Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw Forum
-
- Posts: 11730
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Of course I wouldn't say UT is never the answer. I go to UT. I think it can be the answer depending on relative debt levels and risk aversion.
But, if all I cared about was big law I would without a doubt choose a T14. I finished my first semester toward the top of the class, have TX ties, and struck out at a 1L SA. Kids at places like Duke get 1L SAs before they even get grades back. I know that's anecdotal but from everything I have seen and heard, if there is one thing that TX firms love more than Texans it's the prestige of the T14. At UT, if you're a regular schmo Texan you have to finish high in the class to get big law. At a T14, all they care about is that you're oozing with prestige.
From everything I have seen or heard, TX big law is much easier for Texans to snag coming from a T14 than it is for Texans who go to UT.
But, if all I cared about was big law I would without a doubt choose a T14. I finished my first semester toward the top of the class, have TX ties, and struck out at a 1L SA. Kids at places like Duke get 1L SAs before they even get grades back. I know that's anecdotal but from everything I have seen and heard, if there is one thing that TX firms love more than Texans it's the prestige of the T14. At UT, if you're a regular schmo Texan you have to finish high in the class to get big law. At a T14, all they care about is that you're oozing with prestige.
From everything I have seen or heard, TX big law is much easier for Texans to snag coming from a T14 than it is for Texans who go to UT.
- kalvano
- Posts: 11951
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
You should go to whichever of the T14 is least expensive.
- Crowing
- Posts: 2631
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I think he admitted the weather sucks oncethewaves wrote:2014, do you ever say anything bad about UChicago?
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I know 1L SA's are most prevalent in Texas, but still, everyone "strikes out" at 1L/spring OCI. Is 1L hiring really a decent measure of UT's placement power for you? I don't think Ive ever heard of someone tell me thats how they landed their summer job, even at very top schools (I know it does happen for a couple people, but idk). And everyone still finds summer jobs, and the vast, vast majority of students who do 2L OCI get jobs through it (at my school not necessarily UT). Seems like people at the top of the class at UT do fine. And you'll very likely get an SA if your grades stay high this semesterBigZuck wrote:Of course I wouldn't say UT is never the answer. I go to UT. I think it can be the answer depending on relative debt levels and risk aversion.
But, if all I cared about was big law I would without a doubt choose a T14. I finished my first semester toward the top of the class, have TX ties, and struck out at a 1L SA. Kids at places like Duke get 1L SAs before they even get grades back. I know that's anecdotal but from everything I have seen and heard, if there is one thing that TX firms love more than Texans it's the prestige of the T14. At UT, if you're a regular schmo Texan you have to finish high in the class to get big law. At a T14, all they care about is that you're oozing with prestige.
From everything I have seen or heard, TX big law is much easier for Texans to snag coming from a T14 than it is for Texans who go to UT.
-
- Posts: 377
- Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 8:50 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Judging a school's placement power by a failure to obtain a 1l associate position is stupid. Those are rare from most schools. UT has pretty good big law stats. If you have decent grades and ties you will be fine for 2l summer associate which is what really counts.
Source: I'm a 2l at UT and know many people with biglaw and many of them were above median but not "towards the top of the class".
Source: I'm a 2l at UT and know many people with biglaw and many of them were above median but not "towards the top of the class".
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
-
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 1:47 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
So whats the actual cost differential if UT is free the rest are close to sticker? Like 200k+ ? I'm curious to know if people really think the median "saftey net" for biglaw chances at CCN is actually worth that much, and if so, why?
Seems like if you got into those schools, you're certainly gifted enough to get top 1/3 at UT as easily as median at those schools.
Seems like if you got into those schools, you're certainly gifted enough to get top 1/3 at UT as easily as median at those schools.
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
You must mean just for texans, because only 20%ish of CC get 1L SA's, and Im sure upwards of 80% want them if they could have them2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
True that's a valid caveat. I meant people who validly want Texas SAs which would require tiesjbagelboy wrote:You must mean just for texans, because only 20%ish of CC get 1L SA's, and Im sure upwards of 80% want them if they could have them2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.

-
- Posts: 11730
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I really was only talking about a 1L summer phenomenon to make a point about how employers view UT kids versus T14 kids. And it was anecdotal as shit, and probably subject to all kinds of biases that might make it moot. It's just that when doing research on schools last year and then going through the 1L process this year I have heard of a number of kids at T14s gettings 1L SAs without grades, whereas at UT the only kids I know who have snagged 1L SAs all had high grades, plus were URM, or had some solid nepotism in their favor, or hot girls. I just think that employers favor the prestige of a T14 over UT and if all else were equal (which it never is) if I wanted TX big law I would choose the T14.jbagelboy wrote:I know 1L SA's are most prevalent in Texas, but still, everyone "strikes out" at 1L/spring OCI. Is 1L hiring really a decent measure of UT's placement power for you? I don't think Ive ever heard of someone tell me thats how they landed their summer job, even at very top schools (I know it does happen for a couple people, but idk). And everyone still finds summer jobs, and the vast, vast majority of students who do 2L OCI get jobs through it (at my school not necessarily UT). Seems like people at the top of the class at UT do fine. And you'll very likely get an SA if your grades stay high this semesterBigZuck wrote:Of course I wouldn't say UT is never the answer. I go to UT. I think it can be the answer depending on relative debt levels and risk aversion.
But, if all I cared about was big law I would without a doubt choose a T14. I finished my first semester toward the top of the class, have TX ties, and struck out at a 1L SA. Kids at places like Duke get 1L SAs before they even get grades back. I know that's anecdotal but from everything I have seen and heard, if there is one thing that TX firms love more than Texans it's the prestige of the T14. At UT, if you're a regular schmo Texan you have to finish high in the class to get big law. At a T14, all they care about is that you're oozing with prestige.
From everything I have seen or heard, TX big law is much easier for Texans to snag coming from a T14 than it is for Texans who go to UT.
I don't think the success of 1L SA placement rates should really determine the placement ability of a school. Obviously 2L OCI is much more important. I fully expected to strike out this summer and I'm not particularly worried about the fall (unless my grades drop I guess). Still though, at UT you pretty much need to do well (I think top 3rd as a rough guideline) whereas at T14s it sounds like you don't need to do nearly as well, as long as you have TX ties.
I guess I'm just pushing back against the notion of "Just do UT and get big law bro." UT might be king of the mountain in TX all things considered and its a very good school, but just showing up doesn't automatically mean big law. Again, all else equal, they are going to pick the Harvard kid over the UT kid every day of the week. UT is prestigious in TX but lets not kid ourselves.
-
- Posts: 11730
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
By towards the top of the class I mean top 25ish, top 3rd, something like that. Maybe I worded it too strongly but what I meant was a decent clip above median.timmyd wrote:Judging a school's placement power by a failure to obtain a 1l associate position is stupid. Those are rare from most schools. UT has pretty good big law stats. If you have decent grades and ties you will be fine for 2l summer associate which is what really counts.
Source: I'm a 2l at UT and know many people with biglaw and many of them were above median but not "towards the top of the class".
If I understand you correctly you're saying you know UT kids who got TX big law being fairly close to median? Are we talking normal schmos or did they have something else going for them like diversity or hotness?
Anyway, I'm pretty much of the opinion that someone will finish around the same percentile in their class at UT as they would at a school like Columbia. Columbia students are of a higher caliber when it comes to entering numbers but I really don't think there is a significant enough difference between someone who scores a 173 on the LSAT versus someone who scores a 169 to say the 173 is clearly smarter and will clearly do better in law school. I think regardless of what school you pick you should assume to be median and proceed from there. And if I were median at UT I would expect to be precluded from TX big law. Median at Columbia? I don't hate my chances, as long as I have TX ties.
When you include cost and personal factors- that's when the decision becomes much more complicated.
-
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:44 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Im a normal schmo at median who got big law. I also know of others in roughly the same position. It's not easy or assured by any stretch but it is possible. No doubt that your chances of big law at median are greater from a T14 with Texas ties however.BigZuck wrote:By towards the top of the class I mean top 25ish, top 3rd, something like that. Maybe I worded it too strongly but what I meant was a decent clip above median.timmyd wrote:Judging a school's placement power by a failure to obtain a 1l associate position is stupid. Those are rare from most schools. UT has pretty good big law stats. If you have decent grades and ties you will be fine for 2l summer associate which is what really counts.
Source: I'm a 2l at UT and know many people with biglaw and many of them were above median but not "towards the top of the class".
If I understand you correctly you're saying you know UT kids who got TX big law being fairly close to median? Are we talking normal schmos or did they have something else going for them like diversity or hotness?
Anyway, I'm pretty much of the opinion that someone will finish around the same percentile in their class at UT as they would at a school like Columbia. Columbia students are of a higher caliber when it comes to entering numbers but I really don't think there is a significant enough difference between someone who scores a 173 on the LSAT versus someone who scores a 169 to say the 173 is clearly smarter and will clearly do better in law school. I think regardless of what school you pick you should assume to be median and proceed from there. And if I were median at UT I would expect to be precluded from TX big law. Median at Columbia? I don't hate my chances, as long as I have TX ties.
When you include cost and personal factors- that's when the decision becomes much more complicated.
- Stringer Bell
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Do you personally know people at Chicago pulling Texas biglaw with bottom 10% type grades? I don't think that's really doable from the lower t14. If true, then CC might have an advantage over the lower t14.2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Obviously CC has some advantage over lower T 14. But bottom 10% aint taking shit for either.Stringer Bell wrote:Do you personally know people at Chicago pulling Texas biglaw with bottom 10% type grades? I don't think that's really doable from the lower t14. If true, then CC might have an advantage over the lower t14.2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I don't know anyone in the bottom 10%, I don't even know where that number falls on our grading scale. People aren't really jumping to disclose that they are bad at law school (unfortunately?).Stringer Bell wrote:Do you personally know people at Chicago pulling Texas biglaw with bottom 10% type grades? I don't think that's really doable from the lower t14. If true, then CC might have an advantage over the lower t14.2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
I don't know anyone who targeted Texas with ties who didn't get it. No clue where most fall on the grade spectrum though, but odds are there's a mixture in there and no one (including firms) actually knows where median falls so the middle ~50% or so is kind of a shit show.
- Stringer Bell
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I actually don't think it's obvious that Texas offices would dip much lower at CC than they would at UVA/NU/Duke/etc. I do know that even with Texas ties at those schools, your grades still have to be at least decent.jbagelboy wrote:Obviously CC has some advantage over lower T 14. But bottom 10% aint taking shit for either.Stringer Bell wrote:Do you personally know people at Chicago pulling Texas biglaw with bottom 10% type grades? I don't think that's really doable from the lower t14. If true, then CC might have an advantage over the lower t14.2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
That's why I think the implication that going to CC almost guarantees biglaw for someone from TX is kind of dangerous for someone seeking advice without some pretty legit evidence to back it up.
- wiz
- Posts: 44572
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:25 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I think the main advantage CCN has over UVA/NU/Duke is NY placement, which is reflected in the strong OCI stats. I agree with you about it not being obvious that Texas firms dip much lower at CCN than they would at other T14 schools. Especially UVA and Duke, which I know for a fact are very well-regarded in the South.Stringer Bell wrote:I actually don't think it's obvious that Texas offices would dip much lower at CC than they would at UVA/NU/Duke/etc. I do know that even with Texas ties at those schools, your grades still have to be at least decent.jbagelboy wrote:Obviously CC has some advantage over lower T 14. But bottom 10% aint taking shit for either.Stringer Bell wrote:Do you personally know people at Chicago pulling Texas biglaw with bottom 10% type grades? I don't think that's really doable from the lower t14. If true, then CC might have an advantage over the lower t14.2014 wrote:If you take UTs percentage of people who get Texas SAs who want Texas SAs it is significantly lower than the same percentage at CCN. At UT it's probably like 40% or something at CCN it is 90+
That doesn't come at no cost of course - CCN is more expensive and thus riskier.
That's why I think the implication that going to CC almost guarantees biglaw for someone from TX is kind of dangerous for someone seeking advice without some pretty legit evidence to back it up.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Are they particularly well-regarded in Texas as well, though? Looking at the geographic reports, Chicago sends as many or more people to Texas than UVA or Duke.wiz wrote: I think the main advantage CCN has over UVA/NU/Duke is NY placement, which is reflected in the strong OCI stats. I agree with you about it not being obvious that Texas firms dip much lower at CCN than they would at other T14 schools. Especially UVA and Duke, which I know for a fact are very well-regarded in the South.
- Stringer Bell
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
For the last few years of available employment data, it looks like UVA sends more in total numbers, while Chicago sends a slightly higher percentage of its class. It's tough to draw too much from this, though. For one, I don't think the schools differentiate biglaw from other jobs in the geography breakdowns. So those numbers could conceivably include people working for places like the Travis County District Attorney's office. It's also impossible to determine with much certainty how many students were really gunning for TX. I did a quick search and the UVA law class of 2012 had 16 people from Texas out of 368 students, which comes to 4.3% of the class. I couldn't find a similar statistic for UChi's class or Duke's class. But I learned that someone in the UChi's class previously worked as a Texas roller derby referee.cotiger wrote:Are they particularly well-regarded in Texas as well, though? Looking at the geographic reports, Chicago sends as many or more people to Texas than UVA or Duke.wiz wrote: I think the main advantage CCN has over UVA/NU/Duke is NY placement, which is reflected in the strong OCI stats. I agree with you about it not being obvious that Texas firms dip much lower at CCN than they would at other T14 schools. Especially UVA and Duke, which I know for a fact are very well-regarded in the South.
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
I don't think Chicago carries a tangible advantage over UVA or Duke for Texas on average. We have a couple of firms that probably recruit more here than at those schools (Baker Botts, Susman, Ahmad Zavitzanos) but I wouldn't be surprise if there were others that recruited heavier from there so it likely averages out.
The Chicago advantage over those schools is in major markets.
The Chicago advantage over those schools is in major markets.
-
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:14 am
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Lots of kids in Texas Law have "very strong" ties. Sons and daughters of prominent local judges, politicians(locally or nationally), Forget about those children of texas big law partners, they are more like wall flowers.Bahnking wrote:Title says it all. Texas is close to free, expect minimal scholly money at the rest. My sole goal is get biglaw in Texas (where I have very strong ties and solid work experience). It seems as though Columbia and NYU don't do well in the Texas market, but I'm not sure how much of that is due to self selection vs. actual recruiting. Also, I've heard that some Texas firms only recruit at Texas schools + Harvard - how hard would it be to break into one of these firms from CCN?
So you need to ask yourself how "strong" are you ties when it comes to comparing with your potential peers in Texas. Now if you are like George P. Bush(also an UoT Alumni), hey that will stood out


Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:59 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
How does Stanford compare to Chicago? I really like the school, but my final goal is to end up back home. Given its relative isolation and small class sizes, how hard is it to get into Texas from Stanford?
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Probably not hard at all, especially if you have ties to Texas (as home). Unless UChi is much cheaper, Stanford (or Yale) would be second only to Harvard for TX.Bahnking wrote:How does Stanford compare to Chicago? I really like the school, but my final goal is to end up back home. Given its relative isolation and small class sizes, how hard is it to get into Texas from Stanford?
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Chicago vs. Columbia vs. NYU vs. Texas for Texas Biglaw
Serious sample size issue there. They break their employment down by region and Texas is included in the "Southeast" which includes WV, NC, SC, GA, FL, TN, KY, AR, AL, MS, LA, and OK as well. The average number of grads Stanford sends to those 13 states is 13 students a year over the last 4 years. We aren't talking huge markets there, but it does include Memphis, Nashville, Atlanta, Raleigh, Miami, and others. Remove all of those and we are likely looking at like 5 going to Texas a year maybe.
That being said, I'm sure Stanford grads with Texas ties do fine in Texas. You might have to put in more legwork than you would elsewhere, but the intuition must be that the Stanford name carries weight and is rare.
Still comes down to cost though. Stanford at sticker over Chicago with even like 45k is a tough sell for generic Texas big law. If I were making the decision 45k or 60k would likely be my breaking point. Once you get over 60 I think you suck it up weather wise and enjoy the less debt.
That being said, I'm sure Stanford grads with Texas ties do fine in Texas. You might have to put in more legwork than you would elsewhere, but the intuition must be that the Stanford name carries weight and is rare.
Still comes down to cost though. Stanford at sticker over Chicago with even like 45k is a tough sell for generic Texas big law. If I were making the decision 45k or 60k would likely be my breaking point. Once you get over 60 I think you suck it up weather wise and enjoy the less debt.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login