Rarely talked about schools on TLS... Forum

[reasonabledoubt]

Itunes, Itunes Podcasts Matlock... yet another RC Fail ribbon for you. Itunes is that thing you download that you can listen to all sorts of interesting podcasts and alternative news and stuff on. This message was brought to you by Apple.

Also, lol at the guy attempting to convince us through math while using a 160k "biglaw" salary for his calculations as though it's a thing called a "constant variable." Yeah, good luck with that in 2013.

I can envision it now... "Hello Partner sir, I have many things I would bring to this firm. For example, I got a high GPA on my easy undergrad major and then got a high LSAT test score because I studied for over a year and took a course and did a multitude of PT's which led me to Yale where I wasn't graded and now I have a Yale JD and 200k debt and I would definitely love to make 160k at your big law firm Mr. Partner Sir - "160K! I read it sir, that's what I want, I read it on real internet pixels and magazine statistics..... twitch, twitch." Partner: "double-facepalm" /interview.

Thanks for confirming. I am, in fact, an idiot.

Good luck with your statistics. Don't worry about the real world, externalities, variables you haven't considered and so on. You'll be fine with your stats - they're foolproof.

[reasonabledoubt]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

[rundoxierun]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

[reasonabledoubt]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

I think his reliance on these estimates are exaggerated to the point of lunacy, that's all. Here's the real reason arbitrary stats such as this are used: Because it's comforting to believe you have control over an outcome. It's convenient to disregard all these "random variables." Selective statistics leading to useless data - is that something you study as well?

Why do you think almost all economic theory is useless? (regardless of how "elegant" it looks)

[summerstar]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

I think his reliance on these estimates are exaggerated to the point of lunacy, that's all.

...not to mention, extremely annoying as hell.
and, I really would rather hear about schools that get little mention on TLS, please. tired of the HYS,GULC,CLS, Fordham etc. endless endless rambling

[reasonabledoubt]

I think his reliance on these estimates are exaggerated to the point of lunacy, that's all.

...not to mention, extremely annoying as hell.
and, I really would rather hear about schools that get little mention on TLS, please. tired of the HYS,GULC,CLS, Fordham etc. endless endless rambling[/quote]

Bravo Summerstar!!!

[TTH]

]...not to mention, extremely annoying as hell.
and, I really would rather hear about schools that get little mention on TLS, please. tired of the HYS,GULC,CLS, Fordham etc. endless endless rambling

Go to the "Discuss Your Law School" forum or any of the class year forums. Plenty of schools get talked about.

[reasonabledoubt]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

I'm going to give you a chance to re-read what you just wrote and realize how absurd it is. You essentially said that because the random variables exist in both the Yale and Notre Dame examples, they're irrelevant and shouldn't be considered. You don't seem to understand that just because both examples share a flaw in terms of reliability of data used to formulate the estimates, that it actually undermines the reliability of the results. Let me give you an example: You're building two houses on a foundation of sand. Both foundations are sand. You decide to build both houses because the foundations are the same and therefore "there is no reason to even consider them." Both houses collapse..... why? BECAUSE BOTH FOUNDATIONS WERE FLAWED TO BEGIN WITH. Sheesh.

[summerstar]

been there, done that.

this thread was supposed to be a fresh, updated view, and comparison...sort of like "look at the gem that gets overlooked all the time" discussion.

I'll add some schools that come to mind tomorrow, if I'm feeling brave enough to dare and post anything below T-30.

it is quite possible that we are all a bit cranky waiting for our decisions...

[reasonabledoubt]

been there, done that.

this thread was supposed to be a fresh, updated view, and comparison...sort of like "look at the gem that gets overlooked all the time" discussion.

I'll add some schools that come to mind tomorrow, if I'm feeling brave enough to dare and post anything below T-30.

it is quite possible that we are all a bit cranky waiting for our decisions...

I was really hoping it would become a fresh look at some not-discussed-often schools.... just for fun even. I'm sure I'm not the only one that knows several successful attorneys (friends/family/etc) that went to lower tier schools primarily because they were tied to an area, region, or even city. Why not talk about some of those obscure schools that might have a few good things going for them? I thought it was a good idea.... then the trolls came. I mean, if you take the original example (Valpo) and you take a look at their faculty.... there's a ton of talent there. Are these TLS'ers claiming there would be absolutely nothing worth learning from these Harvard, Columbia and NYU grads? Take a look people... google it.

[summerstar]

exactly.

[rundoxierun]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

I'm going to give you a chance to re-read what you just wrote and realize how absurd it is. You essentially said that because the random variables exist in both the Yale and Notre Dame examples, they're irrelevant and shouldn't be considered. You don't seem to understand that just because both examples share a flaw in terms of reliability of data used to formulate the estimates, that it actually undermines the reliability of the results. Let me give you an example: You're building two houses on a foundation of sand. Both foundations are sand. You decide to build both houses because the foundations are the same and therefore "there is no reason to even consider them." Both houses collapse..... why? BECAUSE BOTH FOUNDATIONS WERE FLAWED TO BEGIN WITH. Sheesh.

God.. this is the first and hopefully only time I will insult someone on TLS.. You are an absolute idiot. It is an ESTIMATION technique. Nothing is exact, estimations give you a way to reasonably compare two situations. You cannot calculate random variables, you can only weigh the likelihood of outcomes. I feel like an idiot for even trying to explain this to you, its like trying to explain genetics to a preschooler. When I walk to the store to buy a loaf of bread am I also suppose to think about the possibility of medical bills from getting hit by a car or tripping and breaking my leg?? NO, but those are random things that could occur. When you estimate something you only consider things that can reasonably be expected to occur.

[TTH]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07

Granted these aren't perfect simulations of real life, but it's still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame

Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

I'm going to give you a chance to re-read what you just wrote and realize how absurd it is. You essentially said that because the random variables exist in both the Yale and Notre Dame examples, they're irrelevant and shouldn't be considered. You don't seem to understand that just because both examples share a flaw in terms of reliability of data used to formulate the estimates, that it actually undermines the reliability of the results. Let me give you an example: You're building two houses on a foundation of sand. Both foundations are sand. You decide to build both houses because the foundations are the same and therefore "there is no reason to even consider them." Both houses collapse..... why? BECAUSE BOTH FOUNDATIONS WERE FLAWED TO BEGIN WITH. Sheesh.

[summerstar]

and dmnit, I'm probably going to go to the LS I finally choose, and that chooses me, based on some completely UNQUANTIFIABLE factor. ( sorry for yelling, I'm tired). Like the chairs. (JK)

[reasonabledoubt]

Take a look - it's almost all T-14 grad faculty: --LinkRemoved--

How can a 0L come trolling on these boards and call this collective group of scholars members of a third tier toilet? Isn't a school defined by their faculty? Or should we judge it because of some magazine's rankings? The law is the law across the board.... so I'd like to hear some of these arguments made to this Valpo Prof: (Harvard/Berkeley AND Yale Grad) http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php

Many of you need to wake up... rankings aren't an absolute measure of anything.

[Ragged]

I'm not gonna try to explain the concept of estimation yet again, I'll only say this: Reasonabledoubte sounds like the type of a guy who will attend a T3 school and feel like he is accomplishing something really special. The last few posts really brought that to light. There goes the chance of anyone taking this thread seriously. I suppose thats a good thing.

[reasonabledoubt]

Time for some math!
Let's assume Yale at sticker vs. ND at full scholly

Yale total cost of living for 3 years = 200,000
ND total cost of living - tuition for 3 years = 45,000
lets say that the value of money discounts at 6% a year

Given that you graduated from Yale, there's a good amount of certainty that you will get a job in biglaw
so with an initial cash outflow of 200,000 and then 10 periods 160,000 (ignoring growth for simplicity's sake). Plug it all into the financial calculator and we get
EV(Yale) = 977,613.93

Given that you graduated from Notre Dame, lets say that you have a 25% chance of biglaw from here on out (not unrealistic for the future), and the other 75% are making about 55,000 (again, ignoring income growth for simplicity's sake)
so the total value of Notre Dame given big law is: EV(N1) = 1,132,613.93
the total value of Notre Dame given you don't make big law EV(N2) = 359,804.79
given these variable cash flows we can combine them given their probability
EV(N1)x.25 + EV(N2)x.75 = 553,007.07

EV(Yale) = 977,613.93
EV(ND) = 553,007.07



Read above for an example of how stupidity works: OP says "these aren't perfect simulations of real life," but then suggests that it's "still a pretty good idea of why Yale is such a better idea than a full ride at Notre Dame."

Contradiction? Oh well, time for math!

He believes that these considerations happen in a vacuum... one with no other variables or externalities. He is a one-dimensional thinker and not bright enough to consider other possible outcomes given that the very variables he used are constantly shifting/changing/relative to other factors far beyond what he's considered.

Wow... this was the perfect thing to read during my plant systematics study break, real entertainment... You use math as an estimator because there is no such thing as a life equation. There are always variables that cant be accounted for, but you have no reason to believe these random variables are more likely to occur if you go to Yale rather than ND so there is no reason to even consider them. An equation in this basic form is called an "estimation". Its not a contradiction because a good idea =/= perfect. I recommend that you try to avoid referring to people with terms like "not bright" when your own post has problems.

I'm going to give you a chance to re-read what you just wrote and realize how absurd it is. You essentially said that because the random variables exist in both the Yale and Notre Dame examples, they're irrelevant and shouldn't be considered. You don't seem to understand that just because both examples share a flaw in terms of reliability of data used to formulate the estimates, that it actually undermines the reliability of the results. Let me give you an example: You're building two houses on a foundation of sand. Both foundations are sand. You decide to build both houses because the foundations are the same and therefore "there is no reason to even consider them." Both houses collapse..... why? BECAUSE BOTH FOUNDATIONS WERE FLAWED TO BEGIN WITH. Sheesh.

[strike]God.. this is the first and hopefully only time I will insult someone on TLS.. You are an absolute idiot. It is an ESTIMATION technique. Nothing is exact, estimations give you a way to reasonably compare two situations. You cannot calculate random variables, you can only weigh the likelihood of outcomes. I feel like an idiot for even trying to explain this to you, its like trying to explain genetics to a preschooler. When I walk to the store to buy a loaf of bread am I also suppose to think about the possibility of medical bills from getting hit by a car or tripping and breaking my leg?? NO, but those are random things that could occur. When you estimate something you only consider things that can reasonably be expected to occur.[/strike]

You're a moron. It's an "estimation technique" that people exaggerate to the point of incuring 200k debt over 0 over. You're ironically showing your own ignorance by encompassing everything you're accusing me of, including not understanding the discrepancies between the unreliability of these estimates vs. the overwhelming amount of reliance on it.

[rundoxierun]

Take a look - it's almost all T-14 grad faculty: --LinkRemoved--

How can a 0L come trolling on these boards and call this collective group of scholars members of a third tier toilet? Isn't a school defined by their faculty? Or should we judge it because of some magazine's rankings? The law is the law across the board.... so I'd like to hear some of these arguments made to this Valpo Prof: (Harvard/Berkeley AND Yale Grad) http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php

Many of you need to wake up... rankings aren't an absolute measure of anything.

Lol.. again man?? Rankings are an ESTIMATION of academic quality.. no one can visit every school in the country so rankings are a way for people to look at the schools and estimate quality. Of course there isnt a huge difference in faculty between the top 100 schools, but who cares. Top law firms dont choose students from top schools because the school magically made them smarter. They choose those students because they were among the best before they even went to law school. The law isnt some rapidly changing thing, many schools can teach it equally well.

[Ragged]

Rankings = job prospects. 'Nuff said.

[reasonabledoubt]

Take a look - it's almost all T-14 grad faculty: --LinkRemoved--

How can a 0L come trolling on these boards and call this collective group of scholars members of a third tier toilet? Isn't a school defined by their faculty? Or should we judge it because of some magazine's rankings? The law is the law across the board.... so I'd like to hear some of these arguments made to this Valpo Prof: (Harvard/Berkeley AND Yale Grad) http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php

Many of you need to wake up... rankings aren't an absolute measure of anything.

Lol.. again man?? Rankings are an ESTIMATION of academic quality.. no one can visit every school in the country so rankings are a way for people to look at the schools and estimate quality. Of course there isnt a huge difference in faculty between the top 100 schools, but who cares. Top law firms dont choose students from top schools because the school magically made them smarter. They choose those students because they were among the best before they even went to law school. The law isnt some rapidly changing thing, many schools can teach it equally well.

Maybe you should read the entire thread and catch up. RC Fail. Now you're arguing a point you just made up. Why do you think I started this thread? I wanted to discuss (and others have expressed similar sentiments) some schools (see title) that are rarely talked about on TLS.... like Valpo and many others. Then, the ranking/elitist trolls came storming in with their indoctrinated views and reliance on these "estimates" you're still defending for some reason. I'm going to go ahead and call you and idiot now because that's what I really think is going on here until you read the entire thread and realize you're wrong.

[reasonabledoubt]

Rankings = job prospects. 'Nuff said.

LOL. If it helps you sleep at night....

Try alumni network.... on this basis, Yale is at a disadvantage because of their smaller class.

[Ragged]

tkgrrett is probably going to Yale man. if he is an idiot you are a vegetable.

[TTH]

Try alumni network.... on this basis, Yale is at a disadvantage because of their smaller class.

If this forum had signatures, I think this would be my signature quote.

[summerstar]

well, first of all, my dad was born in Valporaiso, but that's beside the point ( although, I remember everyone had lovely little birdbaths in their front yard. never mind..)

To your point...check out the faculty is right.

Where do you think a lot of these T-14 lawyers end up teaching, if they don't go into BIGLAW ( add sound effect of heavy DUMDADUM noise) Not necessarily HYS etc., that's almost incestuous if too many are on board at one time at the school they got their JD from. No. And it follows a good philosophy of sharing the academic wealth for them to span out and diperse to schools all over the US and abroad. You'd be surprised to learn that Roger Williams School of Law has HYS all over it, and righteously so. I'll get exact numbers later. And Suffolk, that everyone on here sneers at...well, guys, guess who their star is ( if you've been doing your 0L voluntary homework, you'll know him)....Professor Glannon himself. SO KNOCK IT OFF or I'll bite you

[Ragged]

Rankings = job prospects. 'Nuff said.

LOL. If it helps you sleep at night....

Try alumni network.... on this basis, Yale is at a disadvantage because of their smaller class.

I'd rather know 10 Yale alums than 200 Valpo alums.