will make everyone else in his class feel like crap. Student morale is important. If you are head and shoulder above the rest of the applicants but you do NOT sound humble and full of humility you will probably be rejected. It isn't worth it to offend the rest of the students. I don't agree that you have to have a bad application to be rejected, maybe your applicant is just not good enough so they think that they will fit in.

Try to go get a job at McDonalds with a Ph.D and you will know what I mean. Over qualification is a real problem in the real world. Ok it doesn't have to be that extreme. Try applying for a job that requires 0-3 years of experience with 10+. You will not get call backs most likely. Management think that there are too many potential downsides. This is from personal experience.

Just another take on "YP". Maybe they *really* don't want you... because you are too good for them.

I think this is way off. There is no way to tell anything definitive about someone's personality based on their LSAT and GPA. PSs and LORs could definitely lead to what you're describing here, but not LSATs and GPAs.

You can definitely be overqualified for McDonald's, but good luck being overqualified for a top ten law school.

[CardinalRules]

It is probably a bad idea to admit someone who has 180/4.3, super briliant, but will make everyone else in his class feel like crap. Student morale is important. If you are head and shoulder above the rest of the applicants but you do NOT sound humble and full of humility you will probably be rejected. It isn't worth it to offend the rest of the students. I don't agree that you have to have a bad application to be rejected, maybe your applicant is just not good enough so they think that they will fit in.

Try to go get a job at McDonalds with a Ph.D and you will know what I mean. Over qualification is a real problem in the real world. Ok it doesn't have to be that extreme. Try applying for a job that requires 0-3 years of experience with 10+. You will not get call backs most likely. Management think that there are too many potential downsides. This is from personal experience.

Just another take on "YP". Maybe they *really* don't want you... because you are too good for them.

I think this is way off. There is no way to tell anything definitive about someone's personality based LSATs and GPAs.

You can definitely be overqualified for McDonald's, but good luck being overqualified for a top ten law school.

I think that the point of YP is less that the school considers an applicant too smart for their level of education than that the school thinks that the applicant will choose a higher-ranked school with more prestige because their numbers will have earned them an acceptance at one of those places.

[Reinhardt]

Possible explanation for at least some "yield protection," especially on LSN.

LSN users have a 100% chance of having used LSN. This is in contrast with the people who are not LSN users, who would obviously not be represented on an LSN graph. LSN users, as a group, have an extremely good idea of where their numbers will place them, and thus may not take applications to their "safeties" as seriously as they could. This will in turn lead to the dean of admissions to have an unfavorable opinion of their applications.

It works the other way too, I suppose. LSN users with lower numbers would take their applications to "reaches" very seriously indeed, and may thus have better applications than people who don't use LSN.

Just putting it out there.

[soullesswonder]

Possible explanation for at least some "yield protection," especially on LSN.

LSN users have a 100% chance of having used LSN. This is in contrast with the people who are not LSN users, who would obviously not be represented on an LSN graph. LSN users, as a group, have an extremely good idea of where their numbers will place them, and thus may not take applications to their "safeties" as seriously as they could. This will in turn lead to the dean of admissions to have an unfavorable opinion of their applications.

It works the other way too, I suppose. LSN users with lower numbers would take their applications to "reaches" very seriously indeed, and may thus have better applications than people who don't use LSN.

Just putting it out there.

not bad - my only counter is that LSN users could easily look at graphs from previous years and realize that high numbers are no sure thing at MVP, thus motivating them to take the apps seriously.

[bees]

Possible explanation for at least some "yield protection," especially on LSN.

LSN users have a 100% chance of having used LSN. This is in contrast with the people who are not LSN users, who would obviously not be represented on an LSN graph. LSN users, as a group, have an extremely good idea of where their numbers will place them, and thus may not take applications to their "safeties" as seriously as they could. This will in turn lead to the dean of admissions to have an unfavorable opinion of their applications.

It works the other way too, I suppose. LSN users with lower numbers would take their applications to "reaches" very seriously indeed, and may thus have better applications than people who don't use LSN.

Just putting it out there.

It's mind boggling to think that there are people who applied to law school without LSN or TLS.

I would like to meet one of them.

[CardinalRules]

Possible explanation for at least some "yield protection," especially on LSN.

LSN users have a 100% chance of having used LSN. This is in contrast with the people who are not LSN users, who would obviously not be represented on an LSN graph. LSN users, as a group, have an extremely good idea of where their numbers will place them, and thus may not take applications to their "safeties" as seriously as they could. This will in turn lead to the dean of admissions to have an unfavorable opinion of their applications.

It works the other way too, I suppose. LSN users with lower numbers would take their applications to "reaches" very seriously indeed, and may thus have better applications than people who don't use LSN.

Just putting it out there.

It's mind boggling to think that there are people who applied to law school without LSN or TLS.

I would like to meet one of them.

I joined TLS after I had already applied; I think that my first post may well have been the UCLA acceptance.

[bees]

Possible explanation for at least some "yield protection," especially on LSN.

LSN users have a 100% chance of having used LSN. This is in contrast with the people who are not LSN users, who would obviously not be represented on an LSN graph. LSN users, as a group, have an extremely good idea of where their numbers will place them, and thus may not take applications to their "safeties" as seriously as they could. This will in turn lead to the dean of admissions to have an unfavorable opinion of their applications.

It works the other way too, I suppose. LSN users with lower numbers would take their applications to "reaches" very seriously indeed, and may thus have better applications than people who don't use LSN.

Just putting it out there.

It's mind boggling to think that there are people who applied to law school without LSN or TLS.

I would like to meet one of them.

I joined TLS after I had already applied.

Anything you would have done differently after reading all the nonsense on here? If I hadn't found TLS/LSN I would have applied to much lower ranked schools.

[CardinalRules]

Anything you would have done differently after reading all the nonsense on here? If I hadn't found TLS/LSN I would have applied to much lower ranked schools.

I probably wouldn't have applied to anything outside the top 6 or 8, and I would have felt immensely more pressure when taking the LSAT. On the other hand, I would have spent much less time on the PS and supplementary essays.

[existenz]

Anything you would have done differently after reading all the nonsense on here? If I hadn't found TLS/LSN I would have applied to much lower ranked schools.

I probably wouldn't have applied to anything outside the top 6 or 8, and I would have felt immensely more pressure when taking the LSAT. On the other hand, I would have spent much less time on the PS and supplementary essays.

I would have loved to see Cardinal post in the "What are my chances?" section back in October. The fact that you were applying to USC/UCLA with a 4.1/178 (because you weren't sure about your chances at the T14) would have led to a tsunami of "flame" accusations and mockery.

[beardown_tho]

Anything you would have done differently after reading all the nonsense on here? If I hadn't found TLS/LSN I would have applied to much lower ranked schools.

I probably would've too. I didn't know what a "splitter" was and figured my GPA would doom me at most schools.

[td6624]

Possible explanation for at least some "yield protection," especially on LSN.

LSN users have a 100% chance of having used LSN. This is in contrast with the people who are not LSN users, who would obviously not be represented on an LSN graph. LSN users, as a group, have an extremely good idea of where their numbers will place them, and thus may not take applications to their "safeties" as seriously as they could. This will in turn lead to the dean of admissions to have an unfavorable opinion of their applications.

It works the other way too, I suppose. LSN users with lower numbers would take their applications to "reaches" very seriously indeed, and may thus have better applications than people who don't use LSN.

Just putting it out there.

It's mind boggling to think that there are people who applied to law school without LSN or TLS.

I would like to meet one of them.

I joined TLS after I had already applied.

Anything you would have done differently after reading all the nonsense on here? If I hadn't found TLS/LSN I would have applied to much lower ranked schools.

I'm gonna jump in on this here and say I would have done a ton differently.

I would have:

-Spent much much more time studying for the LSAT. I didn't think prep made much of a difference, and maybe for me it wouldn't have... but you never know.

-Begun applications before the September LSAT instead of in January so I could have submitted them immediately after getting my LSAT score.

-Spent much more time on my PS and made an effort to personalize it for reaches. Even though I have yet to see evidence that it matters.

-Applied more places.

[quickquestionthanks]

http://www.law.umich.edu/prospectivestu ... s/faq.aspx

"If my numbers are above your medians and you don’t admit me, doesn't that mean that you're "yield protecting"? I.e., you didn't admit me because you're sure I wouldn't come?
Such questions deeply underestimate the confidence of this Admissions Office, which tends to assume that everyone who is admitted to Michigan Law will want to come to Michigan Law. Okay, okay, we know – not everyone comes, and people who are admitted to lots of other top law schools are the ones least likely to come. But if this yield-protection allegation were true, then we’d be implementing our nefarious plans very poorly; every year, the school with which we have the highest overlap for admitted candidates is Harvard.We never deny someone because we think, by virtue of their LSAT and GPA, that they will be unlikely to accept our offer of admission. Most people with high numbers will be offered admission – but it is also true that people with very strong numbers will often not be admitted. Like all top law schools, we simply receive far more applications from prospective students with high numbers than we could possibly admit – and we look at many, many factors apart from the numbers. No matter how strong a candidate you are numerically, it is worth putting effort into your application to ensure that you are portraying yourself as well as possible."
-Michigan Law FAQs

What do you think they're going to say? "Yeah, we implement this practice frequently." They've gotta be political about it, right? Schools obviously do this. My friend just got accepted at Georgetown and WL'd at American. 176/3.3. Go figure.

While I haven't finished reading this thread, I'm going to guess that someone will eventually bring up the fact that this was a joke post. I mean, addictedtobeinggreat? And still only has 1 post. C'mon guys. He's just toying with people.

Edit: As for the Harvard overlap thing...that's called lying with statistics. Of course Harvard is going to be the 'mode' in overlap. Their school is like 2-3 times larger than the rest of them.

[CardinalRules]

http://www.law.umich.edu/prospectivestu ... s/faq.aspx

"If my numbers are above your medians and you don’t admit me, doesn't that mean that you're "yield protecting"? I.e., you didn't admit me because you're sure I wouldn't come?
Such questions deeply underestimate the confidence of this Admissions Office, which tends to assume that everyone who is admitted to Michigan Law will want to come to Michigan Law. Okay, okay, we know – not everyone comes, and people who are admitted to lots of other top law schools are the ones least likely to come. But if this yield-protection allegation were true, then we’d be implementing our nefarious plans very poorly; every year, the school with which we have the highest overlap for admitted candidates is Harvard.We never deny someone because we think, by virtue of their LSAT and GPA, that they will be unlikely to accept our offer of admission. Most people with high numbers will be offered admission – but it is also true that people with very strong numbers will often not be admitted. Like all top law schools, we simply receive far more applications from prospective students with high numbers than we could possibly admit – and we look at many, many factors apart from the numbers. No matter how strong a candidate you are numerically, it is worth putting effort into your application to ensure that you are portraying yourself as well as possible."
-Michigan Law FAQs

What do you think they're going to say? "Yeah, we implement this practice frequently." They've gotta be political about it, right? Schools obviously do this. My friend just got accepted at Georgetown and WL'd at American. 176/3.3. Go figure.

While I haven't finished reading this thread, I'm going to guess that someone will eventually bring up the fact that this was a joke post. I mean, addictedtobeinggreat? And still only has 1 post. C'mon guys. He's just toying with people.

Edit: As for the Harvard overlap thing...that's called lying with statistics. Of course Harvard is going to be the 'mode' in overlap. Their school is like 2-3 times larger than the rest of them.

I agree that it was probably a joke post, but I think that the thread has moved far beyond the OP at this point.

[scribelaw]

I am at least glad to see this thread has progressed beyond UM admits trying to claim that the school doesn't really YP.

[Shlonster]

I am at least glad to see this thread has progressed beyond UM admits trying to claim that the school doesn't really YP.

Me too, those knuckleheads!

Also, I've got a buddy who just graduated from SLS who didn't use LSN or TLS.... I don't even know what other resources there are out there for people to use to get this information, to be honest. Or, how accurate any of the things said on here are.

[CardinalRules]

I am at least glad to see this thread has progressed beyond UM admits trying to claim that the school doesn't really YP.

Or, how accurate any of the things said on here are.

+1. I take everything with a grain of salt, but some people do offer useful insights.

[ogman05]

Haven't read through this whole thread but if opreally wants revenge write loci and wait out the acceptance then withdraw. Hurt their numbers and get payback for yping you. O the irony.

[CardinalRules]

Haven't read through this whole thread but if opreally wants revenge write loci and wait out the acceptance then withdraw. Hurt their numbers and get payback for yping you. O the irony.

If OP is for real, he just might think it worth the effort.

[adameus]

[quote="CardinalRules]
Some schools are practicing aggressive YP and dinging applicants who appear extremely overqualified. For example, Texas straight-up rejected a couple of people well above their 75ths (cf. CoalstoNewCastle).[/quote]

Maybe this is why I didn't even get a WL at Michingan.... or perhaps they saw some of my posts on here and considered me a jackass? I'm gonna tell myself its the former.

[CardinalRules]

Perhaps they saw some of my posts on here and considered me a jackass?

It's doubtful that most top law schools (with the startling exception of Yale) regularly peruse these threads and use the comments in them as a variable in the admissions process. Many TLS regulars, including myself, have made a number of jackass comments on the boards here without paying for them in any perceptible or meaningful way.

[adameus]

Perhaps they saw some of my posts on here and considered me a jackass?

It's doubtful that most top law schools (with the startling exception of Yale) regularly peruse these threads and use the comments in them as a variable in the admissions process. Many TLS regulars, including myself, have made a number of jackass comments on the boards here without paying for them in any perceptible or meaningful way.

Yes I realize that, both that its very unlikely that they have read my posts on here and that you have made jackass posts on these boards. I think TCR is that they just didn't like my application, but if you think it hurts to get YP, it hurts even more to get dinged! I think I'm over it now though