Best medium/small markets with no ties Forum

[rickgrimes69]

2L at a regional school where over 50% of students are out of state. Lots of people successfully go against your "conventional wisdom" here every year. Have you even visited Colorado? Even one ski trip?

OP rad is a 3L at Vandy, he has had about 3 TLS accounts that I know of, posts about 25 times a day, and, at least on this topic, has no idea what he is talking about.


edit-- also, looks like that dood you linked went to CCN, or at least he claimed he did. Those schools aren't regional rad. Neither is Vandy... It is like you a purposely missing the point.

lol. bolded is TCR

Tell us more 0L.

I don't have the slightest first-hand insight into legal employment but I read TLS like a mad man. I've read and digested every post even remotely involving legal employment and from this I conclude people like radlulz are misinforming. They overstate things. Should you pay sticker at American? Only under extremely, extremely rare circumstances. UVA sticker? Probably not so bad if you know what you are getting into, have a good head on your shoulders, and are flexible.

TLS is wise, it just goes too far. People who come here will know not to pay sticker at Catholic, no need to speak as if everyone is looking at T2 sticker.

I'm tempted to remind you that as a 0L, you objectively have no idea what you're talking about.

But it's clear that you just don't have any idea what you're talking about regardless. Maybe go find another thread to play in. McDuff can join you.

P.S. there is no circumstance under which somebody should pay sticker at American. HTH

[holdencaulfield]

Answering OP's original question about NON-MAJOR markets. At least in Texas, you must have ties. My classmates (who are now practicing attorneys at firms in these markets) have told me firsthand that you have no shot without ties. Literally, they will trash your top 5% resume because they desperately want to avoid 2nd year associates jumping ship as soon as they get a better gig in a big city.


In my market (DFW) and other major markets, ties are still important, but not necessary.

This is straight up not true. I know of several 1L's with firm jobs this summer in Texas who've never even lived there.

My post is 100% accurate. I'm actually an attorney with FIRSTHAND knowledge of this and I have over a dozen contacts (also attorneys) in the NON-MAJOR markets that have confirmed this.

Are your friends summering in Amarillo? Midland? San Angelo? Abilene? Odessa? Lubbock? Wichita Falls? Didn't think so. Do you know anything about any NON-MAJOR markets in Texas?

Thanks brah. Thanks for muddying the water for anyone actually looking for info.

[Elston Gunn]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

[jastrauss26]

I just read over this thread, thanks for the information everybody. I'm honestly quite torn. Some people say one thing, more say another. The fact is that I don't want to be in any of the places that I have ties, but I have a while to think about what I will do. I have a guaranteed job in MI so long as I graduate from pretty much any LS in the country, but I'm gonna work my a** off to give me as much of an edge as I can have given my lack of ties in whatever market I try to get into. If it fails, I tried and won't have (m)any regrets as I will wind up back in MI, but I don't think I would ever forgive myself if I didn't give myself a shot at finding a city I truly love. Thanks for the advice though everybody, I have been thinking about this 24/7 for the whole weekend and I'm sure it won't end until I start applying to schools.

[Greenandgold]

Answering OP's original question about NON-MAJOR markets. At least in Texas, you must have ties. My classmates (who are now practicing attorneys at firms in these markets) have told me firsthand that you have no shot without ties. Literally, they will trash your top 5% resume because they desperately want to avoid 2nd year associates jumping ship as soon as they get a better gig in a big city.


In my market (DFW) and other major markets, ties are still important, but not necessary.

This is straight up not true. I know of several 1L's with firm jobs this summer in Texas who've never even lived there.

My post is 100% accurate. I'm actually an attorney with FIRSTHAND knowledge of this and I have over a dozen contacts (also attorneys) in the NON-MAJOR markets that have confirmed this.

Are your friends summering in Amarillo? Midland? San Angelo? Abilene? Odessa? Lubbock? Wichita Falls? Didn't think so. Do you know anything about any NON-MAJOR markets in Texas?

Thanks brah. Thanks for muddying the water for anyone actually looking for info.

You must not be a very good attorney if you can't even read an edit

[holdencaulfield]

Answering OP's original question about NON-MAJOR markets. At least in Texas, you must have ties. My classmates (who are now practicing attorneys at firms in these markets) have told me firsthand that you have no shot without ties. Literally, they will trash your top 5% resume because they desperately want to avoid 2nd year associates jumping ship as soon as they get a better gig in a big city.


In my market (DFW) and other major markets, ties are still important, but not necessary.

This is straight up not true. I know of several 1L's with firm jobs this summer in Texas who've never even lived there.

My post is 100% accurate. I'm actually an attorney with FIRSTHAND knowledge of this and I have over a dozen contacts (also attorneys) in the NON-MAJOR markets that have confirmed this.

Are your friends summering in Amarillo? Midland? San Angelo? Abilene? Odessa? Lubbock? Wichita Falls? Didn't think so. Do you know anything about any NON-MAJOR markets in Texas?

Thanks brah. Thanks for muddying the water for anyone actually looking for info.

You must not be a very good attorney if you can't even read an edit

Generally, I remove inaccurate information when editing documents. Guess I better work on that; thanks brah.

[BearsGrl]

Answering OP's original question about NON-MAJOR markets. At least in Texas, you must have ties. My classmates (who are now practicing attorneys at firms in these markets) have told me firsthand that you have no shot without ties. Literally, they will trash your top 5% resume because they desperately want to avoid 2nd year associates jumping ship as soon as they get a better gig in a big city.


In my market (DFW) and other major markets, ties are still important, but not necessary.

This is straight up not true. I know of several 1L's with firm jobs this summer in Texas who've never even lived there.

My post is 100% accurate. I'm actually an attorney with FIRSTHAND knowledge of this and I have over a dozen contacts (also attorneys) in the NON-MAJOR markets that have confirmed this.

Are your friends summering in Amarillo? Midland? San Angelo? Abilene? Odessa? Lubbock? Wichita Falls? Didn't think so. Do you know anything about any NON-MAJOR markets in Texas?

Thanks brah. Thanks for muddying the water for anyone actually looking for info.

People think that the only markets in TX are Austin and Houston. I think that knowledge about non-major markets is very lacking on TLS. And I credit you and Lord about your posts as I think they appear the most credible.

I like the advice of OP also working for a year or two in these markets prior to starting law school. I think too many law students don't come in with enough prior experience and thus, they don't know how to "sell" themselves in an interview.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

[bk1]

I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools.

Nobody is saying that going to a local school is not a tie. We are saying that the person whose only tie is a local school is at a disadvantage to someone who is born/bred from that area. When only half or so of the people at local schools actually get jobs as lawyers it seems stupid to put yourself behind the 8 ball by attending a school where you have no previous ties but the majority of your classmates do.

[BearsGrl]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

+1

The school that I attended (and am no longer at) is super-heavy on out-of-state students. There were people that were able to get a range of jobs - local (within an hour commute) and back in their home state. My knowledge will be more limited than most. In graduate school, I attended school out of state and while I'm sure legal interviews are entirely different, there were no "willingness to move" discussions for companies that could have led from internship-to-job opportunities. I would never tell this same advice to a law student (law interviews for internships are not in the same zone as graduate-level opportunities) but add the ability to "sell yourself" about your reasons for being in an area, along with volunteering in the community (which a firm is going to want you to do anyways) and you already have "ties" to discuss.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Nobody is saying that going to a local school is not a tie. We are saying that the person whose only tie is a local school is at a disadvantage to someone who is born/bred from that area.

First, there is no "we." As you can tell there are a variety of nuanced positions here, and there are certainly people who do not view attendance at a regional school as a tie. In terms of your position, if taken as true, that people whose only tie is the local school are disadvantaged, then the "ties" argument is massively overstated.

I don't agree that there is much of a disadvantage. If it exists it is incredibly slight and likely countered by other factors. Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties. This does a disservice to TLS.

When only half or so of the people at local schools actually get jobs as lawyers

Obviously national law schools have better employment opportunities on the whole than local schools, but you assume too much here. Not going to get into that for the sake of this thread..

it seems stupid to put yourself behind the 8 ball by attending a school where you have no previous ties but the majority of your classmates do.

Do you go to a regional school? But you are so confident that it's "stupid" to attend a regional school without pre-existing ties? Do you have any experience in this particular area? I'm not trying to be a dick, but wouldn't you agree that it is a tad strange that all of the proponents of your position attend top schools?

[bk1]

Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties.

notsureifsrs

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties.

notsureifsrs

Well being exact isn't any fun. You know this.

Ok, so 67% of all negative posts in the choosing a law school forum regarding regional schools are about ties.

There. Still wrong, but probably closer.

[BearsGrl]

Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties.

notsureifsrs

So most comments are not about... "where do you want to work/live?" If someone has a disparity in the schools that they are applying to, then of course this makes sense to ask. However, if they are schools in a # range/region range, then 0Ls just need to be treated with kid gloves. Most people do not know about this site.

[Birdnals]

lulz, this thread was fun to read.

My 2 cents as a 1L with the very limited experience I have for OP if he is still here:

http://qkme.me/3tfvh0

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties.

notsureifsrs

So most comments are not about... "where do you want to work/live?" If someone has a disparity in the schools that they are applying to, then of course this makes sense to ask. However, if they are schools in a # range/region range, then 0Ls just need to be treated with kid gloves. Most people do not know about this site.

Went ahead and read this twice.

What do you mean by what you've typed above?

[bk1]

Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties.

notsureifsrs

Well being exact isn't any fun. You know this.

Ok, so 67% of all negative posts in the choosing a law school forum regarding regional schools are about ties.

There. Still wrong, but probably closer.

You realize that cost and bad job prospects are far and away the dominant themes in those negative posts, right? This is completely tangential and a meaningless point but you are seriously deluded if you think the majority of negative responses have to do with ties.

[rickgrimes69]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

Let me try to spell this out. Going to work in any market to which you have zero personal ties represents an objective disadvantage for two possible reasons.

1. Employers may be suspicious of your long term intentions and/or believe you will go back home if given the chance, or
2. You lack important connections which are useful in getting a job to begin with.

You can debate all you want about the extent to which these factors affect somebody's ability to get a job, but it doesn't change the fact that they will still have an effect. Nobody is saying that lack of ties makes it impossible to get a job. But it will make it harder to a certain degree, and in case you hadn't noticed, the legal market is pretty awful right now. Anybody attending a regional school is already looking at an uphill battle to find employment regardless of ties; why would you want to make it harder on yourself?

Said differently; are you actually arguing that ties have zero tangible impact on somebody's ability to find employment in a small market to which they have no prior connection whatsoever?

Furthermore, discounting my opinions because I don't attend a regional school is stupid, because you forget that Duke is located in a small market. I got nowhere with the local firms, and I can assure you it was not because of grades or my resume. One guy in local midlaw told me flat out that because of my lack of ties, "You won't find a job in North Carolina."

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

Let me try to spell this out. Going to work in any market to which you have zero personal ties represents an objective disadvantage for two possible reasons.

1. Employers may be suspicious of your long term intentions and/or believe you will go back home if given the chance, or
2. You lack important connections which are useful in getting a job to begin with.

You can debate all you want about the extent to which these factors affect somebody's ability to get a job, but it doesn't change the fact that they will still have an effect. Nobody is saying that lack of ties makes it impossible to get a job. But it will make it harder to a certain degree, and in case you hadn't noticed, the legal market is pretty awful right now. Anybody attending a regional school is already looking at an uphill battle to find employment regardless of ties; why would you want to make it harder on yourself?

Said differently; are you actually arguing that ties have zero tangible impact on somebody's ability to find employment in a small market to which they have no prior connection whatsoever?

Furthermore, discounting my opinions because I don't attend a regional school is stupid, because you forget that Duke is located in a small market. I got nowhere with the local firms, and I can assure you it was not because of grades or my resume. One guy in local midlaw told me flat out that because of my lack of ties, "You won't find a job in North Carolina."

Yeah Duke grads have lots of options and a reputation for leaving North Carolina. But had you attended UNC, your job search in North Carolina would be much less effected by your lack of pre-existing ties than by your grades, personality, abilities, experiences, luck, etc. Thus, in this context, "ties" are overstated on TLS. Also to above poster, bk187-- read some of the threads. When you see a UGA/Wisco/Wake/UF thread, nearly all the negative comments are regarding ties. Advice is generally, uh either don't go or go to Wake because you are from North Carolina. That's misleading, shitty advice. It influences people like OP to make the same conclusion he/she made in this thread-- "so, I'm stuck in Michigan?.." OP isn't stuck in Michigan because TLS keeps misstating ties.

[BearsGrl]

Yet 80% of the negative posts in the choosing a law school forum are about ties.

notsureifsrs

So most comments are not about... "where do you want to work/live?" If someone has a disparity in the schools that they are applying to, then of course this makes sense to ask. However, if they are schools in a # range/region range, then 0Ls just need to be treated with kid gloves. Most people do not know about this site.

Went ahead and read this twice.

What do you mean by what you've typed above?

There was one "Choosing a School" thread where the person had such different options (2 Midwest, 2 East Coast) that it would be appropriate to ask if that person had ties/where they wanted to eventually relocate to. However, if someone has a discrepancy between regional schools (UW, Iowa, IU, MSU, etc.) then I think the same discussions don't need to occur. If commonsense can't inform you that any of those schools would have comparable outcomes, then maybe law school isn't the right path for you. Other than a "My Big 10 school is better than yours," if you want to work in the major metro, you'll be fine. Now, if you want to work in the suburbs or country within those states, then you'll want "more ties," but the person shouldn't even be considering NYU for sticker to WI 'burbs regardless based on general pay-scale.

And yes, it was badly worded sentence(s). I was watching the finale for a TV show. My bad.

[BearsGrl]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

Let me try to spell this out. Going to work in any market to which you have zero personal ties represents an objective disadvantage for two possible reasons.

1. Employers may be suspicious of your long term intentions and/or believe you will go back home if given the chance, or
2. You lack important connections which are useful in getting a job to begin with.

You can debate all you want about the extent to which these factors affect somebody's ability to get a job, but it doesn't change the fact that they will still have an effect. Nobody is saying that lack of ties makes it impossible to get a job. But it will make it harder to a certain degree, and in case you hadn't noticed, the legal market is pretty awful right now. Anybody attending a regional school is already looking at an uphill battle to find employment regardless of ties; why would you want to make it harder on yourself?

Said differently; are you actually arguing that ties have zero tangible impact on somebody's ability to find employment in a small market to which they have no prior connection whatsoever?

Furthermore, discounting my opinions because I don't attend a regional school is stupid, because you forget that Duke is located in a small market. I got nowhere with the local firms, and I can assure you it was not because of grades or my resume. One guy in local midlaw told me flat out that because of my lack of ties, "You won't find a job in North Carolina."

I think Lord and myself are just implying that small market can mean something different to everyone. Small market is not the same thing to me as secondary market. Small market is the local DA for a county that has significantly less population than metro markets.

[BearsGrl]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

Let me try to spell this out. Going to work in any market to which you have zero personal ties represents an objective disadvantage for two possible reasons.

1. Employers may be suspicious of your long term intentions and/or believe you will go back home if given the chance, or
2. You lack important connections which are useful in getting a job to begin with.

You can debate all you want about the extent to which these factors affect somebody's ability to get a job, but it doesn't change the fact that they will still have an effect. Nobody is saying that lack of ties makes it impossible to get a job. But it will make it harder to a certain degree, and in case you hadn't noticed, the legal market is pretty awful right now. Anybody attending a regional school is already looking at an uphill battle to find employment regardless of ties; why would you want to make it harder on yourself?

Said differently; are you actually arguing that ties have zero tangible impact on somebody's ability to find employment in a small market to which they have no prior connection whatsoever?

Furthermore, discounting my opinions because I don't attend a regional school is stupid, because you forget that Duke is located in a small market. I got nowhere with the local firms, and I can assure you it was not because of grades or my resume. One guy in local midlaw told me flat out that because of my lack of ties, "You won't find a job in North Carolina."

Yeah Duke grads have lots of options and a reputation for leaving North Carolina. But had you attended UNC, your job search in North Carolina would be much less effected by your lack of pre-existing ties than by your grades, personality, abilities, experiences, luck, etc. Thus, in this context, "ties" are overstated on TLS. Also to above poster, bk187-- read some of the threads. When you see a UGA/Wisco/Wake/UF thread, nearly all the negative comments are regarding ties. Advice is generally, uh either don't go or go to Wake because you are from North Carolina. That's misleading, shitty advice. It influences people like OP to make the same conclusion he/she made in this thread-- "so, I'm stuck in Michigan?.." OP isn't stuck in Michigan because TLS keeps misstating ties.

And the Duke "ties" market is so overblown. Obviously, local firms aren't going to be especially into Duke students from non-NC states because..... you're at Duke. And Duke has notorious national prestige by brand alone. If you want to go to Duke and work in NC, then maybe you want to volunteer and establish NC ties.

[rad lulz]

I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools.

Nobody is saying that going to a local school is not a tie. We are saying that the person whose only tie is a local school is at a disadvantage to someone who is born/bred from that area. When only half or so of the people at local schools actually get jobs as lawyers it seems stupid to put yourself behind the 8 ball by attending a school where you have no previous ties but the majority of your classmates do.

This

[rickgrimes69]

There has been so much conflict in this thread, and yet, I think there's almost no substantive disagreement among the advice-givers.

I appreciate your effort to empathize and seek conciliation, but there is substantive disagreement. It's been argued several times on TLS. I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools. Particularly odd is that casual readers, usually who attend top schools, will seemingly agree with the first group and provide statements like rickgrimes has just provided: " I attend a T-14 and I get grilled with ties questions when I interview in secondary markets." These readers completely miss the point, over and over again.

You have already uncovered the basis of this misunderstanding. You also rightly point out that the trade-off of the stronger regional "tie" is shittier job prospects. But the first group hasn't yet come to your understanding, and thus TLS "conventional wisdom" on this topic remains flawed. I'll close for the evening by saying that, amazingly, the TLS members who have experience on the topic-- those, like myself, who currently are or previously were out-of-state students at regional schools-- near unanimously reside in the second group.

Let me try to spell this out. Going to work in any market to which you have zero personal ties represents an objective disadvantage for two possible reasons.

1. Employers may be suspicious of your long term intentions and/or believe you will go back home if given the chance, or
2. You lack important connections which are useful in getting a job to begin with.

You can debate all you want about the extent to which these factors affect somebody's ability to get a job, but it doesn't change the fact that they will still have an effect. Nobody is saying that lack of ties makes it impossible to get a job. But it will make it harder to a certain degree, and in case you hadn't noticed, the legal market is pretty awful right now. Anybody attending a regional school is already looking at an uphill battle to find employment regardless of ties; why would you want to make it harder on yourself?

Said differently; are you actually arguing that ties have zero tangible impact on somebody's ability to find employment in a small market to which they have no prior connection whatsoever?

Furthermore, discounting my opinions because I don't attend a regional school is stupid, because you forget that Duke is located in a small market. I got nowhere with the local firms, and I can assure you it was not because of grades or my resume. One guy in local midlaw told me flat out that because of my lack of ties, "You won't find a job in North Carolina."

Next time you don't want to admit I'm right, just don't respond - strikethrough is so 2012 TLS

I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools.

Nobody is saying that going to a local school is not a tie. We are saying that the person whose only tie is a local school is at a disadvantage to someone who is born/bred from that area. When only half or so of the people at local schools actually get jobs as lawyers it seems stupid to put yourself behind the 8 ball by attending a school where you have no previous ties but the majority of your classmates do.

This

[Ruxin1]

I think there is a faction of people who post very frequently and all attend >T20 schools. In this faction, the view is that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties. Then there is another group, mainly attending <T20 schools, who feel that legal jobs are hard to come by without geographic ties, but going to a regional school is a tie to that region. Obviously, I'm in the latter group, and I am particularly frustrated not only because the first group disseminates information with which I disagree, but because the first group has absolutely zero experience attending regional schools.

Nobody is saying that going to a local school is not a tie. We are saying that the person whose only tie is a local school is at a disadvantage to someone who is born/bred from that area. When only half or so of the people at local schools actually get jobs as lawyers it seems stupid to put yourself behind the 8 ball by attending a school where you have no previous ties but the majority of your classmates do.

This

I am sure Bearsgrl will refute, but TLS really downplays (to some people's detriment) how parochial and good ole' boy network some southern states are.