Columbia vs. Michigan vs. Penn vs. UVA Forum

[bk1]

A lot of people on this site make fun of Penn by calling it Penn State, I see no such jokes being made about Michigan (Michigan State), sometimes I wonder if this indicative of anything?

Michigan is already a state school so it's hard to make fun of it based on calling it another state school. I've also heard through the TLS grapevine that it's a TTT in decline, but, you know, that's just what I've heard.

[5110]

Good point, bk187. Would it be fair two say that the two schools also have significantly different cultures, Michigan more academic, Penn more biglawish? (I'd imagine that this factor also impacts their prestige.)

[Bronte]

I think people mischaracterize 'lay prestige' on TLS as some sort of pick-up line. Why do you think firms let you search their attorneys by law school? To capitalize on 'lay prestige'. It's real and, while it's by no means THE reason to pick a school, to say it's somehow non-existent is naive.

The flaw in this reasoning is that to whatever extent this is true, this would already be incorporated into the metrics that this site encourages you to use, namely the widely accepted measures of the school's legal employment prospects and prestige. The goal is to assess your employment prospects. To whatever extent firms take "lay prestige" into account, that factor will be fed back into measures like US News's reputation surveys and the NLJ 250 and other employment data.

The consensus on TLS is something like HYS > CCN > MVPDCNB > GTV > regional that dominates its state, else: don't go to law school. This consensus has the negligible effect of "lay prestige" built in.

Edit for poor B.

[bk1]

I think people mischaracterize 'lay prestige' on TLS as some sort of pick-up line. Why do you think firms let you search their attorneys by law school? To capitalize on 'lay prestige'. It's real and, while it's by no means THE reason to pick a school, to say it's somehow non-existent is naive.

The flaw in this reasoning is that to whatever extent this is true, this would already be incorporated into the metrics that this site encourages you to use, namely the widely accepted measures of the school's legal employment prospects and prestige. The goal is to assess your employment prospects. To whatever extent firms take "lay prestige" into account, that factor will be fed back into measures like US News's reputation surveys and the NLJ 250 and other employment data.

The consensus on TLS is something like HYS > CCN > MVPDCN > GTV > regional that dominates its state, else: don't go to law school. This consensus has the negligible effect of "lay prestige" built in.

In light of job prospects, the egregious anti CA trolling is probably warranted.

[Bronte]

In light of job prospects, the egregious anti CA trolling is probably warranted.

Haha, an oversight I assure you. Sorry Boalt.

[bk1]

In light of job prospects, the egregious anti CA trolling is probably warranted.

Haha, an oversight I assure you. Sorry Boalt.

That plus your uncoupling of USC and UCLA from T/V. Though they are doing considerably worse than T/V ITE even if they seemed on par pre-ITE.

[Bronte]

In light of job prospects, the egregious anti CA trolling is probably warranted.

Haha, an oversight I assure you. Sorry Boalt.

That plus your uncoupling of USC and UCLA from T/V. Though they are doing considerably worse than T/V ITE even if they seemed on par pre-ITE.

Yeah I would consider them strong regionals that dominate their state, pretty much the same can be said of Texas, although they've managed to hang onto at least superregional status. Nothing against USC/UCLA. Ranking wasn't meant to be definitive, just a rough estimate of the TLS consensus over the years. Nothing against GULC really. I could say without qualms: HYS > CCN > MVPDNBCG > T/V/UCLA/USC > strong regionals > else.