Re: Texas Tech v South Texas
Posted: Wed May 12, 2010 9:48 pm
b.gump81 wrote:the only real advantages SMU and UH have on Tech is their placement in Biglaw in their respective markets.
That's flat-out wrong.
That's flat-out wrong.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=116849
b.gump81 wrote:the only real advantages SMU and UH have on Tech is their placement in Biglaw in their respective markets.
LULZ inorite?kalvano wrote:b.gump81 wrote:the only real advantages SMU and UH have on Tech is their placement in Biglaw in their respective markets.
That's flat-out wrong.
Even though you should probably start a new thread for this, I'm interested (a little) in hearing your argument for this.kalvano wrote:b.gump81 wrote:the only real advantages SMU and UH have on Tech is their placement in Biglaw in their respective markets.
That's flat-out wrong.
I don't think anyone disagrees with you on this.kalvano wrote:It doesn't matter what you want to do for a job, going to the school that feeds that market is hugely advantageous.
In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
texas man wrote:In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
HILARIOUS. Tech doesn't feed into a major market dumbass. You basically just affirmed everything I have said. ST does feed into a major market. Here is your rebuttal: But, but, we place in Dallas. Sure you do at a whopping 6% - Only a Tech tard would consider that significant enough to claim being able to "feed into a major market." ST feeds into a major market and thus is advantageous. By this same logic, TT does not, and thus is not as advantageous in this regard as ST.texas man wrote:I don't think anyone disagrees with you on this.kalvano wrote:It doesn't matter what you want to do for a job, going to the school that feeds that market is hugely advantageous.
In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
I'm not saying it isnt an advantage to go to SMU for DFW or UH for Houston....I agree with you. I was just saying that I'm not sure it is worth the extra money to attend these schools over a school that costs half the price to attend, especially when someone is not dead set on a certain city and if the person realizes they can reach the same city (even if it takes a couple of years to get there)...again I am talking about non-big lawkalvano wrote:texas man wrote:In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
Yes. To say that the only advantage they have is Biglaw is asinine.
Agreed. Just wanted to make sure that's what you meant (I don't think B.Gump was arguing this - I think he was referring to the the comparison of the schools advantages in the state as a whole, not that in their respective markets this is the only advantage they have - I can see how it can be read both ways.)kalvano wrote:texas man wrote:In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
Yes. To say that the only advantage they have is Biglaw is asinine.
haha i think people are just done listening to you. you are in your own world. and your argument is flawed, and you don't seem to get it, despite people telling you repeatedly.jgrin wrote:HILARIOUS. Tech doesn't feed into a major market dumbass. You basically just affirmed everything I have said. ST does feed into a major market. Here is your rebuttal: But, but, we place in Dallas. Sure you do at a whopping 6% - Only a Tech tard would consider that significant enough to claim being able to "feed into a major market." ST feeds into a major market and thus is advantageous. By this same logic, TT does not, and thus is not as advantageous in this regard as ST.texas man wrote:I don't think anyone disagrees with you on this.kalvano wrote:It doesn't matter what you want to do for a job, going to the school that feeds that market is hugely advantageous.
In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
Thats called Game. Set. Match.
SUCK IT Lubbock incest loving morons.
This is pretty funny - it's good to know we're all on the same page (except jgrin, that is).b.gump81 wrote:I'm not saying it isnt an advantage to go to SMU for DFW or UH for Houston....I agree with you. I was just saying that I'm not sure it is worth the extra money to attend these schools over a school that costs half the price to attend, especially when someone is not dead set on a certain city and if the person realizes they can reach the same city (even if it takes a couple of years to get there)...again I am talking about non-big lawkalvano wrote:texas man wrote:In their respective markets?kalvano wrote:Biglaw or not, people that go to SMU / UofH will have a myriad of opportunities not available to Tech students.
Yes. To say that the only advantage they have is Biglaw is asinine.
jgrin wrote:HILARIOUS. Tech doesn't feed into a major market dumbass. You basically just affirmed everything I have said. ST does feed into a major market. Here is your rebuttal: But, but, we place in Dallas. Sure you do at a whopping 6% - Only a Tech tard would consider that significant enough to claim being able to "feed into a major market." ST feeds into a major market and thus is advantageous. By this same logic, TT does not, and thus is not as advantageous in this regard as ST.
Thats called Game. Set. Match.
SUCK IT Lubbock incest loving morons.
So, finally raising the white flag, ay?b.gump81 wrote:I'm done with this thread. But I think this quote kind of sums it up.
“Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.” - James Harvey Robinson
It is human nature to justify our past actions to make ourselves feel better.
Jgrin- only got into STCL, so he feels the need to justify that his life will be ok. Which it will. STCL is a great school for a great legal market. And you will be fine if you kick ass and get in the top quartile.
Me- I am justifying passing on some ranked schools to attend a cheaper school. I hope it is the right decision as I do not want to take on huge debts, but time will tell
Kalvano- you have stated before the cycle how much you hate texas and never want to live here, but then when SMU gave you a great incentive to go with a good scholarship, you seemed to have jumped on the bandwagon. SMU is great, and I wish you the best. I hope you change your mind about Texas or are able to at least leave if you dont.
b.gump81 wrote:Kalvano- you have stated before the cycle how much you hate texas and never want to live here, but then when SMU gave you a great incentive to go with a good scholarship, you seemed to have jumped on the bandwagon. SMU is great, and I wish you the best. I hope you change your mind about Texas or are able to at least leave if you dont.
longhornmarine wrote:I didnt realize the can of worms this post would open. I am still considering retaking the LSAT because [strike]clearly[/strike] the better option[strike]s[/strike] would be UT[strike]/UH/SMU[/strike] in Texas....or SMU and UH with a decent scholarship
longhornmarine wrote:I didnt realize the can of worms this post would open. I am still considering retaking the LSAT because clearly the better options would be UT/UH/SMU in Texas.
Only happened because an idiot decided he'd shit all over your thread because he had an axe to grind over being rejected. But if you are in no rush to go to law school, retaking is definitely something you should think about. You'd have an entire year to prep and ace the test, just be sure you are fine with postponing your education for another year. I know personally i would go insane taking a year off.longhornmarine wrote:I didnt realize the can of worms this post would open. I am still considering retaking the LSAT because clearly the better options would be UT/UH/SMU in Texas.
whats with putting settle in quotes? It is obvious you settled when looking at the other schools you applied to and only got into wake and smukalvano wrote:b.gump81 wrote:Kalvano- you have stated before the cycle how much you hate texas and never want to live here, but then when SMU gave you a great incentive to go with a good scholarship, you seemed to have jumped on the bandwagon. SMU is great, and I wish you the best. I hope you change your mind about Texas or are able to at least leave if you dont.
Oh, I still hate Texas. But I've never thought SMU was a bad school, and if I have to "settle" for SMU with a 60% scholarship, I will count myself very lucky as I actively pursue employment outside of Texas.
Nice to see another longhorn on the board. What year did you graduate?longhornmarine wrote:I didnt realize the can of worms this post would open. I am still considering retaking the LSAT because clearly the better options would be UT/UH/SMU in Texas.
b.gump81 wrote:whats with putting settle in quotes? It is obvious you settled when looking at the other schools you applied to and only got into wake and smukalvano wrote:b.gump81 wrote:Kalvano- you have stated before the cycle how much you hate texas and never want to live here, but then when SMU gave you a great incentive to go with a good scholarship, you seemed to have jumped on the bandwagon. SMU is great, and I wish you the best. I hope you change your mind about Texas or are able to at least leave if you dont.
Oh, I still hate Texas. But I've never thought SMU was a bad school, and if I have to "settle" for SMU with a 60% scholarship, I will count myself very lucky as I actively pursue employment outside of Texas.
Job in a large legal market in Texas = UT, SMU, UH, and ST.Lucidity wrote:Only happened because an idiot decided he'd shit all over your thread because he had an axe to grind over being rejected. But if you are in no rush to go to law school, retaking is definitely something you should think about. You'd have an entire year to prep and ace the test, just be sure you are fine with postponing your education for another year. I know personally i would go insane taking a year off.longhornmarine wrote:I didnt realize the can of worms this post would open. I am still considering retaking the LSAT because clearly the better options would be UT/UH/SMU in Texas.
Yes - thanks for starting this thread - it has been entertaining. If you want to work in Dallas or Houston (especially biglaw), retaking the LSAT isn't a bad idea. And, if you retake and can get into UT, you'll have good options anywhere in Texas (and beyond). Even so, make sure and visit the schools personally before choosing.longhornmarine wrote:I didnt realize the can of worms this post would open. I am still considering retaking the LSAT because clearly the better options would be UT/UH/SMU in Texas.