What is the difference between the T14s? Forum

[beepboopbeep]

Does anyone know of anything similar that exists?

This seems really helpful and shows that even HLS doesn't place more than 10% of its graduates into V10 firms compared a lower the lower T14s of NU and Cornell and that only Y and Columbia place are able to outplace the lower T14s by >10%. Obviously self selection will have an effect on this in all sorts of ways but definitely suggests much more parity than I would have ever expected. Probably also worth noting that only Y was able to place more than half of its V100 placements into V10 firms.

With all that said I would be even more interested in up to date numbers due to the rush towards security after the economic collapse. But then again, were people in '06 really willing to pass on a V10 firm for a lower V100 firm when even if job security may have been relatively equal exit options certainly were not?

Credit to Regulus for this:



Don't know of any similar ones for other schools.

ETA: I don't know the exact numbers for c/o 2014 but the class size is probably around 200, so that's a rate of 25-30% in V10. Whether that's a worthwhile metric is another story. A good number of the non-V10 are definitely self-selection: Irell, MTO, W&C, etc. Those people could definitely have gotten V5 if they wanted, but that probably wouldn't change the overall numbers since those people would be taking up offers that ended up going to other members of the class (assuming a mostly zero-sum approach; not sure this is how it works).

[Chrstgtr]

[quote="beepboopbeep"][quote="Chrstgtr"]
Does anyone know of anything similar that exists?

This seems really helpful and shows that even HLS doesn't place more than 10% of its graduates into V10 firms compared a lower the lower T14s of NU and Cornell and that only Y and Columbia place are able to outplace the lower T14s by >10%. Obviously self selection will have an effect on this in all sorts of ways but definitely suggests much more parity than I would have ever expected. Probably also worth noting that only Y was able to place more than half of its V100 placements into V10 firms.

With all that said I would be even more interested in up to date numbers due to the rush towards security after the economic collapse. But then again, were people in '06 really willing to pass on a V10 firm for a lower V100 firm when even if job security may have been relatively equal exit options certainly were not?[/quote]

Credit to Regulus for this:

[img]http://i752.photobucket.com/albums/xx16 ... beebc5.png[/img]

Don't know of any similar ones for other schools.

ETA: I don't know the exact numbers for c/o 2014 but the class size is probably around 200, so that's a rate of 25-30% in V10. Whether that's a worthwhile metric is another story. A good number of the non-V10 are definitely self-selection: Irell, MTO, W&C, etc. Those people could definitely have gotten V5 if they wanted, but that probably wouldn't change the overall numbers since those people would be taking up offers that ended up going to other members of the class (assuming a mostly zero-sum approach; not sure this is how it works).[/quote]

Using that data suggests that a little less than 75% of students summered in V100 firms with 25% overall at V10 firms. If all those students received offers that were ultimately accepted then the 2013 SAs will have almost exactly the employment outcomes as (maybe the slightest of edges to V10s for the 2013s) as University of Chicago students had in 2006 before the crash. I don't know if that sounds accurate (possible allowances for '06 being a down year in BigLaw for UChicago and '14 going to be a boom year for UChicago) given that the legal market hasn't fully rebounded but certainly suggests that little has changed in the relative placement power of the top law schools.

Also the SA numbers only indicate the number of people going on to firm jobs so it is very possible once clerkships are accounted for '14 will turn out to be a better year than '06 at least at UChicago since the '06 list includes clerkships as well.

I would still be interested to hear anyone's take on whether the pull of V10s is much stronger now relative to '06 because right now it seems as though the marginal employment benefit of attending a C(hicago)N is only about single digit percentage points at a V10 and little more than 10% at V100s compared to mid-lower T14s like Duke, Northwestern, and Penn.

[jbagelboy]

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Chicago was better off now than pre-cash relative to Harvard/Columbia/Yale for vault. I think most of the remaining edge for the Ivys, if any, is a New York/DC bias in the vault survey. Note how heavily Stanford suffers compared to its peers too in these rankings.

[rayiner]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too. Outside CLS/NYU, V10 placement is also heavily about geographic self selection. My year, five people from NU summered at STB, and I don't think any were on LR. Everyone on LR goes to K&E/Sidley/Mayer.

[jbagelboy]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too.

it's a shame we don't have a general "selectivity" ranking for firms, rather than the ephemeral, ever-coy "prestige" rankings

[Nelson]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too. Outside CLS/NYU, V10 placement is also heavily about geographic self selection. My year, five people from NU summered at STB, and I don't think any were on LR. Everyone on LR goes to K&E/Sidley/Mayer.

Rayiner is right as usual.

Gibson Dunn and Jones Day DC are very selective as well. Not to mention lit boutiques and plaintiffs firms, most of which aren't even NLJ250. Though those are more post clerkship jobs.

[Chrstgtr]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too. Outside CLS/NYU, V10 placement is also heavily about geographic self selection. My year, five people from NU summered at STB, and I don't think any were on LR. Everyone on LR goes to K&E/Sidley/Mayer.

I agree completely with this but am just trying to make sense of any tiers within the T14 outside of possibly HYS. HYS give you the best chance at unicorn jobs but HYS's benefits seemed limited (relative to presumably a free ride or near to it at another T14 and the fact that HYS admits would probably graduate relatively high in their class at the other T14s) for those pursing big law.

Gibson Dunn and Jones Day DC are very selective as well. Not to mention lit boutiques and plaintiffs firms, most of which aren't even NLJ250. Though those are more post clerkship jobs.

To me it appears for those who want private practice, the non-marginal benefits of attending a higher ranked T14 (if any) appear to be located in the reach of higher "prestige" schools (again HYS and to a lesser degree C) to non-major and non-traditional markets/DC (where seemingly all non-HYS schools get slaughtered) and in higher ranked schools ability to place its graduates into the nebulous field of boutique firms (which is extremely hard to measure and doesn't show up on most measures of prestigious private practice i.e. Vault and NLJ250 placement percentages).

[09042014]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too. Outside CLS/NYU, V10 placement is also heavily about geographic self selection. My year, five people from NU summered at STB, and I don't think any were on LR. Everyone on LR goes to K&E/Sidley/Mayer.

Rayiner is right as usual.

Gibson Dunn and Jones Day DC are very selective as well. Not to mention lit boutiques and plaintiffs firms, most of which aren't even NLJ250. Though those are more post clerkship jobs.

Even if other firms aren't more selective, regional bias still plays a huge role. Most V10 aren't a factor in DC, LA, SF, Texas or Chicago. Even if Mayer Brown Chicago isn't more selective than Cleary NYC, plenty of Chicago or Northwestern students would go to MB even if they could get Cleary.

Also it's borderline impossible to rank selectivity by general difficultly. Jenner Block is less selective in terms of grades than Sulcrom, but once you have great grades Sulcrom is unselective as fuck. While Jenner will turn down people with 4.0's.

[09042014]

I agree completely with this but am just trying to make sense of any tiers within the T14 outside of possibly HYS. HYS give you the best chance at unicorn jobs but HYS's benefits seemed limited (relative to presumably a free ride or near to it at another T14 and the fact that HYS admits would probably graduate relatively high in their class at the other T14s) for those pursing big law.

HYS admits would only do marginally better at a t14. The grade/LSAT differences are too small for their performance to differ.

[jbagelboy]

I agree completely with this but am just trying to make sense of any tiers within the T14 outside of possibly HYS. HYS give you the best chance at unicorn jobs but HYS's benefits seemed limited (relative to presumably a free ride or near to it at another T14 and the fact that HYS admits would probably graduate relatively high in their class at the other T14s) for those pursing big law.

HYS admits would only do marginally better at a t14. The grade/LSAT differences are too small for their performance to differ.

This has anecdotal support; how well you do on the LSAT and your college grades are far from fully predictive of law school exam capabilities. Some of the people at my school who "spurned" higher ranked schools are doing brilliantly, others middling.

[09042014]

I agree completely with this but am just trying to make sense of any tiers within the T14 outside of possibly HYS. HYS give you the best chance at unicorn jobs but HYS's benefits seemed limited (relative to presumably a free ride or near to it at another T14 and the fact that HYS admits would probably graduate relatively high in their class at the other T14s) for those pursing big law.

HYS admits would only do marginally better at a t14. The grade/LSAT differences are too small for their performance to differ.

This has anecdotal support; how well you do on the LSAT and your college grades are far from fully predictive of law school exam capabilities. Some of the people at my school who "spurned" higher ranked schools are doing brilliantly, others middling.

LSAT only does a good job in very broad strokes. Like 10 points is when it starts getting fairly significant.

I think U of M found a .2 correlation when it studied results. Which isn't very good.

And now with retakes and the sheer amount of good study guides, it's probably worthless.

[bowser]

In reply to poster above who thought 2013 SAs at Chicago appeared to have done just as well as 2006 SAs:

http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospective ... oymentdata

89% of c/o 2009 worked a law firm 2L summer; 83% of c/o 2014 did.

Whether 89% itself was distorted b/c of the boom I'm not sure, but the boom was in effect during 2006 as well. I'm pretty confident that both Chicago and Columbia had ~90% or slightly more doing law firm SA's throughout the 2000s. To me, 90% doing SAs means pretty much every single swinging dick who wanted Biglaw got it. That's not the case now; I mean, the odds are really in your favor, but it's not "shooting fish in a barrel," like it once was.

[wons]

Does anyone know of anything similar that exists?

This seems really helpful and shows that even HLS doesn't place more than 10% of its graduates into V10 firms compared a lower the lower T14s of NU and Cornell and that only Y and Columbia place are able to outplace the lower T14s by >10%. Obviously self selection will have an effect on this in all sorts of ways but definitely suggests much more parity than I would have ever expected. Probably also worth noting that only Y was able to place more than half of its V100 placements into V10 firms.

With all that said I would be even more interested in up to date numbers due to the rush towards security after the economic collapse. But then again, were people in '06 really willing to pass on a V10 firm for a lower V100 firm when even if job security may have been relatively equal exit options certainly were not?

Well you're downplaying what this shows with your rhetoric. One way to look at this is that Columbia places 10-15% more of its graduates in V10 firms than Penn. Another way to look at it is that your chances of getting a V10 firm are more than 50% better at Columbia than Penn.

Also, agreed re: litigation v. transactional. The value of employment at a V10 firm (compared to generic biglaw) is significantly greater for transactional than for litigation (both because the best transactional work is concentrated in a smaller number of firms, and because vault rankings track transactional practice strength fairly well). If I was 100% interested in litigation (and knew enough as a 0L to have that opinion), I'd be much more inclined to drop down rankings and take money, though I would probably pay for HYS for the clerkship opps.

[IAFG]

Does anyone know of anything similar that exists?

This seems really helpful and shows that even HLS doesn't place more than 10% of its graduates into V10 firms compared a lower the lower T14s of NU and Cornell and that only Y and Columbia place are able to outplace the lower T14s by >10%. Obviously self selection will have an effect on this in all sorts of ways but definitely suggests much more parity than I would have ever expected. Probably also worth noting that only Y was able to place more than half of its V100 placements into V10 firms.

With all that said I would be even more interested in up to date numbers due to the rush towards security after the economic collapse. But then again, were people in '06 really willing to pass on a V10 firm for a lower V100 firm when even if job security may have been relatively equal exit options certainly were not?

Well you're downplaying what this shows with your rhetoric. One way to look at this is that Columbia places 10-15% more of its graduates in V10 firms than Penn. Another way to look at it is that your chances of getting a V10 firm are more than 50% better at Columbia than Penn.

Also, agreed re: litigation v. transactional. The value of employment at a V10 firm (compared to generic biglaw) is significantly greater for transactional than for litigation (both because the best transactional work is concentrated in a smaller number of firms, and because vault rankings track transactional practice strength fairly well). If I was 100% interested in litigation (and knew enough as a 0L to have that opinion), I'd be much more inclined to drop down rankings and take money, though I would probably pay for HYS for the clerkship opps.

Interesting points. It does seem like litigators are most open to the idea that excellent training can happen in many settings.

[84651846190]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too.

it's a shame we don't have a general "selectivity" ranking for firms, rather than the ephemeral, ever-coy "prestige" rankings

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... sRankID=35

[jbagelboy]

Outside transactional work, V10 isn't the end-all-be-all. I got NYC V5 (not Skadden) and got dinged at a number of DC and Chicago V50's. Going down the Vault list in DC: W&C, Cov, Wilmer, Sidley, A&P, and Hogan are all more selective than the V10 (sans WLRK). I'd say Sidley and Jenner in Chicago are more selective too.

it's a shame we don't have a general "selectivity" ranking for firms, rather than the ephemeral, ever-coy "prestige" rankings

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/l ... sRankID=35

This is just how associates ranked their own firm, so it's hardly a quantitative realization. But point taken.