Top Law Schools

I have noticed that most of the people on here seem to be very narrow minded and have the mindset that if you don't go to a t14 school then its a waste of time to go to any other schools and you should retake over and over until you score good enough on the LSAT. Does everyone seem to agree with that? I'm trying to give hope to people that get into good schools that are NOT t14. thoughts?

There is hope at non-T14's if you do well, but doing well is incredibly difficult and unpredictable.

cool thread, bro

The legal job market sucks bro. It's not quite as dire as T14 or die, but it might be depending on your career goals.

It's not TLS being narrow minded but rather TLS reflecting the realities of the job market.

I don't think anyone's directed you to:

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

but you should check it out and get real about the employment prospects.

Yeah I mean look, TLS'ers are super obnoxious and arrogant about this topic. BUT, the general consensus here about "T14 or bust" does seem fair. There really is a huge gap between employment outcomes for T14 graduates and everyone else.

Emersonman wrote:I have noticed that most of the people on here seem to be very narrow minded and have the mindset that if you don't go to a t14 school then its a waste of time to go to any other schools and you should retake over and over until you score good enough on the LSAT. Does everyone seem to agree with that? I'm trying to give hope to people that get into good schools that are NOT t14. thoughts?

It is possible to go to a lower-ranked school and have a successful career as a lawyer.
The idea is that it's a much better idea to go to a higher-ranked school, with far more resources and connections, to improve your chances of starting out your law career right.
As a person who is pretty good at statistics, I would rather the 80% law-employment for $150k over the 40% law-employment for $150k.

I'm even more narrow minded: you probably shouldn't go at all. A null set of options is simplest. But if you are going to go, then max out your application--which includes LSAT score--so you sure as shit don't have to pay for it.

You are incorrect. The TLS mentality is this:

Go to a school where you can reach your career goals with median grades and not incur more debt than you can service with those goals. It just so happens that most people here want to make the big $$$$ or work prestigious jobs which means big law/big fed/etc. therefore most of the advice given out is T-14 or bust.

I gave you advice on your last thread and I stand by that advice even though I am headed to a TT school in the fall. The TT school I have chosen is in the market I want to be in and I can reach my goals at median at this school. I am going to this TT on full scholarship and my parents are covering cost of living so I will get my JD for a total of $0.00.

Everyone's goals and situations are different and the TLS hive will give you great advice based on the information you give them.

TL;dr. The TLS mentality is not "T-14 or Die"

There's plenty of respect here for strong regionals, especially in secondary markets. But the career goals of most TLSers mean that a T14 is by far the safest option. For most people, it is easier/safer to improve your LSAT score to get into a T14 than to play the roulette game of 1L grades at a TTT, where you have one chance to do really well, or else forfeit your opportunity to get a good employment outcome (at least without a LOT of hustle and luck.)

I don't think everyone has that mentality. Choices are complex and comprehensive. Ranking isn't everything. Debt-to-salary ratio matters. What career objectives you have matters. Faculty matters. Rankings are only one piece. If you do things wisely and thoughtfully you will be able to succeed in life. If you are able to actually envision getting into and attending law school, you can succeed if you play your cards right.

Id take VANDY over Georgetown at same price for any market (Georgetown's class is massive and Vanderbilts hiring numbers are just as good)

I'd take UCLA over Duke, Cornell, and Georgetown if I wanted California

I'd take U of Texas with money over Cornell if I wanted Texas...

T-17 is solid imo

~(I'm someone with a top 10 acceptance who will be attending one of the above schools for the stated reasons plus $$$)

Your specific issue is that you appear to think all law schools offer you the exact same access to the same job markets. And that's the mentality that posters here often try to correct.

If you want to work in the local DA's office, great. Go to a local school that tends to place there. Still get a good LSAT and get a full scholarship, but there's no need to go to a top-tier school for that.

But if you want to work in the DOJ, that same local (or regional) school probably won't even get you an interview for the honors program. And if they do, it's because you were at the very top of your class (something you can't predict or count on). So you need to go to a school that gives you a reasonable chance at the job, which means T-14. Or in the specific case of the DOJ, probably T10.

So it's not T-14 or die. It's T-14 or die if your career goals are in areas that regional schools realistically won't place you in.

No. As others have said, it's based on the goals of the person, as well as the amount of debt involved. Someone who gets a good scholly and won't have much debt from say, U of Texas, and wants to work in TX, will usually get directed by people to go there instead of say Michigan at sticker. Keep in mind that this is just an example, the individual may get money at the lower T14s as well and may want to work in a different state.

It depends which non-T14 you're talking about. If you're going to American at sticker, death is probably preferable. If you're going to BC at a huge discount? Not bad at all. "T17" is dumb. You want Chicago? Notre Dame for free is certainly defensible.

Emersonman wrote:I have noticed that most of the people on here seem to be very narrow minded and have the mindset that if you don't go to a t14 school then its a waste of time to go to any other schools and you should retake over and over until you score good enough on the LSAT. Does everyone seem to agree with that? I'm trying to give hope to people that get into good schools that are NOT t14. thoughts?

A whopping set of zero.

PeanutsNJam wrote:It depends which non-T14 you're talking about. If you're going to American at sticker, death is probably preferable. If you're going to BC at a huge discount? Not bad at all. "T17" is dumb. You want Chicago? Notre Dame for free is certainly defensible.

I agree Notre Dame is defensible but the question is how low can you reasonably go before it's risky?

Solid, innovative debate y'all got going on in this thread. I choose death btw.

Retake

curry1 wrote:

Emersonman wrote:I have noticed that most of the people on here seem to be very narrow minded and have the mindset that if you don't go to a t14 school then its a waste of time to go to any other schools and you should retake over and over until you score good enough on the LSAT. Does everyone seem to agree with that? I'm trying to give hope to people that get into good schools that are NOT t14. thoughts?

A whopping set of zero.

Is this trolling? There are several good non-T14 schools depending on one's goals and the price tag.

Goldchain wrote:Id take VANDY over Georgetown at same price for any market (Georgetown's class is massive and Vanderbilts hiring numbers are just as good)

I'd take UCLA over Duke, Cornell, and Georgetown if I wanted California

I'd take U of Texas with money over Cornell if I wanted Texas...

T-17 is solid imo

~(I'm someone with a top 10 acceptance who will be attending one of the above schools for the stated reasons plus $$$)

T17 is not a thing.

Not looking it up because I'm on my phone but (1) I don't believe you about Vanderbilt's hiring numbers being just as good as GTown's and (2) even if that's true, what does GTown's class size have to do with anything, since we're assuming the hiring numbers are same?

Texas w/ money for Texas is certainly defensible over Cornell at sticker. UCLA w/ money for California is defensible over a T14 at sticker. Not sure that I would take Texas over Cornell at the same price.

I've come out on exactly the opposite of this for the most part. Generally, those people that are smart enough to get into a T14 should pursue other options with greater ROIs. Those people that are not smart enough to get into the T14s and are not that smart are probably more tailor made for being lawyers (it's a very redundant job with minimal creativity and analysis). A legal eduction provides a much higher ROI to dumber people and pushing them into the middle class than smart people and pushing them into the upper middle class.

A free T14 education might be worth it (to bank lots of biglaw money quickly) or YS with special unicorn jobs, but for the most part, the person going to Duke is worse at playing the game of life than the person going to TT.

Hand wrote:Solid, innovative debate y'all got going on in this thread. I choose death btw.

Inclusive "or," too

JohannDeMann wrote:I've come out on exactly the opposite of this for the most part. Generally, those people that are smart enough to get into a T14 should pursue other options with greater ROIs. Those people that are not smart enough to get into the T14s and are not that smart are probably more tailor made for being lawyers (it's a very redundant job with minimal creativity and analysis). A legal eduction provides a much higher ROI to dumber people and pushing them into the middle class than smart people and pushing them into the upper middle class.

A free T14 education might be worth it (to bank lots of biglaw money quickly) or YS with special unicorn jobs, but for the most part, the person going to Duke is worse at playing the game of life than the person going to TT.

Yeah. There's no way anyone wants to actually work at a high level in the legal profession in jobs that can only be realistically attained through going to a top school. The better explanation is that everyone else is an idiot for not having the exact same ambitions as you.

Hikikomorist wrote:

Hand wrote:Solid, innovative debate y'all got going on in this thread. I choose death btw.

Inclusive "or," too

I have been a lifelong advocate of giving the natural language "or" the same meaning as the disjunctive connector of propositional logic; I'm glad you noticed