Rank schools for Chicago legal Market only Forum

[chadwick218]

NU is clearly better for Chicago big law than Michigan. The fact that NU has consistently out placed Michigan in big law (in general) is all the evidence one needs.

Yes, but how much of this is self-selection? Michigan sends far more graduates to NYC than does NU.

I think that Michigan still carries slightly more lay prestige in Chicago than does NU, but in recent years this seems to have significantly faded.

I also think that ND carries more weight than does UIUC despite the fact that UIUC sends more people to the NALP 250 firms in Chicago (given that ND's placement is considerably more national than UIUC).

[Flanker1067]

This is a funny thread because you are all arguing over such small differences. Of course, ITE I don't blame you for trying to get every edge you can but really, good grades at UC, NU or MICH + desire to work in Chicago Biglaw = Biglaw job in Chicago. You can argue numbers all day but desire to be there is a big part of the discussion. Obviously no one has been talking about Berkeley, because once you live there why the hell would you want to go to Chicago?


Edit: When I said this is funny, I meant the NU vs. Michigan type conversation. As for the rest of the schools, go ahead and discuss, could be important.

[bryanl87]

lol.... can kent/loyola/depaul even get a job in chicago? better yet.. can they get a job at all? sad reality because just yesterday i was happy that kent accepted me with $$.

[chadwick218]

lol.... can kent/loyola/depaul even get a job in chicago? better yet.. can they get a job at all? sad reality because just yesterday i was happy that kent accepted me with $$.

Top 5% + LR, but you still may be out in this economy at Kirkland, Sidley, or Mayer!

[PDaddy]

Rather odd that nobody mentions Vandy or Texas. UT is obviously the big feeder for the major Texas markets, but I know UT grads also go to other markets like the Bay, L.A., NY, D.C. and ATL. And aside from going to NY or ATL, why wouldn't Vandy be a good feeder for Chicago, esp. when you mention schools like Case and OSU?

It's really a two part question. 1) Can those schools place in Chicago competitively? 2) Do they place competitively given the self-selection of graduates of those schools for other markets. In other words, is their Chicago placement "relatively" good. Does anyone know?

[NayBoer]

Rather odd that nobody mentions Vandy or Texas. UT is obviously the big feeder for the major Texas markets, but I know UT grads also go to other markets like the Bay, L.A., NY, D.C. and ATL. And aside from going to NY or ATL, why wouldn't Vandy be a good feeder for Chicago, esp. when you mention schools like Case and OSU?

It's really a two part question. 1) Can those schools place in Chicago competitively? 2) Do they place competitively given the self-selection of graduates of those schools for other markets. In other words, is their Chicago placement "relatively" good. Does anyone know?

% of students with known location who are in region
New England: 3
Middle Atlantic: 13
East North Central: 9
West North Central: 4
South Atlantic: 27
East South Central: 22
West South Central: 10
Mountain: 3
Pacific: 6
Non-US: 3

Nearly 60% of Vandy students stay in the three South regions (incl. DC), then NY, then Chi, after that LA+SF. So probably it does go to Chicago, but it's not a main feeder. Looks like VULS students prefer DC, TN+ATL, TX, NY and only after that CHI.


Less than 2.5% of Texas students went to Chicago, per NALP:

% of students with known location who are in region
New England: 0.48
Middle Atlantic: 8.19
East North Central: 2.41
West North Central: 0.24
South Atlantic: 8.67
East South Central: 0.48
West South Central: 67.95
Mountain: 2.65
Pacific: 7.71
Non-US: 1.20

Texas is not a big Chicago school, and has plenty of prospects in TX to not need to bother poaching a market already well-covered.

Vandy and Texas are good schools who make a priority of other markets. Conversely, I assume Case and OSU are included in part because Chicago is the only major market most of those graduates will have a shot at.

[dresden doll]

I see no particular reason for considering Stanford tied with U of C or for placing NU below CLS when it comes to the Chicago market. Home court advantage, IMO, counts for a lot more than people tend to give it credit for.

[crackberry]

Yale
Harvard
Chicago
Notre Dame
Northwestern
Michigan
Berkeley
Stanford
Penn
Cornell
Wisconsin
Illinois

Wisconsin > Illinois?

EDIT: ND > Stanford?

Wow. Just wow.

[PDaddy]

Rather odd that nobody mentions Vandy or Texas. UT is obviously the big feeder for the major Texas markets, but I know UT grads also go to other markets like the Bay, L.A., NY, D.C. and ATL. And aside from going to NY or ATL, why wouldn't Vandy be a good feeder for Chicago, esp. when you mention schools like Case and OSU?

It's really a two part question. 1) Can those schools place in Chicago competitively? 2) Do they place competitively given the self-selection of graduates of those schools for other markets. In other words, is their Chicago placement "relatively" good. Does anyone know?

Texas is not a big Chicago school, and has plenty of prospects in TX to not need to bother poaching a market already well-covered.

Vandy and Texas are good schools who make a priority of other markets. Conversely, I assume Case and OSU are included in part because Chicago is the only major market most of those graduates will have a shot at.

I see. It is rather strange that more Vandy students don't go to Chicago (1/10?). On instinct I would think 15-20%, maybe. It would seem that they would be very competitive there. Why the emphasis on NY and not Chicago? To me that makes little sense. But I understand why Texas grads don't typically go there. Thanks for the stats!

[NayBoer]

Go here for more:
http://www.nalplawschoolsonline.org/

The NYC market is certainly the biggest and the most prestigious, gets a lot of the best cases, and gets the biggest bonuses and salaries (if distinctions are made by region). So it makes sense that students would gravitate there. It's sort of the premier market.

Chicago also has lots of competition, including Chicago and Northwestern - both with reputations for focusing on firm placement. Add in all the other assorted Midwestern schools and the fact that Chicago is smaller than NYC and it starts to make sense.

I imagine both Texas and Vanderbilt get an abundance of students who dislike cold weather, in part why they picked warmer places to attend LS. That's probably why many UT students like to stay in TX and many VULS students like DC, ATL, etc. Chicago has a reputation for relatively cold weather, especially compared to Nashville and Austin.

[Tangerine Gleam]

Yale
Harvard
Chicago
Notre Dame
Northwestern
Michigan
Berkeley
Stanford
Penn
Cornell
Wisconsin
Illinois

Wisconsin > Illinois?

EDIT: ND > Stanford?

LOLWUT

[postitnotes]

Obviously no one has been talking about Berkeley, because once you live there why the hell would you want to go to Chicago?

Have you even been to the East Bay? Chicago>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> East Bay. Oakland is right next to Berkeley.

Overall I think Chicago>>>>Nor Cal too.

[JCougar]

Yeah -- there's almost as much to do in Chicago as there is in New York, except Chicago is a lot cheaper. If you want fun stuff to do, you could spend years in Chicago and not get bored. It's cold? So what. Drink some whiskey, and you won't feel a thing.

[crackberry]

Overall I think Chicago>>>>Nor Cal too.

Clearly personal preference. I would disagree entirely ... for a number of reasons not least of which are:

NorCal has better weather and better outdoor activity opportunities (skiing, hiking, climbing, etc.).

[postitnotes]

Overall I think Chicago>>>>Nor Cal too.

Clearly personal preference. I would disagree entirely ... for a number of reasons not least of which are:

NorCal has better weather and better outdoor activity opportunities (skiing, hiking, climbing, etc.).

The Bay Area is a good 4-5 hours away from skiing (Tahoe). Not much closer from skiing than other places are. You also have to drive a fair amount for hiking. It gets pretty windy and rainy in the fall/winter in Nor Cal, but you don't get the benefits of having snow. Snow is much better than rain. I really enjoy having the four seasons/winter and there's just far more to do entertainment-wise in both NYC and Chicago than in Nor Cal. There's far more cultural opportunities in Chicago and NYC (good orchestras, ballet, art shows, gallery exhibits, restaurants, if you are into certain types of clubbing scenes, Euro house club scenes, superior public transportation, etc.)

[crackberry]

The Bay Area is a good 4-5 hours away from skiing (Tahoe). Not much closer from skiing than other places are. You also have to drive a fair amount for hiking. It gets pretty windy and rainy in the fall/winter in Nor Cal, but you don't get the benefits of having snow. And frankly, snow is much better than rain. I LOVE having four seasons/winter and there's just far more to do entertainment-wise in both NYC and Chicago than in Nor Cal. There's far more cultural opportunities in Chicago and NYC (good orchestras, ballet, art shows, gallery exhibits, restaurants, if you are into certain types of clubbing scenes, Euro house club scenes, superior public transportation, etc.) I am never going back to Nor Cal.

Well if you're a skier, you'll clearly agree that Tahoe >>>>>>> any skiing within 1,000 miles (how far is Colorado?) of Chicago, so while it may be a 3 hour drive, at least it's not a plane flight.

You're right, there are no seasons, but once you leave SF, the weather is awesome 9 months out of 12 (March-November). SF weather is touch-and-go, but on the peninsula and in Marin, for instance, it's gorgeous.

To claim that San Francisco lacks cultural opportunities is absurd. Sure, it's no NYC or London, but San Francisco is a world-class city.

Also, comparing Chicago to NYC is totally disingenuous. Chicago is NOT NYC. Not even close.

[postitnotes]

The Bay Area is a good 4-5 hours away from skiing (Tahoe). Not much closer from skiing than other places are. You also have to drive a fair amount for hiking. It gets pretty windy and rainy in the fall/winter in Nor Cal, but you don't get the benefits of having snow. And frankly, snow is much better than rain. I LOVE having four seasons/winter and there's just far more to do entertainment-wise in both NYC and Chicago than in Nor Cal. There's far more cultural opportunities in Chicago and NYC (good orchestras, ballet, art shows, gallery exhibits, restaurants, if you are into certain types of clubbing scenes, Euro house club scenes, superior public transportation, etc.) I am never going back to Nor Cal.

Well if you're a skier, you'll clearly agree that Tahoe >>>>>>> any skiing within 1,000 miles (how far is Colorado?) of Chicago, so while it may be a 3 hour drive, at least it's not a plane flight.

You're right, there are no seasons, but once you leave SF, the weather is awesome 9 months out of 12 (March-November). SF weather is touch-and-go, but on the peninsula and in Marin, for instance, it's gorgeous.

To claim that San Francisco lacks cultural opportunities is absurd. Sure, it's no NYC or London, but San Francisco is a world-class city.

Also, comparing Chicago to NYC is totally disingenuous. Chicago is NOT NYC. Not even close.

It's a shame SF's weather is touch and go, because it's the only decent part of the Bay Area. I lived in the South and East Bay for a decade, and SF is the only part of Nor Cal I like. SF is very small, not just area wise but population wise too. There are more cultural opportunities simply due to Chicago's sheer size/potential demand for certain cultural events. Taking into account QOL, I think Chicago is better than SF. It's much cheaper for one thing, and North Chicago is pristine.

[Kobe_Teeth]

Yeah -- there's almost as much to do in Chicago as there is in New York, except Chicago is a lot cheaper. If you want fun stuff to do, you could spend years in Chicago and not get bored. It's cold? So what. Drink some whiskey, and you won't feel a thing.

I drink a lot of whiskey. Its still really cold.

[09042014]

Yeah -- there's almost as much to do in Chicago as there is in New York, except Chicago is a lot cheaper. If you want fun stuff to do, you could spend years in Chicago and not get bored. It's cold? So what. Drink some whiskey, and you won't feel a thing.

I drink a lot of whiskey. Its still really cold.

As long as its above 20 degrees its not that bad.

[crackberry]

As long as its above 20 degrees its not that bad.

Meanwhile, when it drops below 50 in California - even in the dead of winter - everyone layers up like the apocalypse is coming.

[09042014]

As long as its above 20 degrees its not that bad.

Meanwhile, when it drops below 50 in California - even in the dead of winter - everyone layers up like the apocalypse is coming.

People just get used to their climate. I don't even wear a winter hat in Chicago.

[crackberry]

As long as its above 20 degrees its not that bad.

Meanwhile, when it drops below 50 in California - even in the dead of winter - everyone layers up like the apocalypse is coming.

People just get used to their climate. I don't even wear a winter hate in Chicago.

Totally true. Coming from the East Coast, it seems like all native Californians are cold-blooded. It's odd.

[illini10]

Being born and raised in Chicago I might be a bit biased - but it's one of the best cities in the world. Great people, clean, great public transportation, great food. My long shot is Northwestern. In at DePaul with $$ and more than likely will get $ from Kent and Loyola. I hope I can stay at U of I if I don't get into Northwestern. I have apps out at UW and ND also.
Many of my parents friends works at the top firms in the city and the majority went to Marshall or Kent (that was 25 years ago things do change). The advice they all gave me is if you don't get into one of the top schools, get the most money you can, do the law review and bust your ass.

[gocubs2010]

As long as its above 20 degrees its not that bad.

Meanwhile, when it drops below 50 in California - even in the dead of winter - everyone layers up like the apocalypse is coming.

People just get used to their climate. I don't even wear a winter hate in Chicago.

Totally true. Coming from the East Coast, it seems like all native Californians are cold-blooded. It's odd.

I am from the Chicago area, so I'm definitely used to the cold. I lived in San Francisco for about a year and a half and I remember the night before I moved back there was some snow. the kind of snow that is melting very soon after falling down. it was maybe 1/4 inch of snow at the most. people were pulling off to the side of the road to touch and play with the snow. they acted like the world was coming to an end.