Michigan Law Releases Full Employment Stats Forum

[MTBike]

If you're 100% sure law school is a good plan, you're a moron.

And that is the problem. Law school is difficult, stressful, and can suck at times. If you aren't 100% sure it is a good plan, you definitely should not go. Don't go unless you can give it your all. This seems like a completely reasonable train of thought.

I'm a Marine, and there is not a chance in hell you graduate Boot Camp unless you are giving 100%. People that join the Marines on a whim with no real good reason do not graduate. Law school, like the Marine Corps, is a life choice, and if you are not 100% committed it will show and the results will not be good. I think anyone that advocates choosing to "do" law school without being fully committed is a fucking tool.

Also, I know what a curve is... seriously? If you are going to attack my arguments, at least do so with intelligence. A curve may be very equalizing, but my point was that someone that has a positive attitude and wants to be in law school has an edge on someone that has a negative attitude and isn't really sure about law school. And, with a curve, every little edge helps. Again, this should be clear. The difference between an A and a B may be 2 questions... and the difference between getting those two questions right or wrong may be the difference between someone who puts in 100% and someone who puts in 75%.

I think we can all agree that, for the most part, the students at the T14 are all pretty intelligent and academically strong. There are always going to be people that will get A's regardless of the effort they put in and there will always be people who get Bs regardless of how much they study. But the vast majority of students will need to work efficiently to get the grades they want, and it is a lot easier to work efficiently and intelligently when you actually want to be in law school and are 100% committed to law school.

None of this should be groundbreaking information. It should be clearly evident. I'm not really sure why you disagree.

+1... again, she just says shit hoping that some of it will stick. It's hardly worth your effort to even type a response.

[Blindmelon]

I don't get how working on a crummy MTV show makes your advice any more important than anyone else's.

Huh? MTV? I think you may have me confused with someone else... I work for a financial services firm that has nothing to do with MTV.[/quote]

Hah, my joke was terrible. You're just really into how "real-world" you are so I thought I'd throw that out there. Maybe if you were a CrosswordChamp you would've gotten it.

[planeride]

It could be that when he went to look for an academic job he tried to return to his alma mater (where he went for his three degrees) and wasn't hired. This would leave almost anyone with a sour taste in their mouth and he's out to get them. Of course, this is all speculative

What a ridiculous accusation to make with absolutely no evidence.

I don't care for Campos or his fan-boys but the shoot-the-messenger attitude of some is unseemly. The anger comes from the fact that thousands of law students are graduating with massive debt and almost no chance to pay it off. Not because Dean Z stole his winning Mega Millions ticket.

You are seriously a tool if that is your stance: "Don't shoot the messenger."

Paul Campos is the biggest hypocrite in this entire ordeal because he CHOSE A TEACHING JOB AT A SCHOOL THAT FITS THE BILL FOR EVERYTHING HE BITCHES ABOUT. It's not like Campos is teaching at Harvard... he is at CU-Boulder.

If he really hates the law school scam as much as he says he does, why does he keep teaching at a school that is committing the "scam" he so hates? He's not persuading current students to leave the school and pursue other interests, so why does he continue to perpetuate the problem he hates so much?

Did you read my post? I said that I don't care for Campos. I agree with your criticisms.

However, graduates in debt who can't get jobs is an issue worthy of discussion. Maybe you don't think so, but everyone else seems to. Pointing out Campos' flaws does not eliminate that issue no matter how many capital letters you use. Nor does inventing them out of whole cloth under the guise of "speculation." (I can only imagine the uproar if Campos made such a statement.)

If you can't see the difference between that and your caricature of my post you are just being obtuse.

[JoeMo]

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

You are making some pretty big assumptions about everyone knowing that CSO was telling everyone to apply to Chicago. Also, CSO is supposed to have the knowledge about the market and develop relationships with firms so your students get hired even if the economy sucks. Michigan's CSO failed miserably, and it had some pretty serious impacts on Michigan's students.

This is credited and I think they realize this which is why they've revamped their CSO and have people that specialize in different areas rather than having it continue to work the way it was.

Look, nobody is really saying that there isn't any room for doubt. (I know, I said it but I was using hyperbole which is the norm on TLS) What we are saying is that there is a pervasive negative attitude being perpetuated on TLS about legal hiring by 0L's... which begs the question, if you're so unsure why are you going? I'm assuming some people might be going because they have degrees they can't/don't want to do anything with? As for the others, what gives? I know that if I was uncertain to that extent I wouldn't go. That if I felt that other schools did a better job than Michigan/UVA then that's where I would go.

Also, just to throw this out there for every "Michigan Troll" there seems to be an equally egregious anti-Michigan troll so we sort of even each other out. And this is not directed at you but more at some of the previous posters that think people with a positive attitude about a school we'll be spending three years at and will be paying a lot of money to attend are "trolls".

[Anonymous User]

Maybe it is just because I am older and have worked in the real world, or maybe it is just because I believe people need to take full responsibility for their lives, rather than passing off blame to others (i.e. "I don't have a job, so it MUST be the school's fault, not mine),but why do people here continue to bitch about problems they don't need to have?

I don't get the train of thought behind being "scared" of going to a law school (Michigan or not) and still going. If you are unsure of your decision, then DON'T GO. Don't invest 3 years of your life, excessive amounts of debt, and time probably better spent elsewhere if you are not 100% sure of your choice.

Even in the best of times, I don't imagine any school reported a 100% employment rate... even if they did, what happened in the past is not a guarantee of what will happen in the future. If a prospective student is too dumb to do their own research before dropping $150k to attend a shit institution (or even a great school), they, not anyone else, is responsible for the outcome.

Having said all that, if the numbers published by any school make you faint of heart, maybe law school isn't for you and you should find something else to do with your life.

I chose Michigan over Stanford because I felt Michigan was a better fit for me and I'm confident enough in my abilities that the job numbers aren't really a concern for me, especially after having read a lot of the "Class of 2015" threads... most of the people that post in the threads seem to have no clue what the real world is about and are more concerned with the dating scene, parties, and the social scene than anything else. And, it appears a majority of students are also their own worst enemies: they appear to be entering law school with an already negative attitude. I can only imagine going into law school with a negative attitude is only going to hinder your ability to do well.

Why does XYZ T14 school have a bad placement percentage? Maybe it is because the incoming students go into the school experience with the wrong attitude, and that attitude negatively affects their academic performance, which in turn affects their ability to speak well about their experience during interviews. Maybe not...

Either way, if you are not 100% sure about attending law school, don't, and save yourself the money/time and the rest of us your incessant bitching about bleak employment prospects.

Why are all the Michigan trolls so sanctimonious? Is it the Dean Z cult of personality? Is it the bleak Ann Arbor winters?

Why don't you try not being an asshole? I'm more worried for people who aren't concerned about job prospects after law school (you) than people who are (tlsp). Going into a lot of debt for law school can be scary and a good idea at the same time, hard as that might be for you to comprehend. (Especially when you're talking about a school that screwed over one of their classes with bad CSO advice. Or did all those Michigan students just have "a wrong attitude?")

First, I didn't single any one person out, so I'm not sure why you did (see: tlsp). Second, why would you be more worried about people who aren't worried about job prospects than those that are? Hell, why are you worried about anyone else, for that matter?

I'm not worried about getting a job at the end of law school because:

1) I'm going for free with a stipend, so I'm actually going to earning money in law school, though much less than I currently earn.

2) I'm manage a department for a F100 company and I can come back to this company as an in-house counselor if I so choose

3) I'm confident in my abilities to do well enough in law school to secure gainful employment, and, even if I don't, I have enough money saved up to ensure that I'm not out on my ass if I'm looking for a job for a year post-grad.

Also, I'm not really sure what I said could be taken as asshole-ish. I simply said that you shouldn't go to law school if you aren't 100% committed... this means being of sound mind and not going into law school with a negative attitude. Why is this so hard to comprehend? Do you really think it will work out? Do you go into job interviews with a negative attitude and then still expect to get the job? The mind is a pretty powerful instrument, and if you are already negative about something, it is going to be very difficult to come out the other end with a positive experience.

As far as Michigan CSO giving bad advice... yeah, that sucks. But, I would like to think anyone with half a brain would be intelligent enough to think "Hmm... CSO is telling all 400 of us to apply only to Chicago... maybe I should apply to a few other places, just in case...". I mean, honestly, with a class size that large, if the sheep just did what they were told without any personal thought going into the process, they kinda got what they deserved. As a previous poster said, those that applied in other markets made out, those that only applied to Chicago did not. There is a reason for the saying "Don't put all your eggs in one basket."

Again, why do you seek to place blame on others for stuff? Michigan CSO may have given bad advice, shit happens. But, how do you explain those that succeeded from that class? Was that because of the school or because of the students? You can't blame a bad result on one thing and then a good result on something totally different. If your school's CSO told you to jump off a bridge because it will enhance your employability, would you do it? Take responsibility for your own life and stop placing blame on others.

Not sure if serious. People need to follow CSO advice. The job of CSO is to tell students where to apply to get jobs. CSO said that NYC was dead - would you waste a lot of bids there? CSO squarely gets the blame here. I'm sure you will understand the role of CSO better after you have actually been to law school.

Edit to add - I don't think the law school employment information is needed for someone like you. You have carefully done research and provided at least two outs for yourself if you don't secure employment after law school. I think that people like you will be fine with whatever outcome they have. But the vast majority of 0LS are not as educated or informed as you. Most 0Ls are just going on the outdated advice of law school advisors, parents, friends and family. These people will think it is great for an 0L to pay sticker at any T14. The 0LS who listen to their advice may turn out fine or they may not.

But you are not in the same position with regards to information or decision making as they are. I think most 0Ls are still going to school expecting law to be a huge pay day for them.

I think the bolded statement above needs to be repeated in every thread on TLS.

Oh wait, it already is.

Why don't you accept your own responsibility for your own line of work and worry less about others? I mean, in truth, you should be acting kind to the rest of people on here because they may be able to get access or info about a job that you want. You're essentially calling your peer classmates (whether they go to your school or a different one) idiots. I find that beyond disturbing. Why would you enter an industry where you think your peer members are stupid? It's not exactly the best networking strategy.

[JoeMo]

If you're 100% sure law school is a good plan, you're a moron.

Ad Hom much?

Improper use of "ad hominem" in this context. "You're a moron" is a conclusion, not a basis for an attack on an argument.

I lol'ed.

[Anonymous User]

Not sure if serious. People need to follow CSO advice. The job of CSO is to tell students where to apply to get jobs. CSO said that NYC was dead - would you waste a lot of bids there? CSO squarely gets the blame here. I'm sure you will understand the role of CSO better after you have actually been to law school.

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

How about this: Most top law schools don't specifically teach with the aim of getting a student to pass the bar, unlike some TTT and TTTTs do. Does that mean a Michigan/Chicago/Harvard/Stanford/insertT14here grad should blame the school for not adequately preparing them when they don't pass? No. They should blame themselves for not adequately preparing themselves.

All I am touting is personal responsbility... blaming others does absolutely nothing to help your situation, so rather than dwell on it, move on and make the situation better. I don't understand why this is such an outlandish stance.

Personal responsibility really has no place in this discussion, unless your defense of Michigan is based on an assumption that Michigan students are less adept at taking personal responsibility for their employment status and finding a job outside of OCS and without OCI than all the schools who had much stronger placement. Which seems like a weird and unfounded insult to Michigan kids.

Huh? What just happened right there?

[IAFG]

If you're 100% sure law school is a good plan, you're a moron.

And that is the problem. Law school is difficult, stressful, and can suck at times. If you aren't 100% sure it is a good plan, you definitely should not go. Don't go unless you can give it your all. This seems like a completely reasonable train of thought.

I'm a Marine, and there is not a chance in hell you graduate Boot Camp unless you are giving 100%. People that join the Marines on a whim with no real good reason do not graduate. Law school, like the Marine Corps, is a life choice, and if you are not 100% committed it will show and the results will not be good. I think anyone that advocates choosing to "do" law school without being fully committed is a fucking tool.

Being 100% committed to being successful in LS and being 100% sure at the decision stage aren't the same thing.

Also, I know what a curve is... seriously? If you are going to attack my arguments, at least do so with intelligence. A curve may be very equalizing, but my point was that someone that has a positive attitude and wants to be in law school has an edge on someone that has a negative attitude and isn't really sure about law school. And, with a curve, every little edge helps. Again, this should be clear. The difference between an A and a B may be 2 questions... and the difference between getting those two questions right or wrong may be the difference between someone who puts in 100% and someone who puts in 75%.

Absolutely, putting in lots of effort is important. But (almost) everyone does that no matter their attitude before selecting a law school or their worries about the employment market. In fact... looking around, the people who were the least secure about getting the job they wanted, and the most worried about the employment market, did the best among the people I know. Fear and paranoia is a great driver.

[ScrabbleChamp]

You pay for that service the CSO provides. It is entirely reasonable, as a prospective student, current student, or graduate, to question the quality of the service you will be, are, or did pay for.

Umm... you just made my point for me. CSO is a service, and anyone that blindly assumes they are infallable is wreckless. You said it yourself, you should "question the quality of the service"... You imply my conclusion: You need to be personally resonsible for yourself and your job search. Sure, utilize what is available to you, but do so cautiously.

Ultimately, regardless of the service provided to you by CSO, you, and you alone, are the final say in what you do. If you choose to do exactly as CSO does, you have to live with the consequences... and if you choose not to do what CSO advises, you have to live with the consequences.

[Anonymous User]

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

You are making some pretty big assumptions about everyone knowing that CSO was telling everyone to apply to Chicago. Also, CSO is supposed to have the knowledge about the market and develop relationships with firms so your students get hired even if the economy sucks. Michigan's CSO failed miserably, and it had some pretty serious impacts on Michigan's students.

Unless you're regional and from the Midwest, I would think it was apparent that you should blanket multiple cities and not just Chicago. Also, having attended another grad. program, internship roundtables and such can only go so far. You need to make decisions for yourself and not only go into the process with one area, unless you have a family or other circumstances keeping you in that particular area. This should be a given to whatever law school someone attends.

[Old Gregg]

This is credited and I think they realize this which is why they've revamped their CSO and have people that specialize in different areas rather than having it continue to work the way it was.

Until they've fired everyone in that office, their CSO isn't revamped. When I last checked Michigan's website, Susan Guindi was still there.

[Mr. Somebody]

The negative stuff is a good thing IMO. Its clear that Campos blog is having a big impact, its fairly popular, and all the negative press in the past couple years has caused applications to see a huge drop. Schools are now more responsive to questions about employment. That NYU post a couple weeks ago was very helpful and triggered by Campos blog. I've been tutoring for the LSAT and when I showed one of my students Campos blog he started doing his own research and is now postponing until October to aim for the 170s. I wish there were a thousand Paul Campos' so that schools would be more like Michigan in releasing such detailed stats. I applaud Michigan and we should all be pressuring our respective schools to match what they've done - I know I am.

[D-hops]

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

You are making some pretty big assumptions about everyone knowing that CSO was telling everyone to apply to Chicago. Also, CSO is supposed to have the knowledge about the market and develop relationships with firms so your students get hired even if the economy sucks. Michigan's CSO failed miserably, and it had some pretty serious impacts on Michigan's students.

Unless you're regional and from the Midwest, I would think it was apparent that you should blanket multiple cities and not just Chicago. Also, having attended another grad. program, internship roundtables and such can only go so far. You need to make decisions for yourself and not only go into the process with one area, unless you have a family or other circumstances keeping you in that particular area. This should be a given to whatever law school someone attends.

Why would that be apparent? Hindsight? When the people that are paid to know the market (more so than what is publicly available) and help assist you in finding a job give you advice, why should you think that you should take action counter to that advice?

[IAFG]

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

You are making some pretty big assumptions about everyone knowing that CSO was telling everyone to apply to Chicago. Also, CSO is supposed to have the knowledge about the market and develop relationships with firms so your students get hired even if the economy sucks. Michigan's CSO failed miserably, and it had some pretty serious impacts on Michigan's students.

Unless you're regional and from the Midwest, I would think it was apparent that you should blanket multiple cities and not just Chicago. Also, having attended another grad. program, internship roundtables and such can only go so far. You need to make decisions for yourself and not only go into the process with one area, unless you have a family or other circumstances keeping you in that particular area. This should be a given to whatever law school someone attends.

You can't just "blanket multiple cities" at OCI. You have to choose where to bid, and you're not gonna get all of them. 2009 was a shit year for massmailing too. Firms got more than they could ever need from OCIs. Precision and accuracy was of utmost importance that year, because there was a slim margin for error. That's why people pin the blame on Michigan's OCS.

[rayiner]

I'm going to pull the "3L" card here and say this: having a skeptical attitude about job prospects going in is incredibly useful. C/O 2011's horrific OCI was going on while I was a 1L. I didn't have the relative mountain of data that you guys do now. So I made conservative assumptions. I assumed that I needed to finish top 1/3 to get a job. When it came time for OCI, I did over 50 screeners between Loyola and OCI. I spent 1L summer talking to as many people as I could who might be able to get my resume in front of someone. In the end it was massive overkill, because C/O 2012's OCI went much better than C/O 2011's, but I can't say being a skeptic did anything about help me in the end. I don't know a single skeptical gunner who doesn't have a firm job in my class.

I think it is incredibly dangerous when people like Scrabble underestimate their competition because they're asking what the social scene is like on a TLS thread. For C/O 2011, 1/4 of people ended up with crappy jobs even at schools that melted down less than Michigan. It is very easy to be in that group if you underestimate your peers.

[Anonymous User]

FYI, NYU has this information too (at least it was supplied to me when I was interviewing), but it's just not public and we're asked not to share.

[rayiner]

Huh? What just happened right there?

When I'm picking between car dealers, I don't usually factor in "personal responsibility" in evaluating their post-sale service and support.

[Samara]

Huh? What just happened right there?

When I'm picking between car dealers, I don't usually factor in "personal responsibility" in evaluating their post-sale service and support.

BUT IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHOOSE! If a used car dealer swindles you into a lemon, it's your fault because you made the choice. Clearly.

[skers]

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

You are making some pretty big assumptions about everyone knowing that CSO was telling everyone to apply to Chicago. Also, CSO is supposed to have the knowledge about the market and develop relationships with firms so your students get hired even if the economy sucks. Michigan's CSO failed miserably, and it had some pretty serious impacts on Michigan's students.

This is credited and I think they realize this which is why they've revamped their CSO and have people that specialize in different areas rather than having it continue to work the way it was.

Look, nobody is really saying that there isn't any room for doubt. (I know, I said it but I was using hyperbole which is the norm on TLS) What we are saying is that there is a pervasive negative attitude being perpetuated on TLS about legal hiring by 0L's... which begs the question, if you're so unsure why are you going? I'm assuming some people might be going because they have degrees they can't/don't want to do anything with? As for the others, what gives? I know that if I was uncertain to that extent I wouldn't go. That if I felt that other schools did a better job than Michigan/UVA then that's where I would go.

Also, just to throw this out there for every "Michigan Troll" there seems to be an equally egregious anti-Michigan troll so we sort of even each other out. And this is not directed at you but more at some of the previous posters that think people with a positive attitude about a school we'll be spending three years at and will be paying a lot of money to attend are "trolls".

You're distorting previous arguments/statements. The original statement that spawned this from TLSP "was just I'm frightened." If 0L's aren't at least a little wary going into the current market than they're delusional or ignorant regarding current employment data. The data we just got from Michigan, whether or not it's outdated, is sobering and for incoming students is cause for questions as it appears to be worse than most (if not all) other peer schools.

[D-hops]

Huh? What just happened right there?

When I'm picking between car dealers, I don't usually factor in "personal responsibility" in evaluating their post-sale service and support.

Hey, you picked the car, you should have known it was a lemon.

EDIT: Damn, preempted.

[rayiner]

You pay for that service the CSO provides. It is entirely reasonable, as a prospective student, current student, or graduate, to question the quality of the service you will be, are, or did pay for.

Umm... you just made my point for me. CSO is a service, and anyone that blindly assumes they are infallable is wreckless. You said it yourself, you should "question the quality of the service"... You imply my conclusion: You need to be personally resonsible for yourself and your job search. Sure, utilize what is available to you, but do so cautiously.

Ultimately, regardless of the service provided to you by CSO, you, and you alone, are the final say in what you do. If you choose to do exactly as CSO does, you have to live with the consequences... and if you choose not to do what CSO advises, you have to live with the consequences.

I'm not advocating blindly assuming that the CSO is infallible. I'm advocating that, as a 0L in a position to select between various schools, it is entirely appropriate to factor in the level of CSO competency those schools have demonstrated in the past. Ultimately you're personally responsible for your job search, but you're paying these CSO's to use resources you don't have access to to help you. Part of your exercise of personal responsibility is making that choice.

You can't blame the CSO just because you didn't get a job. Lot's of people won't get jobs--there aren't enough out there. But if the CSO screws up, you can blame them for that, just as you can blame any professional you hire for shoddy service.

[Anonymous User]

I am serious, though I will admit that I don't know intimately the inner-workings of a CSO office as I've yet to utilize their talents. However, I really hate when people blame others for their demise. To me, the math just doesn't add up... 400 graduates, all being told to apply to Chicago, just doesn't seem intelligent to me, and I'm not sure why so many people thought it did. And... define "waste a lot of bids there?"... I'm guessing that those that bid outside of Chicago found jobs, while those that bid only in Chicago did not... so, not sure they were really wasted.

You are making some pretty big assumptions about everyone knowing that CSO was telling everyone to apply to Chicago. Also, CSO is supposed to have the knowledge about the market and develop relationships with firms so your students get hired even if the economy sucks. Michigan's CSO failed miserably, and it had some pretty serious impacts on Michigan's students.

Unless you're regional and from the Midwest, I would think it was apparent that you should blanket multiple cities and not just Chicago. Also, having attended another grad. program, internship roundtables and such can only go so far. You need to make decisions for yourself and not only go into the process with one area, unless you have a family or other circumstances keeping you in that particular area. This should be a given to whatever law school someone attends.

Why would that be apparent? Hindsight? When the people that are paid to know the market (more so than what is publicly available) and help assist you in finding a job give you advice, why should you think that you should take action counter to that advice?

I'm coming from a business background, with business-centered experience, so in my industry, that's what you do. You don't put all of your eggs in a basket. I went to a graduate program who brought in various industry-related firms and I ended up getting internships (non-paid in my field - it's the norm) that were not part of the roundtable. I don't claim to know how the process works at the law school stage, but as an applicant, I would never only blanket one region. That's just me. I go into this process knowing that in the Summers, I may have to relocate to another city and pay double-rent. You have to financially be able to do those types of things.

As I said, I was given one opportunity from the roundtable event (held every semester - and we were competing against not just our own class - not sure how OCI works), but the other two (top-notch opportunities), I had to seek out. Especially in more fickle cities such as Chicago and NY, I would always blanket multiple areas if given the opportunity. Nothing is a guarantee. And sometimes you need to seek out opportunities that you find versus what your school is privy to.

[JoeMo]

The negative stuff is a good thing IMO. Its clear that Campos blog is having a big impact, its fairly popular, and all the negative press in the past couple years has caused applications to see a huge drop. Schools are now more responsive to questions about employment. That NYU post a couple weeks ago was very helpful and triggered by Campos blog. I've been tutoring for the LSAT and when I showed one of my students Campos blog he started doing his own research and is now postponing until October to aim for the 170s. I wish there were a thousand Paul Campos' so that schools would be more like Michigan in releasing such detailed stats. I applaud Michigan and we should all be pressuring our respective schools to match what they've done - I know I am.

Yeah, I'm not arguing that out of all the mud there have been a few good things that have resulted. I don't like Paul Campos because he seems to think that he alone is responsible for bringing about the information about the state of the legal market and how not entirely positive the outlook is. He just comes off as smug to me.

As to the rest of the negativity, I do have a problem with 0L's being overtly negative. This is not to say that 0L's can't partake in the discussions. Of course we can. But when it's the same people all the time spewing shit that half of the time doesn't even make sense it does become kind of asinine.

And yes, I say pretty idiotic shit too. But only because I realize that in this forum that's what gets people fired up and I find it quite enjoyable. Let's just say I'm somewhat of a sadistic freak but only as it pertains to TLS. IRL I'm much less of a sadist since there are real people to connect to but for all intents and purposes TLS is just a riot based on how quickly you can get people to react.

[Samara]

Huh? What just happened right there?

When I'm picking between car dealers, I don't usually factor in "personal responsibility" in evaluating their post-sale service and support.

Hey, you picked the car, you should have known it was a lemon.

EDIT: Damn, preempted.

--ImageRemoved--

[rayiner]

Huh? What just happened right there?

When I'm picking between car dealers, I don't usually factor in "personal responsibility" in evaluating their post-sale service and support.

BUT IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHOOSE! If a used car dealer swindles you into a lemon, it's your fault because you made the choice. Clearly.

Scrabble et al aren't even blaming you for letting yourself be swindled. They're literally blaming you for evaluating the track record of a dealer for selling lemons, on the grounds that if you do get swindled it will be all your fault anyway.