Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
h2oplyer7
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:28 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby h2oplyer7 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:31 pm

I don't know much about law school and law in general, but what I can say is that Tier 1 should be the Top 25 schools. That seems pretty obvious, looking at this forum, LSN and LST. Everything else after that is Tier 2. Everything outside the Top 90 is utter crap.

I hate hearing that, "Well, I know this one person who went to [insert greedy Tier 3-4 law school here] who did well and became a partner." These are the outliers, not the norm.

I am 99% sure I will be sitting this year out.

Instead, I am going to spend all my time preparing my 2020 campaign for President of the United States.

"Vote Me For President in 2020 - Motto: Perfect Vision of a Promising Future"

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby CanadianWolf » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:38 pm

I disagree with your comment that Tier One should be the top 25 law schools. But I do agree with your admission that you don't know much about law schools or law in general. :D

In my opinion, Tier One should encompass the top 18 law schools.

User avatar
h2oplyer7
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:28 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby h2oplyer7 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:43 pm

I was mainly going by employment stats being above 80%. If your law school can't get 8 of 10 people into a job, what the hell are they good for?

Who knows, maybe it is just the T18. All I know is that every one of these schools need to cut the size of their classes. There should be a good law school in every part of the country; not just 18 law schools mostly in New England in California.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby CanadianWolf » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:47 pm

There are good law schools in every part of the country. In my scheme, Tier Two law schools are excellent law schools whereas the top 18 (Tier One) are superb law schools.

User avatar
h2oplyer7
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:28 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby h2oplyer7 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:49 pm

Let me take a moment to flatter myself that my opinion matters.

Tier 1: 1-14
Tier 2: 15-25
Tier 3: 26-35
Tier 4: 36-80

Everyone else...CRAP!!! hahahaha

I'm pissed that I allowed myself to be decieved.

User avatar
top30man
Posts: 1224
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:11 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby top30man » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:57 pm

Dreas wrote:If you guys were paying attention instead of prepping arrogant responses you would understand that I was merely questioning the thought that there are no 50k+ jobs/opportunities outside of the "T13." Please, show me where I said LS is "a good idea."

There's a reason why I posted those two different examples - I'm not trying to be bias.

In terms of the 50/50.. what's your point? The current situation is widespread, and a legal career is long term, not short term (if you can afford it). I'm sorry if you went to LS expecting a six figure job before graduating.

That clerk who wasn't offered a spot obviously wasn't hustling in LS if he had to do the unpaid (which he agreed to inexchange for WE at our firm) work AFTER grad, when people like me are doing the same thing prior to day one of LS.

EDIT: This clerk now has a paid position elsewhere, it seems the WE paid off.

The argument is not that they do not exist. It is that they are atypical. Yes there are anecdotes of success from any school, but that doesn't equal success for the average grad.

User avatar
taxnstuff
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:39 am

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby taxnstuff » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:06 pm

h2oplyer7 wrote:
taxnstuff wrote:THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!


Are you still going to MD? How do you feel about the LST numbers?


Yes. I could write a story about how I'm a special snowflake (I am) but it would be easier to PM me. If not, my only advice is it seems you are not sold on living in MD or Baltimore from what I've gathered, so don't go. Also, talk to real lawyers (graduates within the past 10 years) for advice, and do not make your decision solely based on website advice from strangers or straight statistics. But then again I'm already employed if i strike out so what the hell do I know.

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:09 pm

top30man wrote:The argument is not that they do not exist. It is that they are atypical. Yes there are anecdotes of success from any school, but that doesn't equal success for the average grad.


Atypical, yes. "Virtually only available to T13," no.

Also, my argument is not that it is available for the avg. grad. That's why I specifically pointed out that it's a matter of the individual and hustle (and that's where the arrogant posters on this forum felt the need to fire, as from what it seems is frequently the case).

That clerk I mentioned obviously wasn't one of those who planned ahead and hustled. I do give that individual credit though for finally picking up the slack and leveraging the unpaid WE at our firm to finally find a paid (bar-required) position elsewhere.

I guess you can say this person finally did hustle, just very late in the game, which cost this person serious time and I'm sure stress.

JamMasterJ wrote:you make 90K?

You realize the only jobs that pay that well in law are virtually only available to T13 grads?
Last edited by Dreas on Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Betharl
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:48 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Betharl » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:14 pm

Dreas wrote:
top30man wrote:
JamMasterJ wrote:you make 90K?

You realize the only jobs that pay that well in law are virtually only available to T13 grads?


To his credit, he said "virtually," not that there were none. I think you are taking him more literally than everyone else. I mean, we all know SOME people from t2s do alright.

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:25 pm

Betharl wrote:To his credit, he said "virtually," not that there were none. I think you are taking him more literally than everyone else. I mean, we all know SOME people from t2s do alright.


That's how it came off to me, and although I saw the distinction, I felt that other readers would be misled.

My apologies for the constant editing, I'm responding from an iPod touch =/

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby romothesavior » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:35 pm

Dreas wrote:
Betharl wrote:To his credit, he said "virtually," not that there were none. I think you are taking him more literally than everyone else. I mean, we all know SOME people from t2s do alright.


That's how it came off to me, and although I saw the distinction, I felt that other readers would be misled.

My apologies for the constant editing, I'm responding from an iPod touch =/

I don't think anyone, even the most anti-law school person on TLS, would take the position that no one at T2s, T3s, or even T4s get great jobs. Some do very well for themselves. The problem is that the odds are so incredibly stacked against students at most of these schools that going to one without a significant scholarship is very ill-advised. That's the message here. It isn't even remotely controversial. We have hard data on this, and the data is a lot more convincing than "Yeah, well I know a few T2 grads who ..."

As to the OP, I think this admissions class is very lucky. Sure, some students might be "enticed" to go to worse schools because of admissions/scholarships that they wouldn't have gotten two years ago, but that's more of a function of ignorance and not performing due diligence than anything else. The numbers I applied with two years ago would probably have gotten me more T14 acceptances and more $. Fairly good deal for this class.

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:49 pm

romothesavior wrote:I don't think anyone, even the most anti-law school person on TLS, would take the position that no one at T2s, T3s, or even T4s get great jobs. Some do very well for themselves. The problem is that the odds are so incredibly stacked against students at most of these schools that going to one without a significant scholarship is very ill-advised. That's the message here. It isn't even remotely controversial. We have hard data on this, and the data is a lot more convincing than "Yeah, well I know a few T2 grads who ..."


My argument was never counter to this, I was simply questioning a member's assumption that there is a 40-50k ceiling.

The conventional knowledge is what you say it is, however, I still believe it's up to the individual to make something of it and better their odds (whether it's pushing for scholarships and/or hustling/networking prior to and during LS.. and everything else you can do in between to put you in a favorable position given today's environment - e.g. the individuals at my firm I mentioned earlier).

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby rad lulz » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:53 pm

Dreas wrote:
romothesavior wrote:I don't think anyone, even the most anti-law school person on TLS, would take the position that no one at T2s, T3s, or even T4s get great jobs. Some do very well for themselves. The problem is that the odds are so incredibly stacked against students at most of these schools that going to one without a significant scholarship is very ill-advised. That's the message here. It isn't even remotely controversial. We have hard data on this, and the data is a lot more convincing than "Yeah, well I know a few T2 grads who ..."


My argument was never counter to this, I was simply questioning a member's assumption that there is a 40-50k ceiling.

The conventional knowledge is what you say it is, however, I still believe it's up to the individual to make something of it and better their odds (whether it's pushing for scholarships and/or hustling/networking prior to and during LS.. and everything else you can do in between to put you in a favorable position given today's environment).

Considering the bimodal salary distribution curve, there largely is a cieling for the vast majority of TT grads, yes. The amorphous suggestion to to to law school and "hustle" for the few jobs that pay that amount that are willing to hire from this TT is just asinine.

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:08 pm

rad lulz wrote:Considering the bimodal salary distribution curve, there largely is a cieling for the vast majority of TT grads, yes. The amorphous suggestion to to to law school and "hustle" for the few jobs that pay that amount that are willing to hire from this TT is just asinine.


It surprises me how you don't, or better, how you refuse to understand my point.

Nowhere have I suggested someone go to LS and hustle so that they get a job outside of that alleged ceiling. All I'm saying is that if you do decide to pursue law, you're going to have to really work hard and hustle to get ANY legal job, whether it's 40k or 100k and whether you go to a T2 or a T20/30 for example, but that doesn't mean that there aren't worthwhile opportunities out there. So, simply expecting a job just because you have a JD is asinine, which seems to be what you and those like you are expecting the market to live up to.

It's a different reality now, so YES, hustle is a requirement now in parallel to your school/JD. That doesn't mean all is lost, however, and that a legal career isn't "worth it" - for many, maybe, but not everyone falls under this category.
Last edited by Dreas on Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Ruxin1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:10 pm

Dreas wrote:
rad lulz wrote:Considering the bimodal salary distribution curve, there largely is a cieling for the vast majority of TT grads, yes. The amorphous suggestion to to to law school and "hustle" for the few jobs that pay that amount that are willing to hire from this TT is just asinine.


It surprises me how you don't, or better, how you refuse to understand my point.

No where have I suggested someone go to LS and hustle so that they get a job outside of that alleged ceiling. All I'm saying is that if you do decide to pursue law, you're going to have to really work hard and hustle to get ANY legal job, whether it's 40k or 100k and whether you go to a T2 or a T20/30 for example. So, simply expecting a job just because you have a JD is asinine, which seems to be what you and those like you are expecting the market to live up to.

It's a different reality now, so YES, hustle is a requirement now in parallel to your school/JD. That doesn't mean all is lost, however, and that a legal career isn't "worth it" - for many, maybe, but not everyone falls under this category.


Who the fuck wants to make 40k a year in the private sector?

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:17 pm

Ruxin1 wrote:Who the fuck wants to make 40k a year in the private sector?


Shortsighted, as are most of these comments.

LS is for a legal CAREER, not a short term salary, what's difficult to understand about this?

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Ruxin1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:20 pm

Dreas wrote:
Ruxin1 wrote:Who the fuck wants to make 40k a year in the private sector?


Shortsighted, as are most of these comments.

LS is for a legal CAREER, not a short term salary, what's difficult to understand about this?


Goodluck finding a legal career from Pepperdine, in line behind the 10 better law schools in CA alone.

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby sunynp » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:24 pm

Dreas wrote:
Ruxin1 wrote:Who the fuck wants to make 40k a year in the private sector?


Shortsighted, as are most of these comments.

LS is for a legal CAREER, not a short term salary, what's difficult to understand about this?


I'm curious how you think this career works for most people. How much more do you think a person who is lucky enough to start out at 40 or 50k will earn over their career? My feeling is that it is very difficult to move up from the lower end of the bi-modal curve to the upper level. I'm sure there are anecdotes of people doing well, but what does a career look like for someone who struggles to even get a full-time pad JD and bar required job?

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Ruxin1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:28 pm

sunynp wrote:
Dreas wrote:
Ruxin1 wrote:Who the fuck wants to make 40k a year in the private sector?


Shortsighted, as are most of these comments.

LS is for a legal CAREER, not a short term salary, what's difficult to understand about this?


I'm curious how you think this career works for most people. How much more do you think a person who is lucky enough to start out at 40 or 50k will earn over their career? My feeling is that it is very difficult to move up from the lower end of the bi-modal curve to the upper level. I'm sure there are anecdotes of people doing well, but what does a career look like for someone who struggles to even get a full-time pad JD and bar required job?


Dreas = Bearsgrl alt = chup!?!?!?!?

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:39 pm

sunynp wrote:I'm curious how you think this career works for most people. How much more do you think a person who is lucky enough to start out at 40 or 50k will earn over their career? My feeling is that it is very difficult to move up from the lower end of the bi-modal curve to the upper level. I'm sure there are anecdotes of people doing well, but what does a career look like for someone who struggles to even get a full-time pad JD and bar required job?


After being on this forum for well over a year and keeping pace day in and day out, it seems like to many a legal career is nothing more than a get rich quick scheme. I guess this reflects a lot on today's generation, expecting a lot without working hard.

To me, any professional career is a fundamental in establishing oneself in this country and opening opportunities for oneself and family. Sure, you can get stuck in a horrible position but that's partially a reflection on you as an individual and your motivation.

You're not entitled to what you haven't work toward.

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Ruxin1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:40 pm

Dreas wrote:
sunynp wrote:I'm curious how you think this career works for most people. How much more do you think a person who is lucky enough to start out at 40 or 50k will earn over their career? My feeling is that it is very difficult to move up from the lower end of the bi-modal curve to the upper level. I'm sure there are anecdotes of people doing well, but what does a career look like for someone who struggles to even get a full-time pad JD and bar required job?


After being on this forum for well over a year and keeping pace day in and day out, it seems like to many a legal career is nothing more than a get rich quick scheme. I guess this reflects a lot on today's generation, expecting a lot without working hard.

To me, any professional career is a fundamental in establishing oneself in this country and opening opportunities for oneself and family. Sure, you can get stuck in a horrible position but that's partially a reflection on you as an individual and your motivation.

You're not entitled to what you haven't work toward.


Well thanks to SHITBOOMERS the American Dream is mostly dead. HTH

Dreas
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Dreas » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:42 pm

Ruxin1 wrote:Dreas = Bearsgrl alt = chup!?!?!?!?


Because I have my own opinion and question some of the advice on here?

You sound like a true thinker among men, really.

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby Ruxin1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:43 pm

Dreas wrote:
Ruxin1 wrote:Dreas = Bearsgrl alt = chup!?!?!?!?


Because I have my own opinion and question some of the advice on here?

You sound like a true thinker among men, really.


lulz.

--LinkRemoved--

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby romothesavior » Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:03 pm

This thread has turned from TTT apologist drivel to shitboomer drivel pretty quickly. Though I suppose the two are very similar.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Law School Admissions 2012: LUCKY or CURSED

Postby fatduck » Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:06 pm

booTTTstraps




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: azaleafire, hammy393, hellohalo, kthrynf, PDX4343, pkalltheway, samsamthomas, sjs12 and 7 guests