who is more impressive to you: Forum

[bceagles182]

Top 5% in a group of people that are probably extremely competitive is slightly more impressive than middle of the pack at a school where employment prospects are so much better (and thus less of a need for cut throat competition). Top 1/3 I'd go with T-14, but median I'll go with the TTT grad.

If you ask which one is better off, in general probably the T-14 grad, but that's not how I interpreted the question.

Its easy to be at the top when your going to school with a bunch of kids that suck.

This is stupid and ignorant. Graduating in the top 5% at any law school is not easy at all. There are plenty of people at Tier four schools who did poorly on the LSAT but who had high GPAs in undergrad. Many of these people are extremely motivated. That said, I'd much rather be the latter. If we changed the second option to graduated in the bottom half at low T14, I would probably say the former is more impressive.

[ranovr32]

[/quote]

This is stupid and ignorant. Graduating in the top 5% at any law school is not easy at all. There are plenty of people at Tier four schools who did poorly on the LSAT but who had high GPAs in undergrad. Many of these people are extremely motivated. That said, I'd much rather be the latter. If we changed the second option to graduated in the bottom half at low T14, I would probably say the former is more impressive.[/quote]


Well its just like in undergrad or high school, if you go to a prestigious school everyone is much smarter then average. If you go to TTT schools most everyone is average. Its a pretty simple math problem in my opinion, but I care not. This will be my last post on this subject.

[Rednorthstar]

To the OP, I think they are both pretty impressive, but it's not my opinion that counts, it's the law firm that it looking to employ said student. In my book I always look at Cornell or Stanford, whether its grad or undergrad and think they person is smart.

That said not everybody in a TTT is an idiot, how about a guy with an Ivy UG that for whatever reason wanted to go to a TTT LS?

[09042014]

To the OP, I think they are both pretty impressive, but it's not my opinion that counts, it's the law firm that it looking to employ said student. In my book I always look at Cornell or Stanford, whether its grad or undergrad and think they person is smart.

That said not everybody in a TTT is an idiot, how about a guy with an Ivy UG that for whatever reason wanted to go to a TTT LS?

Wanting to go to a TTT makes you an idiot. Possibly more than the idiots who can't do any better.

[Rednorthstar]

^ Really? You mean everybody who doesn't have the same goals as a certain set of people are ALL CLUELESS MORONS? That may be the most genius thing I've ever heard. If only I had the power to nominate you for a nobel prize...

Said person might have gotten a full scholarship, said person might want to stick to a certain locale for certain reasons (family, that's where they want to work) where there is only a fourth tier. Maybe the person doesn't care about BIGLAW. They didn't get into a T14 and rather than wait an extra year to retake LSATs and reapply they want their degree. There are plenty exceptions to the rule.

The most ignorant people I've ever met are the ones that say 'If he doesn't do what I would do or DID do, is an idiot.'

[soullesswonder]

Top 5% in a group of people that are probably extremely competitive is slightly more impressive than middle of the pack at a school where employment prospects are so much better (and thus less of a need for cut throat competition). Top 1/3 I'd go with T-14, but median I'll go with the TTT grad.

If you ask which one is better off, in general probably the T-14 grad, but that's not how I interpreted the question.

ITE, people at T14s that don't begin with "Ya", "Harv", or "Stan" are probably just as competitive as are people at low ranked schools. And these schools have people who are better at being competitive.

Its law school of course its competitive. And what you think the people at HYS are less competitive? How the hell did you think they got there?
Long answer short, its easy to put it in an analogy:
Whats more impressive, having a batting average in the top 5% in the history of the Florida Marlins or the top1/3 of the Yankees?
Its easy to be at the top when your going to school with a bunch of kids that suck.

The people I know at Yale are definitely not competitive. I sometimes wonder if they actually learn anything. I don't know anyone at Harvard or Stanford. My guess is that Harvard is probably as competitive as the lower T14s (thanks to mandatory LP), while Stanford is somewhere between barely-conscious Yale and gun-your-heart-out CCNMVPDCNG.

minor quibble: Harvard recently clarified that there is no mandatory LP. Some profs might have taken it that way in the past, but everyone is now on the same page - they're discretionary.

[09042014]

^ Really? You mean everybody who doesn't have the same goals as a certain set of people are ALL CLUELESS MORONS? That may be the most genius thing I've ever heard. If only I had the power to nominate you for a nobel prize...

You flatter me.

Said person might have gotten a full scholarship, said person might want to stick to a certain locale for certain reasons (family, that's where they want to work) where there is only a fourth tier. Maybe the person doesn't care about BIGLAW. They didn't get into a T14 and rather than wait an extra year to retake LSATs and reapply they want their degree. There are plenty exceptions to the rule.

Even a full ride to a T3 is a waste of three years of time and lost earnings plus cost of living.

Even if they don't want BIG LAWL, T1 schools have considerably better job opportunities.

Going to a TTT over a t14 because you don't want to wait a year is stupid.

Taking an extremely risky career path to be near family is stupid.

The most ignorant people I've ever met are the ones that say 'If he doesn't do what I would do or DID do, is an idiot.'

They aren't idiots because they are doing something different than me they are idiots because they are gambling their future on a terrible bet.

Betting your house on black in roulette is honesty a better bet than going to a TTT law school.

[Rednorthstar]

Even a full ride to a T3 is a waste of three years of time and lost earnings plus cost of living.

That's silly. You learn the same skill set and if you're savvy enough to get the full ride you're hopefully savvy enough to market yourself without the big-name degree.

Even if they don't want BIG LAWL, T1 schools have considerably better job opportunities.

True. I really wish I could say the same for undergrad.

Going to a TTT over a t14 because you don't want to wait a year is stupid.

Taking an extremely risky career path to be near family is stupid.

It depends on what you want to do with your life and law degree, and where you are at in life. Remember that unless you're earning at least a quarter million dollars a year (which precious few people do) you rarely get rich off your salary, you get wealthy off of how you rotate your funds. Obviously a higher salary makes this easier. For waiting a year, tell that to the guy who is 35 years old and is sick of putting his life on hold. If you're 21 or 22 yeach it makes sense, but not everybody has the advantage of youth. Priorities change as you age. You'll learn this.

Betting your house on black in roulette is honesty a better bet than going to a TTT law school.

I'm all for calculated risks, but that also depends on the TTT. Some TTTs have very good employment rates.

[RVP11]

Top 5% in a group of people that are probably extremely competitive is slightly more impressive than middle of the pack at a school where employment prospects are so much better (and thus less of a need for cut throat competition). Top 1/3 I'd go with T-14, but median I'll go with the TTT grad.

If you ask which one is better off, in general probably the T-14 grad, but that's not how I interpreted the question.

Its easy to be at the top when your going to school with a bunch of kids that suck.

This is stupid and ignorant. Graduating in the top 5% at any law school is not easy at all. There are plenty of people at Tier four schools who did poorly on the LSAT but who had high GPAs in undergrad. Many of these people are extremely motivated. That said, I'd much rather be the latter. If we changed the second option to graduated in the bottom half at low T14, I would probably say the former is more impressive.

Whatever your opinions are, make sure your quotes are correct.

I never said that.

[ArealG]

I voted for top 5%. Kicking ass and chewing bubble gum. And I ain't go no damn gum cuz I ain't spending a buck for a pack of Wrigley's.

[09042014]

That's silly. You learn the same skill set and if you're savvy enough to get the full ride you're hopefully savvy enough to market yourself without the big-name degree.

But not the job. Who the fuck cares about your lawyering skills when you are litigating trailer park evictions.
[/quote]

It depends on what you want to do with your life and law degree, and where you are at in life. Remember that unless you're earning at least a quarter million dollars a year (which precious few people do) you rarely get rich off your salary, you get wealthy off of how you rotate your funds. Obviously a higher salary makes this easier. For waiting a year, tell that to the guy who is 35 years old and is sick of putting his life on hold. If you're 21 or 22 yeach it makes sense, but not everybody has the advantage of youth. Priorities change as you age. You'll learn this.

What kind of black and white thinking is this. If you don't get rich it doesn't matter? The difference between 160K and 45K when you have 180K in debt is the difference between an audi and the occasional night on the towns and a 87 chevette and alpo.

I'm all for calculated risks, but that also depends on the TTT. Some TTTs have very good employment rates.

Even at good TTT's you need to be top 5% to make big law and have a hope at paying your loans back.

TTT's ruin a solid 80% of their students careers. Fuck em.

[Rednorthstar]

@ Desertfox: The most successful people I know don't have college degrees, so getting wealthy doesn't hinge on that alone. However, to some people getting rich doesn't matter. Some people just want to spend their lives being a public defender. I don't happen to fall into that category. That said I really think you may have some damn valid points. I just checked out the student loan calculator and put in a slightly more conservative $150K, and yeah, over 10 years that's a whopping payment. And if the student has additional UG debt, figure anywhere from $50K-$200K, then that's an additional mortgage payment. Wonder how many of them hire themselves to file bankruptcy.

I'm speaking from a less holistic viewpoint and more from my own viewpoint which I suppose isn't fair to assume on others. I have zero UG debt, and have enough money to pay for enough of my schooling that I should end up about $40K in debt, which is somewhat more managable. In especially saturated areas I can see TTTs getting the short end of the stick. I'm looking at Widener in DE, which is the only law school in DE (and is locally well regarded.) Most of the attorney's I've met went to Widener and almost all of them do very well for themselves. I imagine, though I don't know, that some other schools like Old Miss and University of Maine (though it's really a second tier school) are in similar situations where they've got a whole market for themselves so it's easier to find jobs.

BTW I already own an Audi.

[FlightoftheEarls]

BTW I already own an Audi.

SICKKKKKK!!!!!

[ck3]

I would rather be middle of the pack at the T14.


A reason to take the risk of going to a TTT

If you can't get into or afford a T14 school, you're career and long term financial prospects in doing real estate closings in your local market with your TTT degree and your law school debt are probably still better than they would be with an undergrad degree and maybe better than with an MBA because MBA's are a dime a dozen.

Another thing is that we always talk about the starting salary. However, if you are looking at the probability of making $45K coming out of a TTT you still have to consider that your salary in year 10 after graduation will have a lot greater chance of being 75K to 100K if you have the law degree from TTT than if you don't have one at all. This is not to say that everyone who goes to a TTT is going to end up making a 100K but your chances of doing so with just an undergrad degree are pretty slim unless you own your own business or have one of the few spots in upper management or you are a good salesperson of some product or service. Sorry for the run on sentences.

[englawyer]

Another thing is that we always talk about the starting salary. However, if you are looking at the probability of making $45K coming out of a TTT you still have to consider that your salary in year 10 after graduation will have a lot greater chance of being 75K to 100K if you have the law degree from TTT than if you don't have one at all. This is not to say that everyone who goes to a TTT is going to end up making a 100K but your chances of doing so with just an undergrad degree are pretty slim unless you own your own business or have one of the few spots in upper management or you are a good salesperson of some product or service. Sorry for the run on sentences.

this isn't quite true. accountants and engineers will most likely hit 100k ten years out. almost any big company corporate career probably has those prospects, whether you start in finance, human resources, or whatever. these opportunities are all available from even a TTT undergrad.

if you go to a top school and get a job in a prestigious professional services firm (banking/consulting/etc) then that is another path that will almost surely hit 100k within 10 years (or in the case of wall st, within 1 year).

now if you struck out at undergrad OCI, don't have connections, etc. and you can't land a gig with a big company, then you are right. someone that graduates and starts in a temp agency or whatnot will probably not hit 100k within 10 years.

[prezidentv8]

Another thing is that we always talk about the starting salary. However, if you are looking at the probability of making $45K coming out of a TTT you still have to consider that your salary in year 10 after graduation will have a lot greater chance of being 75K to 100K if you have the law degree from TTT than if you don't have one at all. This is not to say that everyone who goes to a TTT is going to end up making a 100K but your chances of doing so with just an undergrad degree are pretty slim unless you own your own business or have one of the few spots in upper management or you are a good salesperson of some product or service. Sorry for the run on sentences.

this isn't quite true. accountants and engineers will most likely hit 100k ten years out. almost any big company corporate career probably has those prospects, whether you start in finance, human resources, or whatever. these opportunities are all available from even a TTT undergrad.

if you go to a top school and get a job in a prestigious professional services firm (banking/consulting/etc) then that is another path that will almost surely hit 100k within 10 years (or in the case of wall st, within 1 year).

now if you struck out at undergrad OCI, don't have connections, etc. and you can't land a gig with a big company, then you are right. someone that graduates and starts in a temp agency or whatnot will probably not hit 100k within 10 years.

Undergrad OCI?! Prestige whores.

[Danteshek]

Which one describes you best?

Attending a T2/T3 school with hopes of Big Law

OR

Attending a lower T-14 and are worried about career prospects?

ITT marginal students at top law schools reassure themselves that their sense of entitlement is justified

[ck3]

Another thing is that we always talk about the starting salary. However, if you are looking at the probability of making $45K coming out of a TTT you still have to consider that your salary in year 10 after graduation will have a lot greater chance of being 75K to 100K if you have the law degree from TTT than if you don't have one at all. This is not to say that everyone who goes to a TTT is going to end up making a 100K but your chances of doing so with just an undergrad degree are pretty slim unless you own your own business or have one of the few spots in upper management or you are a good salesperson of some product or service. Sorry for the run on sentences.

this isn't quite true. accountants and engineers will most likely hit 100k ten years out. almost any big company corporate career probably has those prospects, whether you start in finance, human resources, or whatever. these opportunities are all available from even a TTT undergrad.

if you go to a top school and get a job in a prestigious professional services firm (banking/consulting/etc) then that is another path that will almost surely hit 100k within 10 years (or in the case of wall st, within 1 year).

now if you struck out at undergrad OCI, don't have connections, etc. and you can't land a gig with a big company, then you are right. someone that graduates and starts in a temp agency or whatnot will probably not hit 100k within 10 years.

Undergrad OCI?! Prestige whores.

I went to engineering school out of high school at GA Tech. I know very few people who graduated from there who are making over $100K over 10 years after graduation. Granted most of them live in the South so this would account to some degree for lower salaries. Overall engineering is a very good field to have an undergrad degree in but I doubt that many people applying to a TTT law school have an engineering degree or it would be a wiser move for them to pursue an engineering job for $60,000. Sure there are plenty of engineers who make that kind of money but there are very few people with business, liberal arts degres that make that.

If you are a CPA, or you rise to the level of controller or assistant controller or you are pretty high up in a big 4 consulting firm like Deloitte then yes you are right. But how many controllers are there in one organization. I worked for a hotel development company. They had 2 accountants on the executive floor and about 20 real estate attorneys. But that is just one industry but I think in general there may be more 100K law jobs than 100K accounting jobs in this economy and if you only have a bachelors in accounting and 10 years of experience you probably won't make controller or assistant controller. I'm sure there are exceptions but I am talking about the averages. So based upon my experience, I would much rather have a law degree and 10 years experience even with the debt than to have an undergrad accounting degree and 10 years of experience.

If you work in HR in a fortune 500 company like ADP if you don't rise to the level of director you won't make over 100K even if you work there for 30 years. Especially without an advanced degree like MBA or law. If you get the MBA or Masters of Human Resources you have to compete with the 10 million other people who have them from Wharton to Nova Southeastern online. There is a lot of competition and fewer good jobs ITE for law school graduates but I can tell you from years of experience that there is even more competition among those who have an undergrad degree and are competing for those one or 2 management jobs.