Michigan (Sticker) vs Penn (Sticker) vs Illinois (Full Ride) Forum

[Veyron]

Yeah, I think the thing everyone is overlooking is the stipulation that he wants to end up in Chicago. That's a pretty ambiguous word, really. I mean, I want to end up in Los Angeles, but if I got a full ride from Yale would I take it over Stanford? Absolutely. If a DC or New York firm offered me 190K would I take it over 145K in LA? Absolutely. Because although I would prefer to stay in LA, my want isn't that great. For others, when they say they want a place, that means they need a reasonable assurance that they'll end up there. Some people I know would take 60K in LA over 190K in New York (and before it blows up, I know there are probably even more people for whom the reverse is true).

Just depends on how big that want is.

Yah, this is what I was trying to say. Mich probably is slightly better for most chicagobiglaw but if you're like most law students, at the end of the day the 6 figure job in one city is better than the 45 k job in your preferred market. Penn gives you the best.shot at gainful employment and isn't too far behind Mich. Hell, I know.medians w chi biglaw offers.

[johnnyutah]

It's a lame city

Funny. I chose P over its peer schools just because Philly was a way better city than any of the others.

[BruceWayne]

This Penn dick riding is really getting out of hand. People telling someone to go to Penn over Michigan at sticker is absurd when that person wants to work in Chicago. In addition, this idea that Penn places better than Michigan is based entirely on US News rank, TLS hearsay, and autoadmit.com hearsay. OP should be debating Michigan sticker vs. Ill free.

[Kiersten1985]

OP, did you ask Michigan or Penn for money? I did (for Michigan) and they came through. I emailed the financial aid office and attached an offer I had for more money from another school (wasn't a peer school, either), and they got back to me within a couple days with an offer.

I think people hesitate to negotiate money with schools and they lose out that way. Try it. It might make up your mind for you.

[clint4law]

Create a poll....

created a poll....thanks...and Merry Christmas

[kk19131]

Apparently I'm the only one who thinks Illinois is the best way to go...even if Michigan does have more prestige/mobility.

[Tanicius]

Apparently I'm the only one who thinks Illinois is the best way to go...even if Michigan does have more prestige/mobility.

I think Illinois is the correct answer here, especially as long as Michigan is at sticker. That said, if the OP has the numbers to get into Penn, Michigan probably won't remain at sticker for long. Scholarships come on this January.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Yeah, I think the thing everyone is overlooking is the stipulation that he wants to end up in Chicago. That's a pretty ambiguous word, really. I mean, I want to end up in Los Angeles, but if I got a full ride from Yale would I take it over Stanford? Absolutely. If a DC or New York firm offered me 190K would I take it over 145K in LA? Absolutely. Because although I would prefer to stay in LA, my want isn't that great. For others, when they say they want a place, that means they need a reasonable assurance that they'll end up there. Some people I know would take 60K in LA over 190K in New York (and before it blows up, I know there are probably even more people for whom the reverse is true).

Just depends on how big that want is.

Yah, this is what I was trying to say. Mich probably is slightly better for most chicagobiglaw but if you're like most law students, at the end of the day the 6 figure job in one city is better than the 45 k job in your preferred market. Penn gives you the best.shot at gainful employment and isn't too far behind Mich. Hell, I know.medians w chi biglaw offers.

Dude, how many pro-Penn and anti-Michigan thread trolls are you currently working on? This is ridiculous, and I honestly doubt anybody believes a word out of your mouth after your "Penn > Illinois FR > Michigan for Chicago" crap. You do realize that people remember the things you write, correct? You are probably in the running for the least credible person on these boards. Enough about you, though - a couple quick points:

1.) Penn does not give you the best shot at gainful employment. If you want to go into this, see my extensive discussion with Rayiner from a previous thread. Michigan could place just as easily into NYC biglaw if it wanted, but our students self-select into significantly more difficult and desirable markets. If Penn students did the same, or if Michigan students flocked to our fallback market (yes, NYC is the "safety" market for OCI) in droves like Penn students do, you'd be hard pressed to find any discernible difference. I'm not claiming that Michigan has an advantage here, but it certainly isn't hurting, despite this stupid self-reinforcing idea that has caught on as popular "knowledge" on TLS.

2.) Are you claiming that Penn is equally as good of a choice as Michigan for Chicago? Here are the numbers of attorneys at some of the most selective Chicago firms:

Sidley:
Michigan - 26
Penn - 8

Kirkland:
Michigan - 65
Penn - 6

Mayer:
Michigan - 46
Penn - 19

Latham:
Michigan - 16
Penn - 2

Penn is a great school, but Penn does not best Michigan for Chicago. As for the OP, the issue of Michigan vs. Illinois comes down to which type of risk adverse you are: debt adverse, or striking-out adverse. That's a personal choice, and either one could be a great decision. I'd echo the sentiments of others and say that you should bring the scholarship to the attention of both Michigan and Penn. Congrats on being in the position to be making this choice!

[Veyron]

[/quote]

Yah, this is what I was trying to say. Mich probably is slightly better for most chicagobiglaw but if you're like most law students, at the end of the day the 6 figure job in one city is better than the 45 k job in your preferred market. Penn gives you the best.shot at gainful employment and isn't too far behind Mich. Hell, I know.medians w chi biglaw offers.[/quote]
Dude, how many pro-Penn and anti-Michigan thread trolls are you currently working on? This is ridiculous, and I honestly doubt anybody believes a word out of your mouth after your "Penn > Illinois FR > Michigan for Chicago" crap. You do realize that people remember the things you write, correct? You are probably in the running for the least credible person on these boards. Enough about you, though - a couple quick points:

1.) Penn does not give you the best shot at gainful employment. If you want to go into this, see my extensive discussion with Rayiner from a previous thread. Michigan could place just as easily into NYC biglaw if it wanted, but our students self-select into significantly more difficult and desirable markets. If Penn students did the same, or if Michigan students flocked to our fallback market (yes, NYC is the "safety" market for OCI) in droves like Penn students do, you'd be hard pressed to find any discernible difference. I'm not claiming that Michigan has an advantage here, but it certainly isn't hurting, despite this stupid self-reinforcing idea that has caught on as popular "knowledge" on TLS.

2.) Are you claiming that Penn is equally as good of a choice as Michigan for Chicago? Here are the numbers of attorneys at some of the most selective Chicago firms:

Sidley:
Michigan - 26
Penn - 8

Kirkland:
Michigan - 65
Penn - 6

Mayer:
Michigan - 46
Penn - 19

Latham:
Michigan - 16
Penn - 2

Penn is a great school, but Penn does not best Michigan for Chicago. As for the OP, the issue of Michigan vs. Illinois comes down to which type of risk adverse you are: debt adverse, or striking-out adverse. That's a personal choice, and either one could be a great decision. I'd echo the sentiments of others and say that you should bring the scholarship to the attention of both Michigan and Penn. Congrats on being in the position to be making this choice![/quote]

Reading comp fail? I said was almost as good as Michigan for Chicago but better in terms of gainful employment overall. Don't just spam me with #s bro, apply law to facts.

[johnnyutah]

Apparently I'm the only one who thinks Illinois is the best way to go...even if Michigan does have more prestige/mobility.

I think Illinois is the correct answer here, especially as long as Michigan is at sticker. That said, if the OP has the numbers to get into Penn, Michigan probably won't remain at sticker for long. Scholarships come on this January.

Nope, I said UIUC too

[rayiner]

Yeah, I think the thing everyone is overlooking is the stipulation that he wants to end up in Chicago. That's a pretty ambiguous word, really. I mean, I want to end up in Los Angeles, but if I got a full ride from Yale would I take it over Stanford? Absolutely. If a DC or New York firm offered me 190K would I take it over 145K in LA? Absolutely. Because although I would prefer to stay in LA, my want isn't that great. For others, when they say they want a place, that means they need a reasonable assurance that they'll end up there. Some people I know would take 60K in LA over 190K in New York (and before it blows up, I know there are probably even more people for whom the reverse is true).

Just depends on how big that want is.

Yah, this is what I was trying to say. Mich probably is slightly better for most chicagobiglaw but if you're like most law students, at the end of the day the 6 figure job in one city is better than the 45 k job in your preferred market. Penn gives you the best.shot at gainful employment and isn't too far behind Mich. Hell, I know.medians w chi biglaw offers.

Dude, how many pro-Penn and anti-Michigan thread trolls are you currently working on? This is ridiculous, and I honestly doubt anybody believes a word out of your mouth after your "Penn > Illinois FR > Michigan for Chicago" crap. You do realize that people remember the things you write, correct? You are probably in the running for the least credible person on these boards. Enough about you, though - a couple quick points:

1.) Penn does not give you the best shot at gainful employment. If you want to go into this, see my extensive discussion with Rayiner from a previous thread. Michigan could place just as easily into NYC biglaw if it wanted, but our students self-select into significantly more difficult and desirable markets. If Penn students did the same, or if Michigan students flocked to our fallback market (yes, NYC is the "safety" market for OCI) in droves like Penn students do, you'd be hard pressed to find any discernible difference. I'm not claiming that Michigan has an advantage here, but it certainly isn't hurting, despite this stupid self-reinforcing idea that has caught on as popular "knowledge" on TLS.

The self-selection argument is a poor one. NYC firms at Michigan OCI aren't suddenly going to start taking twice as many students as they usually do just because students are shut out of the usual "more difficult and desirable" markets. Firms by and large go into T14s with some expectation that they'll be calling back X number of people and offering X' number of people. That's why it helps to have big pipelines into firms with big classes.

Think of it from the perspective of someone who just wants a biglaw job out of OCI. What is the credited OCI strategy? Bidding up and down NYC on firms with big summer classes. Everyone I know that did something different had trouble, while even below-median people by and large were okay if they bid NYC. If that's your OCI strategy, what do you want in a school? A ton of NYC interview slots, and a ton of callback slots at those big NYC firms. Penn had a ridiculous number of interview slots at places like Debevoise, DPW, Paul Weiss, etc, firms which are still taking 50+ SAs. Each bid on one of those firms is high-yield, putting you in play for a large number of openings. Meanwhile, bidding on a firm like Foley that might have a half a dozen summers firmwide is very risky - even if they are less grade sensitive, they are just plain oversubscribed. One mistake during an interview or callback (eg: not being enthusiastic enough about the chosen market) might sink you.

Call it hearsay and anecdote if you want, but that's the best anyone really has to go on right now and having gunned OCI myself, and knowing people who did at the various schools, I have formed a firm conclusion that Penn students were in a good position this year.

[CanadianWolf]

If you are certain that you want to live & work in Chicago, then decide between Michigan & Illinois with a full scholarship. Try for money at Michigan by using your Penn acceptance as well as your Illinois scholarship.

[johnnyutah]

Think of it from the perspective of someone who just wants a biglaw job out of OCI. What is the credited OCI strategy? Bidding up and down NYC on firms with big summer classes. Everyone I know that did something different had trouble, while even below-median people by and large were okay if they bid NYC. If that's your OCI strategy, what do you want in a school? A ton of NYC interview slots, and a ton of callback slots at those big NYC firms. Penn had a ridiculous number of interview slots at places like Debevoise, DPW, Paul Weiss, etc, firms which are still taking 50+ SAs. Each bid on one of those firms is high-yield, putting you in play for a large number of openings. Meanwhile, bidding on a firm like Foley that might have a half a dozen summers firmwide is very risky - even if they are less grade sensitive, they are just plain oversubscribed. One mistake during an interview or callback (eg: not being enthusiastic enough about the chosen market) might sink you.

NYC biglaw is back up to 50 SAs? Not bad. They were at like 25 SAs my 2L year.

[BarbellDreams]

I was one of the ones that said UIUC is the right choice. With that said, lets focus on Michigan vs. Penn:

For Chicago this is a no brainer. Look at NALP at the largest firms in Chicago and compare the number of Michigan grads versus Penn grads. Michigan wins this by a landslide. Michigan in my opinion places better nationwide than Penn and Penn students try to play up their school to be better than Michigan by citing ONLY NYC numbers, while disregarding the fact that nationwide there are simply more Michigan grads in other big markets than there are Penn grads.

Dont get me wrong, both schools are amazing schools and give their students amazing opportunities. With that said lets not kid ourselves,Michigan is simply a stronger program.

[rayiner]

Think of it from the perspective of someone who just wants a biglaw job out of OCI. What is the credited OCI strategy? Bidding up and down NYC on firms with big summer classes. Everyone I know that did something different had trouble, while even below-median people by and large were okay if they bid NYC. If that's your OCI strategy, what do you want in a school? A ton of NYC interview slots, and a ton of callback slots at those big NYC firms. Penn had a ridiculous number of interview slots at places like Debevoise, DPW, Paul Weiss, etc, firms which are still taking 50+ SAs. Each bid on one of those firms is high-yield, putting you in play for a large number of openings. Meanwhile, bidding on a firm like Foley that might have a half a dozen summers firmwide is very risky - even if they are less grade sensitive, they are just plain oversubscribed. One mistake during an interview or callback (eg: not being enthusiastic enough about the chosen market) might sink you.

NYC biglaw is back up to 50 SAs? Not bad. They were at like 25 SAs my 2L year.

A number of NYC firms never dipped below 50 SAs. SullCrom, DPW, STB, Cleary, Debevoise, and PW were over 50 for summer 2010. This year, Cravath, Skadden, and Weil should be back over 50 as well.

[BruceWayne]

The self-selection argument is a poor one. NYC firms at Michigan OCI aren't suddenly going to start taking twice as many students as they usually do just because students are shut out of the usual "more difficult and desirable" markets. Firms by and large go into T14s with some expectation that they'll be calling back X number of people and offering X' number of people. That's why it helps to have big pipelines into firms with big classes.

Think of it from the perspective of someone who just wants a biglaw job out of OCI. What is the credited OCI strategy? Bidding up and down NYC on firms with big summer classes. Everyone I know that did something different had trouble, while even below-median people by and large were okay if they bid NYC. If that's your OCI strategy, what do you want in a school? A ton of NYC interview slots, and a ton of callback slots at those big NYC firms. Penn had a ridiculous number of interview slots at places like Debevoise, DPW, Paul Weiss, etc, firms which are still taking 50+ SAs. Each bid on one of those firms is high-yield, putting you in play for a large number of openings. Meanwhile, bidding on a firm like Foley that might have a half a dozen summers firmwide is very risky - even if they are less grade sensitive, they are just plain oversubscribed. One mistake during an interview or callback (eg: not being enthusiastic enough about the chosen market) might sink you.

Call it hearsay and anecdote if you want, but that's the best anyone really has to go on right now and having gunned OCI myself, and knowing people who did at the various schools, I have formed a firm conclusion that Penn students were in a good position this year.

I'm sorry but the Michigan guy's argument is a lot stronger than this. Your entire argument relies on pidegeonholing placement, and student's preferences, into one very narrow spectrum--NYC biglaw. Contrary to what you're trying to allude to, a lot of students DO NOT want to work in some big NYC firm. Essentially, you're throwing away every other legal career choice and telling people to ignore what might be best for their individual career desires and to just focus on NY biglaw. Even worse, your assertions for what that might be are based soley on anecdote (most of it reamed from the incredibly suspect source that is autoadmit.com). The OP is interested in working in Chicago, IL. Clearly there is no guarantee that he will be able to work there, but you're telling him to choose to go to a school that will substantially decrease his chance at working where he really desires, for a marginal---and frankly uncertain--increased chance at working somewhere that he isn't even interested in.

I was one of the ones that said UIUC is the right choice. With that said, lets focus on Michigan vs. Penn:

For Chicago this is a no brainer. Look at NALP at the largest firms in Chicago and compare the number of Michigan grads versus Penn grads. Michigan wins this by a landslide. Michigan in my opinion places better nationwide than Penn and Penn students try to play up their school to be better than Michigan by citing ONLY NYC numbers, while disregarding the fact that nationwide there are simply more Michigan grads in other big markets than there are Penn grads.

Dont get me wrong, both schools are amazing schools and give their students amazing opportunities. With that said lets not kid ourselves,Michigan is simply a stronger program.

This is what it boils down to; it's almost unbelievable that they cannot see how weak of an argument this is that the school is stronger. But then again this is what TLS has been doing with NYU for years.

[johnnyutah]

Think of it from the perspective of someone who just wants a biglaw job out of OCI. What is the credited OCI strategy? Bidding up and down NYC on firms with big summer classes. Everyone I know that did something different had trouble, while even below-median people by and large were okay if they bid NYC. If that's your OCI strategy, what do you want in a school? A ton of NYC interview slots, and a ton of callback slots at those big NYC firms. Penn had a ridiculous number of interview slots at places like Debevoise, DPW, Paul Weiss, etc, firms which are still taking 50+ SAs. Each bid on one of those firms is high-yield, putting you in play for a large number of openings. Meanwhile, bidding on a firm like Foley that might have a half a dozen summers firmwide is very risky - even if they are less grade sensitive, they are just plain oversubscribed. One mistake during an interview or callback (eg: not being enthusiastic enough about the chosen market) might sink you.

NYC biglaw is back up to 50 SAs? Not bad. They were at like 25 SAs my 2L year.

A number of NYC firms never dipped below 50 SAs. SullCrom, DPW, STB, Cleary, Debevoise, and PW were over 50 for summer 2010. This year, Cravath, Skadden, and Weil should be back over 50 as well.

Ahh. I remember Dewey took I think 23, and said all the others were doing about the same.

[rayiner]

I was one of the ones that said UIUC is the right choice. With that said, lets focus on Michigan vs. Penn:

For Chicago this is a no brainer. Look at NALP at the largest firms in Chicago and compare the number of Michigan grads versus Penn grads. Michigan wins this by a landslide. Michigan in my opinion places better nationwide than Penn and Penn students try to play up their school to be better than Michigan by citing ONLY NYC numbers, while disregarding the fact that nationwide there are simply more Michigan grads in other big markets than there are Penn grads.

Dont get me wrong, both schools are amazing schools and give their students amazing opportunities. With that said lets not kid ourselves,Michigan is simply a stronger program.

Come back after you've done OCI. You'll realize that stuff like "number of grads in firms" doesn't matter at all compared to "number of interview slots per firm" and "number of SAs per firm".

The way 0Ls and 1Ls think OCI works is very different from how it actually works (that was certainly true for me before I did OCI). When big firms are deciding on callbacks, they're not comparing Michigan resumes to Penn resumes. That doesn't happen until they're deciding on offers. Rather, they have interview and callback targets for each school. Eg: they'll plan to interview 40 people at Michigan and 80 people at Penn, and callback X% of those people.

Where do those targets come from? It's not based on firms thinking Michigan is better than Penn or vice versa. It's large based on past experience - if a firm had x Michigan grads and 3x Penn grads, they'll set targets based on those expectations.

[fish52]

never go anywhere you wouldn't be happy to graduate at the median.

it's too early to know if you'll be stuck with sticker. if IL offers a fullride, start negotiating.

a-men. Sweeten that deal at Penn.

I'd be shocked and embarrassed for Penn if they made any effort to counter the Illinois offer. Different levels, people. And I have no pro-Penn bias here, as I think Philly is pretty similar to Hell.

[IAFG]

never go anywhere you wouldn't be happy to graduate at the median.

it's too early to know if you'll be stuck with sticker. if IL offers a fullride, start negotiating.

a-men. Sweeten that deal at Penn.

I'd be shocked and embarrassed for Penn if they made any effort to counter the Illinois offer. Different levels, people. And I have no pro-Penn bias here, as I think Philly is pretty similar to Hell.

i assumed that someone getting a fullride at illinois has the numbers for some money at mich or penn but a little digging on LSN suggests otherwise.

[kk19131]

Again, ALL the original post says is that the poster wants to end up in Chicago.

Why in the world are you all telling him to take out $100,000+ in loans to attend Michigan or Penn over a full ride at Illinois? It makes NO sense. It seems like everyone here is assuming he wants to go into biglaw.

If this is what passes for the future of the legal community then I'm truly scared.

[NayBoer]

Again, ALL the original post says is that the poster wants to end up in Chicago.

Why in the world are you all telling him to take out $100,000+ in loans to attend Michigan or Penn over a full ride at Illinois? It makes NO sense. It seems like everyone here is assuming he wants to go into biglaw.

If this is what passes for the future of the legal community then I'm truly scared.

There's no reason to believe that the most financially remunerative option isn't on the table. We should probably assume that he does want biglaw unless he has some stated preference otherwise. Also, even in Champaign with COL and other expenses, a "full ride" is still going to be at least $45k and possibly $60k+. So, we're comparing $60k to roughly $200k, not zero versus $200k. Obviously, that's a huge difference, but is that difference worth it? Even if OP doesn't want biglaw, Michigan or Penn will just give him opportunities that he will simply not get at Illinois. This is the trade-off. Your chances of getting any job are better out of Michigan or Penn. Your chances of getting a biglaw job are MUCH higher out of Michigan or Penn. Michigan and Penn are also stronger in markets outside Chicago, should the OP need to tap into one. Michigan and Penn JDs are just much more powerful and more flexible. You go into more debt, but you get more out of it, too. People don't go into this kind of debt solely for the name. There's actual value in choosing a school like Michigan over Illinois.

[Tanicius]

Again, ALL the original post says is that the poster wants to end up in Chicago.

Why in the world are you all telling him to take out $100,000+ in loans to attend Michigan or Penn over a full ride at Illinois? It makes NO sense. It seems like everyone here is assuming he wants to go into biglaw.

If this is what passes for the future of the legal community then I'm truly scared.

There's no reason to believe that the most financially remunerative option isn't on the table. We should probably assume that he does want biglaw unless he has some stated preference otherwise. Also, even in Champaign with COL and other expenses, a "full ride" is still going to be at least $45k and possibly $60k+. So, we're comparing $60k to roughly $200k, not zero versus $200k. Obviously, that's a huge difference, but is that difference worth it? Even if OP doesn't want biglaw, Michigan or Penn will just give him opportunities that he will simply not get at Illinois. This is the trade-off. Your chances of getting any job are better out of Michigan or Penn. Your chances of getting a biglaw job are MUCH higher out of Michigan or Penn. Michigan and Penn are also stronger in markets outside Chicago, should the OP need to tap into one. Michigan and Penn JDs are just much more powerful and more flexible. You go into more debt, but you get more out of it, too. People don't go into this kind of debt solely for the name. There's actual value in choosing a school like Michigan over Illinois.

Full rides are different than full tuition.

[NayBoer]

Again, ALL the original post says is that the poster wants to end up in Chicago.

Why in the world are you all telling him to take out $100,000+ in loans to attend Michigan or Penn over a full ride at Illinois? It makes NO sense. It seems like everyone here is assuming he wants to go into biglaw.

If this is what passes for the future of the legal community then I'm truly scared.

There's no reason to believe that the most financially remunerative option isn't on the table. We should probably assume that he does want biglaw unless he has some stated preference otherwise. Also, even in Champaign with COL and other expenses, a "full ride" is still going to be at least $45k and possibly $60k+. So, we're comparing $60k to roughly $200k, not zero versus $200k. Obviously, that's a huge difference, but is that difference worth it? Even if OP doesn't want biglaw, Michigan or Penn will just give him opportunities that he will simply not get at Illinois. This is the trade-off. Your chances of getting any job are better out of Michigan or Penn. Your chances of getting a biglaw job are MUCH higher out of Michigan or Penn. Michigan and Penn are also stronger in markets outside Chicago, should the OP need to tap into one. Michigan and Penn JDs are just much more powerful and more flexible. You go into more debt, but you get more out of it, too. People don't go into this kind of debt solely for the name. There's actual value in choosing a school like Michigan over Illinois.

Full rides are different than full tuition.

I think it's unclear whether OP means full tuition or full tuition plus COL and books. I think a lot of people use "full ride" to mean full tuition.

[AreJay711]

Michigan could place just as easily into NYC biglaw if it wanted, but our students self-select into significantly more difficult and desirable markets. If Penn students did the same, or if Michigan students flocked to our fallback market (yes, NYC is the "safety" market for OCI) in droves like Penn students do, you'd be hard pressed to find any discernible difference. I'm not claiming that Michigan has an advantage here, but it certainly isn't hurting, despite this stupid self-reinforcing idea that has caught on as popular "knowledge" on TLS.

Actually, this is one of the reasons I decided to apply ED to Michigan instead of RD banking on at least a few bites in the CNPMV range. There is a possibility that sending fewer people to NYC will make me slightly more attractive than someone from a peer school since NYC is my peer school. I know it might not even help on the margins but there is a possibility it might. I know that Chicago is the OP's top choice but Penn might not be better overall if he or she properly hedges the bet.