Best Law School for Texas? Forum

[madmartigan]

Really? It's anecdotal, but everyone I have spoken with in Dallas/Houston says that Dallas & Houston aren't nearly as affected by the economy as other markets (they usually cite oil companies as the reason, especially in Houston). I still think UT owns over SMU and UH, but I would argue SMU and UH (NLJ250 at like 23% and 18%) are doing pretty well.

Oh, Dallas & Houston are less affected, sure. However, this is a relative thing; it means "tighter hiring" as opposed to the "no hiring" going on other places. Things are better there, but things are still noticeably worse than they were pre-recession. Hiring fewer people means they can be more selective about who they take, and that impacts folks at lower-ranked schools pretty badly.

missed this... I gotcha. Yeah, I think both SMU and UH are outperforming their rank. And SMU hands out a lot of $. it sucks there are so few biglaw jobs in Austin... not sure I could live in Austin for 3 years and then have to move to Houston/Dallas. Especially Dallas, the sprawl, stripmalls and chain restaurant rows make me vomit... At least Htown has midtown, and Montrose. Just my opinion... don't get fisty Dallas lovers.

[RVP11]

Are you really saying that there is a correlation between LSAT score and the ability to evaluate employment prospects?

Yes. Before this thread, I would have never dreamed of thinking this. After this thread, I'm growing convinced there's a strong correlation. When 156 and 164 are wrong, and multiple 170+ are right...that's correlative to me, yes.

As for being a 0L. Does being a 1, 2, or 3L really make you one damn bit more qualified to determine how hiring decisions are made at biglaw firms?

Yes, actually it does. This is something you'll understand when you get to law school. There are certain resources to which law students have access.

I've been in the workforce for over 20 years. I've been involved in evaluating job candidates for 10. Does that make me an expert in how law firms hire? Of course not. But I'd say that it gives me a helluva lot more insight into the hiring process than you got sitting in con law.

Your 20 years experience in the non-BigLaw workforce surely gives you some insight into hiring decisions in general, but I'd wager it gives you much less insight into BigLaw hiring than is gained by spending only a year or two on TLS or speaking with people from career services at a top law school.

[vanwinkle]

I feel like I've had this argument before.

[madmartigan]

Yes, if everyone in the T14 suddenly decided Dallas was the place to be, then yeah, it would have an effect.

But they don't and won't, and so it really doesn't matter. That's the problem with "what ifs". What if SMU was suddenly ranked like it placed? Then we wouldn't be having an argument.

Outside HYS (happy Richie Tenenbaum?), a T14 just doesn't swing as much weight as certain people want to believe. For finding a job in the Dallas market, an SMU grad is just as competitive as a UVA / Cornell / whatever.

That's not saying, nor have I ever said, that SMU is your best all-around bet. But people seem to keep making that the argument.

If Dallas is your spot, though, then it's a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell. You won't get super-special loving here.

you literally just proved our point. if t14 wanted to pwn dallas, they could. So if you want to work (not live in dallas during law school and work there*) in dallas then your best shot at big law is t14, then UT, then SMU.

geese... it only took 4 pages

[kalvano]

I go to A T14, and regardless of what all the data shows, I'm right.

I simplified that for you.

[kalvano]

you literally just proved our point. if t14 wanted to pwn dallas, they could. So if you want to work (not live in dallas during law school and work there*) in dallas then your best shot at big law is t14, then UT, then SMU.

geese... it only took 4 pages

Read the whole thing. If the T14 descended en masse, then yeah, it would have an effect. But outside HYS, just wandering down here with T14 will not place on you any particular higher footing than an SMU grad.

[RVP11]

UT is nearly T14. SMU is fucking St John's on steroids. There should be no question here.

[vanwinkle]

Yes, if everyone in the T14 suddenly decided Dallas was the place to be, then yeah, it would have an effect.

But they don't and won't, and so it really doesn't matter.

Actually it does matter. It matters because some folks from UT and the T14 do go to Dallas, and with the economy restricting hiring, firms would rather keep taking those kids than SMU kids.

Outside HYS (happy Richie Tenenbaum?), a T14 just doesn't swing as much weight as certain people want to believe. For finding a job in the Dallas market, an SMU grad is just as competitive as a UVA / Cornell / whatever.

This is not true.

If Dallas is your spot, though, then it's a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell. You won't get super-special loving here.

Let's assume, just for argument's sake, that SMU will do as well placing you in Dallas. But if that's true, then it's still not a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell, because they'll give you just as much access to Dallas, and access to other legal markets if you can't find anything in Dallas. There's kind of a recession going on, and these things matter. Intentionally limiting yourself to a single legal market in this economy is, quite frankly, stupid, and yet that's what you'd be doing if you actually chose SMU over those other schools without some compelling additional reason (like $$$$).

[Sangiovese]

When 156 and 164 are wrong, and multiple 170+ are right...that's correlative to me, yes.

So break it down for my feeble little 156 brain. What exactly am I wrong about? You conveniently ignored it when I asked you in my last post.... but why do you think I am advocating the same position as Kalvano?

Once again I'll state my original position... Since you missed it last time, maybe bold red text will help.

UT is the top dog for all of Texas.
In Dallas, SMU closely follows UT. In Houston, UH closely follows UT.
So basically, UT is the best choice as it allows you to compete all over Texas. SMU and U. Houston place very well in their home cities, but drop off once you venture out.

[madmartigan]

Yes, if everyone in the T14 suddenly decided Dallas was the place to be, then yeah, it would have an effect.

But they don't and won't, and so it really doesn't matter.

Actually it does matter. It matters because some folks from UT and the T14 do go to Dallas, and with the economy restricting hiring, firms would rather keep taking those kids than SMU kids.

Outside HYS (happy Richie Tenenbaum?), a T14 just doesn't swing as much weight as certain people want to believe. For finding a job in the Dallas market, an SMU grad is just as competitive as a UVA / Cornell / whatever.

This is not true.

If Dallas is your spot, though, then it's a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell. You won't get super-special loving here.

Let's assume, just for argument's sake, that SMU will do as well placing you in Dallas. But if that's true, then it's still not a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell, because they'll give you just as much access to Dallas, and access to other legal markets if you can't find anything in Dallas. There's kind of a recession going on, and these things matter. Intentionally limiting yourself to a single legal market in this economy is, quite frankly, stupid, and yet that's what you'd be doing if you actually chose SMU over those other schools without some compelling additional reason (like $$$$).

ok,ok... lets stay on thread. the question is best opportunity of a tx school to place big law in Dallas. UT portability isn't relevant.

[kalvano]

Yes, if everyone in the T14 suddenly decided Dallas was the place to be, then yeah, it would have an effect.

But they don't and won't, and so it really doesn't matter.

Actually it does matter. It matters because some folks from UT and the T14 do go to Dallas, and with the economy restricting hiring, firms would rather keep taking those kids than SMU kids.

Doesn't seem to be the case so far.

Outside HYS (happy Richie Tenenbaum?), a T14 just doesn't swing as much weight as certain people want to believe. For finding a job in the Dallas market, an SMU grad is just as competitive as a UVA / Cornell / whatever.

This is not true.

Prove it.

If Dallas is your spot, though, then it's a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell. You won't get super-special loving here.

Let's assume, just for argument's sake, that SMU will do as well placing you in Dallas. But if that's true, then it's still not a waste to go to UT or Penn or Cornell, because they'll give you just as much access to Dallas, and access to other legal markets if you can't find anything in Dallas. There's kind of a recession going on, and these things matter. Intentionally limiting yourself to a single legal market in this economy is, quite frankly, stupid, and yet that's what you'd be doing if you actually chose SMU over those other schools without some compelling additional reason (like $$$$).

Again, the argument is not portability or outside the Dallas market.

[madmartigan]

When 156 and 164 are wrong, and multiple 170+ are right...that's correlative to me, yes.

So break it down for my feeble little 156 brain. What exactly am I wrong about? You conveniently ignored it when I asked you in my last post.... but why do you think I am advocating the same position as Kalvano?

Once again I'll state my original position... Since you missed it last time, maybe bold red text will help.

UT is the top dog for all of Texas.
In Dallas, SMU closely follows UT. In Houston, UH closely follows UT.
So basically, UT is the best choice as it allows you to compete all over Texas. SMU and U. Houston place very well in their home cities, but drop off once you venture out.

i agree with sang here... LSAT doesn't equal better job placement. It equals better law school and better logic/RC abilities, and this thread should prove my point. and i'm a 168 so i'm not a hater.

EDIT: actually better school can equal better job placement, and better lsat equals better school. but i think you smell what I'm steppin in.

[RVP11]

When 156 and 164 are wrong, and multiple 170+ are right...that's correlative to me, yes.

So break it down for my feeble little 156 brain. What exactly am I wrong about? You conveniently ignored it when I asked you in my last post.... but why do you think I am advocating the same position as Kalvano?

Once again I'll state my original position... Since you missed it last time, maybe bold red text will help.

UT is the top dog for all of Texas.
In Dallas, SMU closely follows UT. In Houston, UH closely follows UT.
So basically, UT is the best choice as it allows you to compete all over Texas. SMU and U. Houston place very well in their home cities, but drop off once you venture out.

Nothing in the red text is wrong.

How about your claim that the fact that UT has higher % placed in NLJ250 doesn't mean that Dallas firms are going deeper in the class at UT than at SMU? Or that UT and SMU are "neck and neck" in Dallas?

[entrechatsix]

how and why is this thread still going?

[vanwinkle]

Again, the argument is not portability or outside the Dallas market.

Did you even read what I wrote? I'm assuming the answer is "no".

[RVP11]

This thread is like George W. Bush being educated at Yale. Nothing's sticking. I just hope it doesn't last four years.

[madmartigan]

how and why is this thread still going?

right on. I would love to hear any other perspectives on tx schools and tx markets, since i'm still undecided.

[kalvano]

I'd really like to hear more about T14 placement in Texas, and how it's better to go to one of those schools.

Some charts and graphs would be nice. Particularly something with some evidence to back up some claims.

[entrechatsix]

I'd really like to hear more about T14 placement in Texas, and how it's better to go to one of those schools.

Some charts and graphs would be nice. Particularly something with some evidence to back up some claims.

does winning this internet fight about job placement in a state you've admitted you don't want to live/work in really mean this much to you?

[kalvano]

I'd really like to hear more about T14 placement in Texas, and how it's better to go to one of those schools.

Some charts and graphs would be nice. Particularly something with some evidence to back up some claims.

does winning this internet fight about job placement in a state you've admitted you don't want to live/work in really mean this much to you?

No, I'm just being a dick now. I can't sleep tonight, so I've got nothing better to do.

I'm also enjoying watching the stupidity of youth.

[madmartigan]

[quote="kalvano"]I'd really like to hear more about T14 placement in Texas, and how it's better to go to one of those schools.

you're a non sequitur monster. i don't think this thread can move forward until you understand self-selection and how that affects raw placement numbers in markets with regional law schools.

and i'm still 50/50 as to whether you're messing with us.

since you're a bigD native. how about your opinion on uptown dallas vs montrose/midtown houston?

[glassglass]

ugh. What the hell, I'll throw something in, seeing as how I got in at SMU, UH, and Vandy, but not UT. Vanderbilt's more portable, but I want to work in Texas. I figure UT > Vanderbilt, but does Vanderbilt > SMU in Dallas, > UH in Houston? Just wondering.

[vanwinkle]

right on. I would love to hear any other perspectives on tx schools and tx markets, since i'm still undecided.

UVA places rather well into the TX markets. In the last three years it has placed:

22 grads into law firms in Dallas
3 grads into clerkships in Dallas
18 grads into law firms in Houston
5 grads into clerkships in Houston
1 person into PI employment in Houston

Since you're actually capable of understanding the concept of self-selection and how it affects employment numbers, you'll probably appreciate how good this is (especially after considering UVA placed 224 grads in NYC law firms and 218 grads in DC law firms in that 3-year span; that's 40% of folks graduated in the last 3 years right there).

The fact that it's a prestigious institution and isn't too well-represented in Texas can also work to your advantage, since law firms like diversity of degrees in their incoming classes. There are enough UVA Law grads going to Texas to give you alumni connections, but not so many that you're going to be competing heavily for the same jobs with the same firms, like you would against your classmates at UT, SMU, etc.

[kalvano]

you're a non sequitur monster. i don't think this thread can move forward until you understand self-selection and how that affects raw placement numbers in markets with regional law schools.

and i'm still 50/50 as to whether you're messing with us.

since you're a bigD native. how about your opinion on uptown dallas vs montrose/midtown houston?

All of Texas sucks. Houston sucks quite a bit harder than Dallas does.

I would never fuck with people on something so serious as school debates.

[Sangiovese]

When 156 and 164 are wrong, and multiple 170+ are right...that's correlative to me, yes.

So break it down for my feeble little 156 brain. What exactly am I wrong about? You conveniently ignored it when I asked you in my last post.... but why do you think I am advocating the same position as Kalvano?

Once again I'll state my original position... Since you missed it last time, maybe bold red text will help.

UT is the top dog for all of Texas.
In Dallas, SMU closely follows UT. In Houston, UH closely follows UT.
So basically, UT is the best choice as it allows you to compete all over Texas. SMU and U. Houston place very well in their home cities, but drop off once you venture out.

Nothing in the red text is wrong.

How about your claim that the fact that UT has higher % placed in NLJ250 doesn't mean that Dallas firms are going deeper in the class at UT than at SMU? Or that UT and SMU are "neck and neck" in Dallas?

Why did I say neck and neck in Dallas placement? That's simple. Count the number of graduates from each school at firms in Dallas. I posted those numbers. They support my position. SMU places an almost exactly identical number of graduates into Dallas law firms as Texas does. I get self selection. Really. But the statement wasn't a hypothetical "who could place more students into Dallas?" question... it was a statement that as many SMU grads find employment in Dallas as UT grads. Nothing more. Hell.... if you want to go with hypotheticals, then forget the NLJ placement numbers completely. How many YLS grads would get biglaw employment if they all went after that instead of clerkships and other opportunities? Might as well toss the whole data set out the window.

All of UT is not the competition for an SMU grad looking for employment in Dallas. Only the portion of UT grads that choose to apply to Dallas firms provide competition. And the number of lawyers from each school at the firms in Dallas shows that as many SMU grads as UT grads find employment in Dallas. Actual numbers of graduates placed is equal.

As for firms "going deeper" into UT than SMU. By the NLJ nationwide numbers, they only go 9% deeper to start with. Assuming that there is absolutely zero "home court advantage" would mean that the firms are only going 9% deeper into the UT class... that's hardly earth shattering. And I stand by my assertion that there IS a home court advantage. The connections made within the city add up to something. You can tout OCI all you want, but NETWORKING is how people in the real world find jobs. The biglaw world has differences, yes... but networking still counts. So does an alumni base. Does it count for 9%? I don't know. AND NEITHER DO YOU. So stating it as an unassailable fact makes you look... well... foolish and arrogant.