The first link is better since it doesn't exclude clerks yet. (since people who clerk get 2L summer jobs).Veyron wrote:The proximity argument is bunk. Michigan also primarily feeds into Chicago.EzraStiles wrote:Ah I better see what your saying. The two do have relatively similar placement, but i think if an applicant is completely set on practicing in Chicago, and they cannot get into U of C, NU is their best option, mainly based on simple proximity to firms and their recruiting efforts.Veyron wrote:I would like to see the statistic that says that it is easier to get biglaw in Chi-town from NU than Michigan. Said statistic should not be based on self selection.
edit: Also keep in mind that NU is more $ than Michigan. Indeed it is proly the most expensive law school in the country after cost of living.
My main beef was with your claim that UMich gets more respect in Chicago than NU. I guarantee if you poll a bigger group that will prove false, or at least not as definite as you make it sound.
EDIT: Never compare other schools to HYS based off what you see on a chart. That chart lists the number of graduates and how many go into Big Law. HYS graduates, especially Yale and Stanford, don't try for Big Law nearly as much as other T14 schools. The chart is accurate. Never question the chart.
And yes, the chart is accurate, its just measuring the wrong thing.
The difference in placement overall is probably class size. Small class sizes do better percentage wise. For example firms may hire 2 NU and 2 Mich, but Mich has a larger class size making the percentage change smaller.
Michigan beats NU out west and down south, NU beats it in Chicago, and they are fairly tied for NYC.
Also the proximity argument is not bunk. Half of NU's class stays in Chicago. It has a great alumni network. Michigan does too, but a lot of Michigan's top talent goes to NYC and Cali, but NU's stay in Chicago.
If you know you want Chicago, if not Michigan is the more versatile school.
