CBs from Meh Firms- What to do Forum

[DMXdawg]

Just do W&C is "meh" bro

[BlueParrot]

I would try to get your grades up a little bit over the next two years and build some great relationships with professors. Will probably be more important for your path than if you end up starting at a V10 vs V20 (or whatever).

[rpupkin]

lol just fuck this profession.

Sorry to rain on the let's-all-shit-on-the-OP parade, but I think the reaction ITT is a little over the top. The OP is just doing what many of us (myself included) probably did as rising 2Ls: viewing OCI as a continuation of the brass-ring chasing that most T14 law students have done for much of their lives.

It's understandable. Vault sucks. Chambers isn't that helpful either. But what else is someone with one year of law school behind them supposed to look at? When I was a 1L, I didn't understand what it meant to work at a big law firm as an associate. I didn't really understand after SA stints either. Or after a clerkship. It's really, really hard to gain useful perspective on this decision as a rising 2L, because you don't know what it's like to work as a litigation associate until, well, you start working as a litigation associate.

OP: All I can tell you is that the difference between what you describe as a "strong litigation firm," on the one hand, and a less-distinctive V20/V30/V50 firm, on the other, is probably not as meaningful as you think. The painful reality is that--if your goal is to maximize professional happiness and opportunities--the most important factor is probably luck. Do you end up in a practice group that's growing? Do you end up working for a partner (or partners) who actually bother to invest in your development as an associate? Do you have the fortune of getting staffed on the cases that give you the opportunities to build your skills? Those are the things that really matter. And they don't have much (if anything) to do with Vault, Chambers, or any other assessment of prestige.

[Mr. Blackacre]

lol just fuck this profession.

Sorry to rain on the let's-all-shit-on-the-OP parade, but I think the reaction ITT is a little over the top. The OP is just doing what many of us (myself included) probably did as rising 2Ls: viewing OCI as a continuation of the brass-ring chasing that most T14 law students have done for much of their lives.

It's understandable. Vault sucks. Chambers isn't that helpful either. But what else is someone with one year of law school behind them supposed to look at? When I was a 1L, I didn't understand what it meant to work at a big law firm as an associate. I didn't really understand after SA stints either. Or after a clerkship. It's really, really hard to gain useful perspective on this decision as a rising 2L, because you don't know what it's like to work as a litigation associate until, well, you start working as a litigation associate.

OP: All I can tell you is that the difference between what you describe as a "strong litigation firm," on the one hand, and a less-distinctive V20/V30/V50 firm, on the other, is probably not as meaningful as you think. The painful reality is that--if your goal is to maximize professional happiness and opportunities--the most important factor here is probably luck. Do you end up in a practice group that's growing? Do you end up working for a partner (or partners) who actually bother to invest in your development as an associate? Do you have the fortune of getting staffed on the cases that give you the opportunities to build your skills? Those are the things that really matter. And they don't have much (if anything) to do with Vault, Chambers, or any other assessment of prestige.

Lol this actually explains why your first comment was so nice. The irony in there is that you have no problem making snarky comments to other posters asking stupid questions, but you're going to defend this OP because you had a similar experience in LS. It would be nice if you extended the same kind of leniency to other people as well, fyi.

[rpupkin]

Lol this actually explains why your first comment was so nice. The irony in there is that you have no problem making snarky comments to other posters asking stupid questions, but you're going to defend this OP because you had a similar experience in LS. It would be nice if you extended the same kind of leniency to other people as well, fyi.

I make snarky comments when I want to make snarky comments. I'm sorry that you're disappointed that my posts don't align with your assessment of when such comments are appropriate.

[Mr. Blackacre]

Lol this actually explains why your first comment was so nice. The irony in there is that you have no problem making snarky comments to other posters asking stupid questions, but you're going to defend this OP because you had a similar experience in LS. It would be nice if you extended the same kind of leniency to other people as well, fyi.

I make snarky comments when I want to make snarky comments. I'm sorry that you're disappointed that my posts don't align with your assessment of when such comments are appropriate.

Not disappointed - not surprised either. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy in you calling out others when you shit on clueless posters on a daily basis.

[lavarman84]

Lol this actually explains why your first comment was so nice. The irony in there is that you have no problem making snarky comments to other posters asking stupid questions, but you're going to defend this OP because you had a similar experience in LS. It would be nice if you extended the same kind of leniency to other people as well, fyi.

I make snarky comments when I want to make snarky comments. I'm sorry that you're disappointed that my posts don't align with your assessment of when such comments are appropriate.

Not disappointed - not surprised either. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy in you calling out others when you shit on clueless posters on a daily basis.

This site as a whole tends to shit on clueless posters. It's understandable, but it also sucks. It's understandable because reading through the threads would make people less clueless. It sucks because the people often don't become less clueless in their own thread because they're put on the defensive. We are all hypocrites at one point or another. We all contribute to the good and bad of this place.

[rpupkin]

Lol this actually explains why your first comment was so nice. The irony in there is that you have no problem making snarky comments to other posters asking stupid questions, but you're going to defend this OP because you had a similar experience in LS. It would be nice if you extended the same kind of leniency to other people as well, fyi.

I make snarky comments when I want to make snarky comments. I'm sorry that you're disappointed that my posts don't align with your assessment of when such comments are appropriate.

Not disappointed - not surprised either. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy in you calling out others when you shit on clueless posters on a daily basis.

I disagree that I "shit on clueless posters on a daily basis." I think most of my posts are offered in the spirit of helpful advice. I have no idea who you are, but you appear to have a special interest in my posting history. I don't think it's appropriate to derail an on-topic thread with this kind of thing, so I suggest you start a thread in the lounge if you really want to discuss the hypocrisy of my TLS posting.

[Mr. Blackacre]

I disagree that I "shit on clueless posters on a daily basis." I think most of my posts are offered in the spirit of helpful advice. I have no idea who you are, but you appear to have a special interest in my posting history. I don't think it's appropriate to derail an on-topic thread with this kind of thing, so I suggest you start a thread in the lounge if you really want to discuss the hypocrisy of my TLS posting.

Agree to disagree. Lol re: bolded - while that would be fun, I don't think I have enough TLS cred to feel confident shitposting in the lounge.

This site as a whole tends to shit on clueless posters. It's understandable, but it also sucks. It's understandable because reading through the threads would make people less clueless. It sucks because the people often don't become less clueless in their own thread because they're put on the defensive. We are all hypocrites at one point or another. We all contribute to the good and bad of this place.

I guess that's fair.

To get back on topic, I would offer OP some advice, but everything's pretty much been covered at this point. OP does sound pretty conceited (which, for the record, most people at my school weren't end of 1L), and Vault is useless for litigation.

[lolwat]

Yeah OP got some good advice already. To me it was more the tone of the question as I read it: "i'm median to top 33% and got some callbacks at biglaw firms, but none of them are v10... What do i do??!?"

[charliekelly33]

Getting things back on track:

Calling a V20 "meh" with average grades and no firm offers yet. What a douche

[RSN]

One thing I don't see already mentioned in this thread is that if you actually end up with more than 15 or so callbacks, yes you could turn a few down from firms that have a bad reputation or just seem like really poor fits. But otherwise there's no reason not to do them just because you don't like where they are on the Vault rankings. Cart is majorly ahead of the horse here.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Lol this actually explains why your first comment was so nice. The irony in there is that you have no problem making snarky comments to other posters asking stupid questions, but you're going to defend this OP because you had a similar experience in LS. It would be nice if you extended the same kind of leniency to other people as well, fyi.

I make snarky comments when I want to make snarky comments. I'm sorry that you're disappointed that my posts don't align with your assessment of when such comments are appropriate.

Not disappointed - not surprised either. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy in you calling out others when you shit on clueless posters on a daily basis.

Pretty sure he only shits on the arrogant/rude ones.

[Anonymous User]

At first it seemed like OP was calling the firms "meh" because they weren't V10. As the posts went on I got the impression that he understands Vault doesn't map onto lit quality/prestige, but was just giving folks a sense of where he did/didn't get in and has otherwise determined that the firms he has CBs for are average for lit. Take the callbacks, OP. Outside of a few super selective biglaw firms and lit boutiques, most biglaw shops are more similar than they are different anyway.

[jbagelboy]

jesus

decline the callbacks and drop out. you'll be miserable in biglaw if your attitude is this terrible

[dixiecupdrinking]

All snark aside, if you ever want to work in biglaw, you need to take whatever biglaw SA you can get. If you don't want biglaw, then don't do it. But a "meh" firm is 10000% better than no firm if you want to work in a firm later.