What should I do? Forum

[Nova]

Ehh I wasn't talking about YOU . I was talking generally.

I'll reply further when I'm at a computer

[isuperserial]

Idk what you mean by across the board. There's really only 2 main metrics. Lt ft jdr jobs & big law/fed clerkship placement.

Umn is basically equal to or better than every school ranked below it in ltftjdr jobs. If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

If you're going to move somewhere you don't have ties for a 25% chance at bl/fc, you're doing it wrong

I agree with you to some degree. UMN gives you a solid shot at real lawyer jobs. But the fact remains that a school like Notre Dame or WUSTL or even Illinois gives you that same shot, but with literally 10% higher chance at fedclerk/biglaw. So my reasoning is that if the chance at a real lawyer job remains the same, but the chance for fedclerk/biglaw goes up for a school, then that school is objectively superior in most cases. I mean seriously 10% is very significant. People care about the 10% difference between UCLA and Michigan, people care about this. Pair that up with the fact that their medians are uncharacteristically high compared to their job placements, then UMN becomes a real shit show. Numbers that would get you in with no scholly would probably garner you a solid one at a school with almost identical job placement like Wake Forest. With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

[Moneytrees]

Idk what you mean by across the board. There's really only 2 main metrics. Lt ft jdr jobs & big law/fed clerkship placement.

Umn is basically equal to or better than every school ranked below it in ltftjdr jobs. If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

If you're going to move somewhere you don't have ties for a 25% chance at bl/fc, you're doing it wrong

I agree with you to some degree. UMN gives you a solid shot at real lawyer jobs. But the fact remains that a school like Notre Dame or WUSTL or even Illinois gives you that same shot, but with literally 10% higher chance at fedclerk/biglaw. So my reasoning is that if the chance at a real lawyer job remains the same, but the chance for fedclerk/biglaw goes up for a school, then that school is objectively superior in most cases. I mean seriously 10% is very significant. People care about the 10% difference between UCLA and Michigan, people care about this. Pair that up with the fact that their medians are uncharacteristically high compared to their job placements, then UMN becomes a real shit show. Numbers that would get you in with no scholly would probably garner you a solid one at a school with almost identical job placement like Wake Forest. With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

This. I completely agree. UM has some really impressive admissions stats, but those won't get you a great job at the end of the day. It's almost bizarre how mediocre UM's employment stats are relative to its admissions requirements. This was a point that I made in an earlier post of mine, when I was trying to understand why Fordham was ranked so low in the rankings despite its solid Biglaw placement.

The rankings really need to find a way emphasize job placement. Schools like BC, BU, and Fordham should clearly rank higher than Indiana, Arizona St., and UM. Otherwise most students interested in going to law school will continue making ill informed decisions based on rankings that do not accurately reflect employment opportunities. Anybody enrolling in law school should do a considerable amount of research and find out the employment stats for each individual school themselves, but the reality is that not everybody does this.

A young kid will get into UM and think "Wow, got into a great school! I will have no problem finding a good job now!". Meanwhile, he/she could have gone to Wake Forest for considerably less and have a much better chance at landing a rewarding job.

[jk148706]

Idk what you mean by across the board. There's really only 2 main metrics. Lt ft jdr jobs & big law/fed clerkship placement.

Umn is basically equal to or better than every school ranked below it in ltftjdr jobs. If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

If you're going to move somewhere you don't have ties for a 25% chance at bl/fc, you're doing it wrong

I agree with you to some degree. UMN gives you a solid shot at real lawyer jobs. But the fact remains that a school like Notre Dame or WUSTL or even Illinois gives you that same shot, but with literally 10% higher chance at fedclerk/biglaw. So my reasoning is that if the chance at a real lawyer job remains the same, but the chance for fedclerk/biglaw goes up for a school, then that school is objectively superior in most cases. I mean seriously 10% is very significant. People care about the 10% difference between UCLA and Michigan, people care about this. Pair that up with the fact that their medians are uncharacteristically high compared to their job placements, then UMN becomes a real shit show. Numbers that would get you in with no scholly would probably garner you a solid one at a school with almost identical job placement like Wake Forest. With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

This. I completely agree. UM has some really impressive admissions stats, but those won't get you a great job at the end of the day. It's almost bizarre how mediocre UM's employment stats are relative to its admissions requirements. This was a point that I made in an earlier post of mine, when I was trying to understand why Fordham was ranked so low in the rankings despite its solid Biglaw placement.

The rankings really need to find a way emphasize job placement. Schools like BC, BU, and Fordham should clearly rank higher than Indiana, Arizona St., and UM. Otherwise most students interested in going to law school will continue making ill informed decisions based on rankings that do not accurately reflect employment opportunities. Anybody enrolling in law school should do a considerable amount of research and find out the employment stats for each individual school themselves, but the reality is that not everybody does this.

A young kid will get into UM and think "Wow, got into a great school! I will have no problem finding a good job now!". Meanwhile, he/she could have gone to Wake Forest for considerably less and have a much better chance at landing a rewarding job.

To be clear, when u say UM here, you are referring to Minnesota not Michigan, right?

[Moneytrees]

Idk what you mean by across the board. There's really only 2 main metrics. Lt ft jdr jobs & big law/fed clerkship placement.

Umn is basically equal to or better than every school ranked below it in ltftjdr jobs. If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

If you're going to move somewhere you don't have ties for a 25% chance at bl/fc, you're doing it wrong

I agree with you to some degree. UMN gives you a solid shot at real lawyer jobs. But the fact remains that a school like Notre Dame or WUSTL or even Illinois gives you that same shot, but with literally 10% higher chance at fedclerk/biglaw. So my reasoning is that if the chance at a real lawyer job remains the same, but the chance for fedclerk/biglaw goes up for a school, then that school is objectively superior in most cases. I mean seriously 10% is very significant. People care about the 10% difference between UCLA and Michigan, people care about this. Pair that up with the fact that their medians are uncharacteristically high compared to their job placements, then UMN becomes a real shit show. Numbers that would get you in with no scholly would probably garner you a solid one at a school with almost identical job placement like Wake Forest. With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

This. I completely agree. UM has some really impressive admissions stats, but those won't get you a great job at the end of the day. It's almost bizarre how mediocre UM's employment stats are relative to its admissions requirements. This was a point that I made in an earlier post of mine, when I was trying to understand why Fordham was ranked so low in the rankings despite its solid Biglaw placement.

The rankings really need to find a way emphasize job placement. Schools like BC, BU, and Fordham should clearly rank higher than Indiana, Arizona St., and UM. Otherwise most students interested in going to law school will continue making ill informed decisions based on rankings that do not accurately reflect employment opportunities. Anybody enrolling in law school should do a considerable amount of research and find out the employment stats for each individual school themselves, but the reality is that not everybody does this.

A young kid will get into UM and think "Wow, got into a great school! I will have no problem finding a good job now!". Meanwhile, he/she could have gone to Wake Forest for considerably less and have a much better chance at landing a rewarding job.

To be clear, when u say UM here, you are referring to Minnesota not Michigan, right?

Yeah of course, my bad.

[BigZuck]

Idk what you mean by across the board. There's really only 2 main metrics. Lt ft jdr jobs & big law/fed clerkship placement.

Umn is basically equal to or better than every school ranked below it in ltftjdr jobs. If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

If you're going to move somewhere you don't have ties for a 25% chance at bl/fc, you're doing it wrong

I agree with you to some degree. UMN gives you a solid shot at real lawyer jobs. But the fact remains that a school like Notre Dame or WUSTL or even Illinois gives you that same shot, but with literally 10% higher chance at fedclerk/biglaw. So my reasoning is that if the chance at a real lawyer job remains the same, but the chance for fedclerk/biglaw goes up for a school, then that school is objectively superior in most cases. I mean seriously 10% is very significant. People care about the 10% difference between UCLA and Michigan, people care about this. Pair that up with the fact that their medians are uncharacteristically high compared to their job placements, then UMN becomes a real shit show. Numbers that would get you in with no scholly would probably garner you a solid one at a school with almost identical job placement like Wake Forest. With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

This. I completely agree. UM has some really impressive admissions stats, but those won't get you a great job at the end of the day. It's almost bizarre how mediocre UM's employment stats are relative to its admissions requirements. This was a point that I made in an earlier post of mine, when I was trying to understand why Fordham was ranked so low in the rankings despite its solid Biglaw placement.

The rankings really need to find a way emphasize job placement. Schools like BC, BU, and Fordham should clearly rank higher than Indiana, Arizona St., and UM. Otherwise most students interested in going to law school will continue making ill informed decisions based on rankings that do not accurately reflect employment opportunities. Anybody enrolling in law school should do a considerable amount of research and find out the employment stats for each individual school themselves, but the reality is that not everybody does this.

A young kid will get into UM and think "Wow, got into a great school! I will have no problem finding a good job now!". Meanwhile, he/she could have gone to Wake Forest for considerably less and have a much better chance at landing a rewarding job.

A+ anti-Michigan trolling, would read again

I definitely agree that the rankings are dumb and should be changed or ignored but if some kid is just cracking open a copy of US News and World Report's grad school rankings edition at the airport (that is the only place they sell it, right?) and picking random schools based on what they read there and not doing any other research at all, I don't really feel bad for them. That's contributory negligence dawg.

As for Minnesota- I think the school is what it is. It's a strong regional that really only places into its market. It's not a big law feeder or a national school or anything like that. And maybe a school like Notre Dame does have somewhat better employment outcomes. But you really shouldn't be choosing a school for its big law placement unless its a T14 (maaaaaaybe you can stretch that to a T18 but I wouldn't). It doesn't really matter that Fordham places better into large firms than Minnesota, choosing either for their big law placement is folly and with schools like that you should be much more focused on their geographic placement because more likely than not, you aren't going to get one of those top of the line outcomes.

[cron1834]

A+ anti-Michigan trolling, would read again

Tell me he's talking about MN and not UMich?

[03152016]

Tell me he's talking about MN and not UMich?

To be clear, when u say UM here, you are referring to Minnesota not Michigan, right?

Yeah of course, my bad.

[jk148706]

A+ anti-Michigan trolling, would read again

Tell me he's talking about MN and not UMich?

Whew.
I wuz like... Wuuuutt

[cron1834]

Yikes, mybad, didn't see that above.

[BigZuck]

T12 4 lyfe

[chocolatesugar]

So I wrote a LOCI for Minnesota. As for being a mish-mash. It doesn't bother me much, I have some connections and family in different places.

Hopefully the LOCI helps.

If anyone wants to suggest anywhere I should apply at this moment, let me know. I could throw in a few more schools.

Thanks!

[Nova]

It's pretty clear that the above mentioned schools have better employment numbers than Minnesota. Many schools ranked lower than UM will give you a decent shot at Biglaw.

You are making some serious mischaracterization.

a 1/3 at best chance at biglaw is not decent.

Sure, you will have to work hard for it, but Biglaw will be a viable possibility at schools like Notre Dame and Boston University.

everyone is working hard for good grades. most of the class wont get them.

At UM, you will have to be at the VERY top of your class to even think about Biglaw

no you don't. You need to be top 25% to have a good shot. The cutoffs aren't much lower at the other schools you listed.

you are making a 5-10% difference sound extreme.

I was trying to understand why Fordham was ranked so low in the rankings despite its solid Biglaw placement.

F doesn't have solid bl placement. none of the schools we are talking about have solid bl placement.

Otherwise most students interested in going to law school will continue making ill informed decisions based on rankings that do not accurately reflect employment opportunities. Anybody enrolling in law school should do a considerable amount of research and find out the employment stats for each individual school themselves, but the reality is that not everybody does this.

That's their own fault.

A young kid will get into UM and think "Wow, got into a great school! I will have no problem finding a good job now!". Meanwhile, he/she could have gone to Wake Forest for considerably less and have a much better chance at landing a rewarding job.

"much better chance".

UMN and WFs placement are basically identical. 2/3 ltftjdr jobs. just under 20% bl/fc.

a rewarding job

if a typical ltftjdr job isn't rewarding iyo, then you definitely shouldn't be attending a regional law school.

With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

I agree, but feel the same way about basically every school outside the T14

As for Minnesota- I think the school is what it is. It's a strong regional that really only places into its market. It's not a big law feeder or a national school or anything like that. And maybe a school like Notre Dame does have somewhat better employment outcomes. But you really shouldn't be choosing a school for its big law placement unless its a T14 (maaaaaaybe you can stretch that to a T18 but I wouldn't). It doesn't really matter that Fordham places better into large firms than Minnesota, choosing either for their big law placement is folly and with schools like that you should be much more focused on their geographic placement because more likely than not, you aren't going to get one of those top of the line outcomes.

tcr

[Lebrarian_Booker]

Saw a thread titled "What should I do?".

Poked my head in to see how long before "retake" floods the board.

Was not disappointed.

[Nova]

The phrase always reminds me of that lebron commercial

[Moneytrees]

It's pretty clear that the above mentioned schools have better employment numbers than Minnesota. Many schools ranked lower than UM will give you a decent shot at Biglaw.

You are making some serious mischaracterization.

a 1/3 at best chance at biglaw is not decent.

Sure, you will have to work hard for it, but Biglaw will be a viable possibility at schools like Notre Dame and Boston University.

everyone is working hard for good grades. most of the class wont get them.

At UM, you will have to be at the VERY top of your class to even think about Biglaw

no you don't. You need to be top 25% to have a good shot. The cutoffs aren't much lower at the other schools you listed.

you are making a 5-10% difference sound extreme.

I was trying to understand why Fordham was ranked so low in the rankings despite its solid Biglaw placement.

F doesn't have solid bl placement. none of the schools we are talking about have solid bl placement.

Otherwise most students interested in going to law school will continue making ill informed decisions based on rankings that do not accurately reflect employment opportunities. Anybody enrolling in law school should do a considerable amount of research and find out the employment stats for each individual school themselves, but the reality is that not everybody does this.

That's their own fault.

A young kid will get into UM and think "Wow, got into a great school! I will have no problem finding a good job now!". Meanwhile, he/she could have gone to Wake Forest for considerably less and have a much better chance at landing a rewarding job.

"much better chance".

UMN and WFs placement are basically identical. 2/3 ltftjdr jobs. just under 20% bl/fc.

a rewarding job

if a typical ltftjdr job isn't rewarding iyo, then you definitely shouldn't be attending a regional law school.

With all that information, I think unless you really want to practice in Minnesota, it's a school that will rarely become justifiable.

I agree, but feel the same way about basically every school outside the T14

As for Minnesota- I think the school is what it is. It's a strong regional that really only places into its market. It's not a big law feeder or a national school or anything like that. And maybe a school like Notre Dame does have somewhat better employment outcomes. But you really shouldn't be choosing a school for its big law placement unless its a T14 (maaaaaaybe you can stretch that to a T18 but I wouldn't). It doesn't really matter that Fordham places better into large firms than Minnesota, choosing either for their big law placement is folly and with schools like that you should be much more focused on their geographic placement because more likely than not, you aren't going to get one of those top of the line outcomes.

tcr

I disagree with pretty much everything you said. You don't address any of my points with tangible data. Anybody with a brain can plainly see that Minnesota has weak employment numbers that are eclipsed by many schools ranked in the top 35. Why can't you just admit that, instead of continuing a debate in which you are objectively wrong lol? You obstinately argue a point that is disproved by facts- you have the drive to be a great attorney.

[BigZuck]

Nova directly addressed what you said, and where possible he backed it up with data. It's a regional school just like all the other schools you mentioned (and all non-T14s). Top of the class has a shot at big law, rest of the class is SOL if that's what they want. None of those schools should be attended if the goal is big law.

I'm having a hard time understanding your disconnect with reality and the words that are right in front of you.

[Moneytrees]

BU: Clerkships= 5; BL= 27; PS: 13

Minn: Clerkships= 4.5; BL= 13.5; PS: 11.5

There are 10 other schools I could do this for. Do you not see that the numbers clearly favor BU? Why is it so hard to admit that Minn. is inferior/equal to a plethora of schools ranked below it? Nova keeps repeating that Minnesota has equal employment numbers to BC, Fordham, Notre Dame, etc., but this is just not true. You may not agree that a 30 percent chance of BG is "decent", but at least admit that there is a discrepancy between Minnesota and the aforementioned schools. You can't just keep repeating that there is no difference, when there clearly is.

As I said initially, I see no reason to go to Minnesota unless you want to live in Minneapolis. Its ranking is not indicative of the employment opportunities it offers its students.

[Moneytrees]

BU: Clerkships= 5; BL= 27; PS: 13

Minn: Clerkships= 4.5; BL= 13.5; PS: 11.5

There are 10 other schools I could do this for. Do you not see that the numbers clearly favor BU? Why is it so hard to admit that Minn. is inferior/equal to a plethora of schools ranked below it? Nova keeps repeating that Minnesota has equal employment numbers to BC, Fordham, Notre Dame, etc., but this is just not true. You may not agree that a 30 percent chance of BG is "decent", but at least admit that there is a discrepancy between Minnesota and the aforementioned schools. You can't just keep repeating that there is no difference, when there clearly is.

As I said initially, I see no reason to go to Minnesota unless you want to live in Minneapolis. Its ranking is not indicative of the employment opportunities it offers its students.

Let me just add that I am not arguing that one should attend a school like BU or Notre Dame if one's dream is to practice law, say, in California. Never did I say that. My initial claim ONLY had to do with the fact that a school like Minnesota is ranked far higher than its employment numbers suggest it should be ranked. A claim that Nova seems bent on refuting, for some reason.

[Nova]

Nova keeps repeating that Minnesota has equal employment numbers to BC, Fordham, Notre Dame, etc., but this is just not true. You may not agree that a 30 percent chance of BG is "decent", but at least admit that there is a discrepancy between Minnesota and the aforementioned schools.

If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

My initial claim ONLY had to do with the fact that a school like Minnesota is ranked far higher than its employment numbers suggest it should be ranked. A claim that Nova seems bent on refuting, for some reason.

i think usnwr is a joke. regardless of the publications rankings, t14 has the best placement, followed by UT/USC/UCLA/Vandy in any given order. beyond 18, usnwr does not correlate well with job prospects.

i don't think umn has the 19th best prospects. Id put them around 30. hence linking to the atl rankings.

You don't address any of my points with tangible data. Anybody with a brain can plainly see that Minnesota has weak employment numbers that are eclipsed by many schools ranked in the top 35. Why can't you just admit that, instead of continuing a debate in which you are objectively wrong lol?

i am using the same data you are. Im disagreeing with your qualitative language, such as "weak" vs "decent"/"solid" when comparing a difference of 5-10ish% in one metric.

you said WF would give someone a "much better chance" at a rewarding career than UMN which is just flat out wrong.

you said bl is a "viable possibility" from nd but at umn you have to be at the "VERY top of the class", when the cutoff difference is about 10%.

imo, your language is misleading. i cant be "objectively wrong" because, you know, its an opinion.

[Moneytrees]

Nova keeps repeating that Minnesota has equal employment numbers to BC, Fordham, Notre Dame, etc., but this is just not true. You may not agree that a 30 percent chance of BG is "decent", but at least admit that there is a discrepancy between Minnesota and the aforementioned schools.

If you think 5-10ish% better bl/fc placement at maybe 10 schools ranked lower is "plenty" of schools placing "far better", then fine.

My initial claim ONLY had to do with the fact that a school like Minnesota is ranked far higher than its employment numbers suggest it should be ranked. A claim that Nova seems bent on refuting, for some reason.

i think usnwr is a joke. regardless of the publications rankings, t14 has the best placement, followed by UT/USC/UCLA/Vandy in any given order. beyond 18, usnwr does not correlate well with job prospects.

i don't think umn has the 19th best prospects. Id put them around 30. hence linking to the atl rankings.

You don't address any of my points with tangible data. Anybody with a brain can plainly see that Minnesota has weak employment numbers that are eclipsed by many schools ranked in the top 35. Why can't you just admit that, instead of continuing a debate in which you are objectively wrong lol?

i am using the same data you are. Im disagreeing with your qualitative language, such as "weak" vs "decent"/"solid" when comparing a difference of 5-10ish% in one metric.

you said WF would give someone a "much better chance" at a rewarding career than UMN which is just flat out wrong.

you said bl is a "viable possibility" from nd but at umn you have to be at the "VERY top of the class", when the cutoff difference is about 10%.

imo, your language is misleading. i cant be "objectively wrong" because, you know, its an opinion.

Nova- the difference between Minnesota and Fordham Biglaw placement is 20 percent. That's not 5 percent. That is why I claim you are objectively wrong. Whether it's 20, 15, or 10- a school like Fordham DOES have better employment numbers. To say otherwise is objectively wrong.

You can argue that the difference is negligible, or should be glossed over- those are subjective claims (which I disagree with). Anyways, let's move on.

[Chrysogonus]

Fordham grads with JD required jobs: 63%
MN: 80%

Fordham grads unemployed and seeking 8%
MN: 2%

the more you know...

[Nova]

Nova- the difference between Minnesota and Fordham Biglaw placement is 20 percent. That's not 5 percent. That is why I claim you are objectively wrong. Whether it's 20, 15, or 10- a school like Fordham DOES have better employment numbers. To say otherwise is objectively wrong.

You can argue that the difference is negligible, or should be glossed over- those are subjective claims (which I disagree with). Anyways, let's move on.

move on to what? the thread is about applying to regional law schools in several different markets.

& the difference is actually 15% in bl/fc.

Fordham grads with JD required jobs: 63%
MN: 80%

Fordham grads unemployed and seeking 8%
MN: 2%

the more you know...

here are some other metrics from the most recent data available

•62.8% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs.
•75.3% graduates were employed in long-term jobs.
•79.4% graduates were employed in full-time jobs.

•67.4% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs.
•81.3% graduates were employed in long-term jobs.
•89.1% graduates were employed in full-time jobs.

[Nova]

As for being a mish-mash. It doesn't bother me much, I have some connections and family in different places.

where

where did you grow up

where have you lived

where are your connections

where is your immediate family

the original point of nitpicking with mt was supposed to be to get the point across that ties matter a lot more than bl prospects when choosing a regional law school

[jk148706]

I can't retake. I really can't.

I don't believe you