What is the difference between the T14s? Forum

[beepboopbeep]

That 0L in my hypothetical example has to choose in 10 seconds which school to attend. Okay let's make it clearer. That OL has either the US ranking or LST to look at in 10 seconds, and he got into all the top schools.

So a 0L got into every t14 and has only ten seconds to decide. This 0L got no scholarship from any school despite having numbers that got him into HYS.

How is this a useful or plausible hypothetical?

[IAFG]

I was just trying to point out the absurdity of relying entirely on employment numbers.

But I don't get that. Do you not want to get a job? And the flat employment score isn't the be-all and end-all - it's what kinds of jobs going into that score as well, and how the employment score intersects with cost. I don't think anyone has ever denied that.

I'm not saying UVA$$ cannot be a better choice than Yale.


My point was the ranking gives one a better picture than the LST list. Every 0L should accumulat as much information as possible. But my claim is the rankings are useful (not that LST isn't useful. It is.).

If you don't want to actually learn the lay of the land, and already think you can't stomach a Michigan winter, they might be.

[emu42]

Assuming sticker, it seems:
Y
HS
CCN (CC a bit better than N)
PV (little difference between NYU and P)
BMDNC
G

Why would you assume sticker?

Please, 0L, share your fountain of school rank wisdom (that you what, picked up from other TLS posters and are now parroting?)

I was just trying to point out the absurdity of relying entirely on employment numbers.

Are you related to the emo girl 0 L going to Harvard ? If not, you seem like you could be bffs.

because i'm going to harvard? given that i never arbitrarily ranked anything and don't care about prestige, what do we have in common?

half of your posts are criticizing me

[B.B. Homemaker]

Look what I assumed. These ppl really can't read.
That 0L in my hypothetical example has to choose in 10 seconds which school to attend. Okay let's make it clearer. That OL has either the US ranking or LST to look at in 10 seconds, and he got into all the top schools.

Me??

[manu6926]

...

[manu6926]

...

[B.B. Homemaker]

Also, you're still retroactively justifying the US News survey. Why?

I've lived in Europe, Canada, Asia. Every country has school rankings.

My point is the rankings are useful, to some exent.

lol

[beepboopbeep]

I've lived in Europe, Canada, Asia. Every country has school rankings.

I was totally unconvinced, but this swayed me.

[manu6926]

...

[Mack.Hambleton]

.

[manu6926]

...

[manu6926]

...

[rad lulz]

.

[emu42]

I never ranked anything. If anything, I "parrotted" what others on this forum seem to usually say. Hence I said "it seems".
I don't think you are even real. You imagine yourself to be a HLS student. or HLS made a mistake.

lolwut, i didn't even criticize you, relax

[cotiger]

What is this?

I think it's stupid to rely entirely on statistics. As Jbagelboy said, according to those stats, Columbia, Stanford and Chicago are better than Yale, but we know that's not true.

I really think the US News rankings are useful. Assuming no scholarships, if a 0L has to make a decision as to which school to attend in 10 seconds, and if this 0L got into all the top schools, he would be best served by choosing the highest ranked school.
Assuming sticker, it seems:
Y
HS
CCN (CC a bit better than N)
PV (little difference between NYU and P)
BMDNC
G

This is definitely the stupidest thing I've seen all day

In case you're unclear, let me illustrate with a drawing. T14 law schools are kind of like a house. A tiered house that looks a little bit like this:



As you can see, by the time you get to the very top it's pretty much just a bunch of doors.

[EquallyWrong]

In case you're unclear, let me illustrate with a drawing. T14 law schools are kind of like a house. A tiered house that looks a little bit like this:



As you can see, by the time you get to the very top it's pretty much just a bunch of doors.

Only objection is that the doors are drawn as closed, when we all know that the whole point of a JD is to open them. I think people might get the picture if every tier had the same number of doors, but with more closed doors the further down one went...and depicted next to those were the frowning faces of the unprestigious non-HYS preterite...maybe even add a wider panorama depicting friends and loved ones very impressed (grandmothers weeping for joy, former crushes exposing themselves in flustered amazement, etc) at the top and growing more and more indifferent as one drops down the list...with an outfolding triptych depicting the second and third their schools, second tier depicting lives of pauperdom and third tier showing the various methods of suicide available. Then, maybe, people would finally get it.

[MrSebastian]

Take a look at the way US News makes its rankings, it's somewhat awful (http://www.usnews.com/education/best-gr ... s-rankings).

25% is based on how deans and prominent faculty members rate other schools, which is totally subjective. Many don't know much about other schools yet their opinions have a lot of influence (you can see how this results in a circular argument for the rankings).

Meanwhile, only 20% is based on job placement. I'd like to think that hard employment data counts more than the opinions of a handful of people, but no. I kinda like how ATL ranks schools a lot better, since it leaves out the whole subjectivity component and is mostly based on employment numbers and job quality (they're coming out with the new ranking tomorrow BTW).

[wons]

Repeat this until it sinks in:

Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same.

Biglaw jobs (mostly) PAY the same, but they AREN'T the same.

HYS and CCN place significantly better into the top firms. This is particularly important for transactional work.

I don't think there's much distinction between the alphabet soup of lower T14s, but there's a step down from Yale in terms of top firm placement, a step down from H&S, and then a step down from CCN.

[Holly Golightly]

Take a look at the way US News makes its rankings, it's somewhat awful (http://www.usnews.com/education/best-gr ... s-rankings).

25% is based on how deans and prominent faculty members rate other schools, which is totally subjective. Many don't know much about other schools yet their opinions have a lot of influence (you can see how this results in a circular argument for the rankings).

Meanwhile, only 20% is based on job placement. I'd like to think that hard employment data counts more than the opinions of a handful of people, but no. I kinda like how ATL ranks schools a lot better, since it leaves out the whole subjectivity component and is mostly based on employment numbers and job quality (they're coming out with the new ranking tomorrow BTW).

Schools also get points for charging ridiculous tuition rates. It's absurd.

[Otunga]

Repeat this until it sinks in:

Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same.

Biglaw jobs (mostly) PAY the same, but they AREN'T the same.

HYS and CCN place significantly better into the top firms. This is particularly important for transactional work.

I don't think there's much distinction between the alphabet soup of lower T14s, but there's a step down from Yale in terms of top firm placement, a step down from H&S, and then a step down from CCN.

I'm a 0L but this is what seems to be the case to me also. Although, Penn's numbers are stronger than MVDCN.

[lecsa]

Repeat this until it sinks in:

Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same.

Biglaw jobs (mostly) PAY the same, but they AREN'T the same.

HYS and CCN place significantly better into the top firms. This is particularly important for transactional work.

I don't think there's much distinction between the alphabet soup of lower T14s, but there's a step down from Yale in terms of top firm placement, a step down from H&S, and then a step down from CCN.

Are you currently in biglaw?
QOL is more important than firm rankings. A lot of the highest ranked firms have the worst billables and worst QOL. Firm rankings are stupid. It boggles the mind when people say stuff like this. Good luck billing minimum 2500 to 3000 for minimal prestige boost. A lot of in house jobs suck too QOL wise. The reward for finishing your work is more work boring work.

[3L2014]

[/quote]

I really think the US News rankings are useful. Assuming no scholarships, if a 0L has to make a decision as to which school to attend in 10 seconds, and if this 0L got into all the top schools, he would be best served by choosing the highest ranked school.
Assuming sticker, it seems:
Y
HS
CCN (CC a bit better than N)
PV (little difference between NYU and P)
BMDNC
G[/quote]
This is definitely the stupidest thing I've seen all day[/quote]

egregious UVA trolling

[wons]

I am currently a midlevel associate at a big firm, and you are entirely, 100%, like, literally the opposite of correct, wrong. I award you no points, and may god and Winston & Strawn have mercy upon your soul.

Repeat this until it sinks in:

Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same.

Biglaw jobs (mostly) PAY the same, but they AREN'T the same.

HYS and CCN place significantly better into the top firms. This is particularly important for transactional work.

I don't think there's much distinction between the alphabet soup of lower T14s, but there's a step down from Yale in terms of top firm placement, a step down from H&S, and then a step down from CCN.

Are you currently in biglaw?
QOL is more important than firm rankings. A lot of the highest ranked firms have the worst billables and worst QOL. Firm rankings are stupid. It boggles the mind when people say stuff like this. Good luck billing minimum 2500 to 3000 for minimal prestige boost. A lot of in house jobs suck too QOL wise. The reward for finishing your work is more work boring work.

[BanjoCalhoun]

Only objection is that the doors are drawn as closed, when we all know that the whole point of a JD is to open them. I think people might get the picture if every tier had the same number of doors, but with more closed doors the further down one went...and depicted next to those were the frowning faces of the unprestigious non-HYS preterite...maybe even add a wider panorama depicting friends and loved ones very impressed (grandmothers weeping for joy, former crushes exposing themselves in flustered amazement, etc) at the top and growing more and more indifferent as one drops down the list...with an outfolding triptych depicting the second and third their schools, second tier depicting lives of pauperdom and third tier showing the various methods of suicide available. Then, maybe, people would finally get it.

I love this.

[09042014]

I am currently a midlevel associate at a big firm, and you are entirely, 100%, like, literally the opposite of correct, wrong. I award you no points, and may god and Winston & Strawn have mercy upon your soul.

Repeat this until it sinks in:

Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same. Not all biglaw jobs are the same.

Biglaw jobs (mostly) PAY the same, but they AREN'T the same.

HYS and CCN place significantly better into the top firms. This is particularly important for transactional work.

I don't think there's much distinction between the alphabet soup of lower T14s, but there's a step down from Yale in terms of top firm placement, a step down from H&S, and then a step down from CCN.

Are you currently in biglaw?
QOL is more important than firm rankings. A lot of the highest ranked firms have the worst billables and worst QOL. Firm rankings are stupid. It boggles the mind when people say stuff like this. Good luck billing minimum 2500 to 3000 for minimal prestige boost. A lot of in house jobs suck too QOL wise. The reward for finishing your work is more work boring work.

Guy who wears his Sulcrom bag with the logo facing outward.