University of Tulsa has risen from 150+ to 72 in 5 years Forum

Lord Randolph McDuff · Post by **Lord Randolph McDuff** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:33 am

Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.

Tanicius · Post by **Tanicius** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:40 am

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.

By what metric did it improve? Rankings that are determined by the size of school libraries and number of published articles by professors, or job stats?

Grond · Post by **Grond** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:46 am

worked out for this guy I guess

http://www.susmangodfrey.com/Attorneys/Bill-Carmody/

Lord Randolph McDuff · Post by **Lord Randolph McDuff** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:50 am

Tanicius wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.
By what metric did it improve? Rankings that are determined by the size of school libraries and number of published articles by professors, or job stats?

LST employment score... What did you think I was talking about?

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:51 am

Tanicius wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.
By what metric did it improve? Rankings that are determined by the size of school libraries and number of published articles by professors, or job stats?

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/ ... ends/2013/

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:55 am

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.

But no, I don't think the +6.5% in firms of 100+ had much to do with the quality of their hustle.

The +7.5% in gov/PI? Maybe.

Lord Randolph McDuff · Post by **Lord Randolph McDuff** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:25 am

BigZuck wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.
But no, I don't think the +6.5% in firms of 100+ had much to do with the quality of their hustle.

The +7.5% in gov/PI? Maybe.

Oh try, will you.

Sorry no one on this site ever wants to blame students. Blah.

MistakenGenius · Post by **MistakenGenius** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:39 am

Post removed.

Lord Randolph McDuff · Post by **Lord Randolph McDuff** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:48 am

MistakenGenius wrote:
Grond wrote:worked out for this guy I guess

http://www.susmangodfrey.com/Attorneys/Bill-Carmody/
It absolutely did Grond. Carmody is clearly a badass lawyer. But the legal market was very different in 1988. Back then, there wasn't this huge influx of young attorneys so school prestige didn't matter nearly as much as it does now. It was a lot more like today's medical schools in the 60s-80s. Get your JD and you're set. That's not how it works today. Unfortunately, as good as Carmody might be, he might never have had the opportunity today to show it. That's why I always used the qualifier "since the recession."

On another note, I did not know there was a service academy for the merchant marine's. You learn something new every day.

Also, LRM, I have no problem blaming students. Those with ambitious goals but shit LSATs who refuse to retake? Idiots. And I definitely think networking and "hustling" can make a difference for a single student. But to say that one class hustled 20% more than other years? That seems a rather large percentile difference. I think you go to Colorado. Considering the medians for GPA and LSAT did not increase noticeably in the last few years, it seems likely that the classes overall will have similar work ethics to other years.

Either I'm drunk or your not making any sense or both.

I'm saying that the school did not improve. Each class is completely different, filled with students with different goals and ambitions. TLS never takes culture into account, mega- posters assuming the student experience they had is basically the experience had across the country. Really, the only thing in common your average TU student has with a T14 student is the ridiculous curriculum they sit through.

Lord Randolph McDuff · Post by **Lord Randolph McDuff** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:49 am

Also fuck internet I'm going to sleep.

MistakenGenius · Post by **MistakenGenius** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:55 am

Post removed.

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:00 am

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
BigZuck wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:Oh yeah you guys are rights. Totes.

My school actually improved by 20% in one year. Nothin to do wit students.
But no, I don't think the +6.5% in firms of 100+ had much to do with the quality of their hustle.

The +7.5% in gov/PI? Maybe.
Oh try, will you.

Sorry no one on this site ever wants to blame students. Blah.

Firms were hiring more/needed more bodies/economy was improving

Lord Randolph McDuff · Post by **Lord Randolph McDuff** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:39 am

Certainly one of the many factors Zuck. But think of an even smaller school like TU. Four transfers and six people don't sign up for the bar and that changes the LST score by 12%.

TLS ignores this and drolls on and on about a coinflips chance to practice law.

Anyway this jumped from ties/bigoted Okies to my other pet topic; I'll just leave this thread. And I hope I didn't say anything "dangerous" that might influence kiddos to attend shit schools, though I don't ever wish to censor my posts. Regardless, TU is not a good school. You'll either come out with a 45k job or you'll have to wait and eventually get a 45k job. If that deters people, so be it.

timbs4339 · Post by **timbs4339** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:41 am

I lose seven hands of blackjack last night. Tonight I've won seven hands. Conclusion- I'm better at blackjack.

03152016 · Post by **03152016** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:56 am

Grond wrote:worked out for this guy I guess

http://www.susmangodfrey.com/Attorneys/Bill-Carmody/

Apropos of nothing, this is an entertaining read. Guy is a baller.

In a huge defense victory, Carmody orchestrated events outside the lawsuit to defeat a local hero in his hometown court. Carmody’s client, a Dallas investment brokerage, got sued for over $50 million. A loss was sure to break the company. The plaintiff was a “big fish” businessman who had sued Bill’s client in his “small pond,” the little town of Rockport, Texas.

The case stood second on the trial docket. If the first case went as set, Carmody’s case would be bumped for months. A postponement could have cost the brokerage an advantage it had gained during discovery: Although Carmody had deposed all of the opponent’s experts, he had shielded his client’s key expert from deposition. So, the opposition was ill prepared for the expert’s trial testimony. If the case was reset, the opposition would be able to depose the expert and erase their disadvantage.

To prevent this, Bill took the unprecedented step of brokering a deal in which his client funded a $180,000 settlement of the first case on the docket. This enabled Carmody’s case to be tried while his client still had the edge. Bill did go to trial and won a resounding take-nothing judgment – and jury debriefing confirmed the deciding role of the key expert’s testimony. Bill’s client also won a counterclaim of almost $700,000.

Tanicius · Post by **Tanicius** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:39 pm

To prevent this, Bill took the unprecedented step of brokering a deal in which his client funded a $180,000 settlement of the first case on the docket. This enabled Carmody’s case to be tried while his client still had the edge. Bill did go to trial and won a resounding take-nothing judgment – and jury debriefing confirmed the deciding role of the key expert’s testimony. Bill’s client also won a counterclaim of almost $700,000.

This seems vaguely unethical.

ElliotNessquire · Post by **ElliotNessquire** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:23 pm

Damn, I had no idea what kind of pissing match I was beginning with this thread

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:38 pm

ElliotNessquire wrote:Damn, I had no idea what kind of pissing match I was beginning with this thread

You must be new here

Oklahoma2014 · Post by **Oklahoma2014** » Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:43 pm

MistakenGenius wrote:
TatteredDignity wrote:
MistakenGenius wrote: 4.) They are okay making a small salary ($40000-$50000, chances of 6 figures are 0%)
It's best to avoid talking out of your ass. The big Tulsa firms (big in a relative sense, at least) start right around $100k. And several smaller firms do, too. I work with several recent TU grads who are making six figs. I'm not saying OP should count on that--just that it's not impossible.
Think you should probably stay in the men's style thread, this is big boy talk. I feel like the burden of proof is on you to show us different. What I see is that the number of current graduates who are hired in firms of 101 attorneys or more is 0. That's easily shown in LST. I also looked up the associates of the 20 largest firms in Tulsa for the hell of it. There's no doubt there's big law in Tulsa, but they're not hiring Tulsa grads. Since 2010, I've found one UTulsa hire. At the Tulsa office of an Oklahoma firm called McAfee and Taft, there's a young guy named Jared there. He already had a masters degree, but got his JD from Tulsa where he graduated number one in his class, was order of the curule chair (I'm unfamiliar with that honor), and was editor in chief of the Tulsa law review. He also happened to share the last name with 2 partners. Clearly, he's a special case, but if we count him, that means since 2010, 1 Tulsa grad snagged a perfect outcome out of around 500 graduates. That's effectively 0%. In this economy, the chances of a Tulsa grad making 6 figures out the door is so low it can be considered 0. I think you're the one talking out of your ass. But please, share some more anecdotes with us.

As for the guy who asked about my insular comment, I have family in Oklahoma. I hesitate to call Oklahoma the South, but they think they are, and they do share many characteristics with the typical south. The belief in states' rights is alive and well there, and out of staters are all viewed as different people. I'm not saying they'd reject someone from Kansas without knowing his credentials, but they're going to view them more skeptically, and all else being equal, will more likely give the nod to someone from the state.

Also, OP. Only consider your goals, your ties, money, and the school's employment. USNWR means nothing.

Late to the party. I know Jared. But I'm not aware that he shares the same last name as any partners at the firm.