As I have posted before, I was accepted into the University Chicago but it doesn't look like I'm going to have much help financially. However, I have received full ride offers from Chicago Kent, Michigan State, DePaul, and Indiana McKinney. I have also gotten into a couple of top 25 schools but I am facing a similar dilemma. My ultimate goal is to get into big law and I have been told that if I graduate in the top 5% at a tier 2 school then that shouldn't be a problem. Curves matter to me too and I also want to take that into consideration when choosing a school
1
54 comments
Chicago will open doors for you that the others just can't. Yes, you'll be crushed financially for awhile, but I'd imagine the lifetime earnings expectancy of Chicago grads would far surpass the others, even factoring in the debt. The problem is one of distribution more than anything.
That said, those others are great schools. Their lacking compared to Chicago is probably much more a matter of recognition and prestige than quality. You'll get a great education at any of them.
So I think in actual value, the money tips the scale. But in perceived value (which is very real) the prestige of Chicago balances it back out at the very least.
It also depends on what you want to do. If you go to Chicago, you can do it. Period. Whatever it is. At the others, what you do and where you do it will have limitations.
This is an excellent, excellent thread. It is threads like this that make this forum one of the best in the LSAT community.
If I were you, I'd go to Chicago.
It's not a given that you'll be able to get a biglaw job after graduating from a tier-2 school, nor is it a given that you'll be able to graduate at the top of your class. Even if you're a butt-kicker, you could get sick, or go through a terrible breakup, etc.
You might change your mind about your career path. Chicago will give you the flexibility to do anything—clerkships, public interest law (which, like everything, is extremely competitive), academia, or the biggest, baddest law firms anywhere in the country.
As I think @jhaldy10325 was getting at, the Venn diagram of "perceived value" and "value" from a given law school mostly overlaps. That is, perceived value IS the value. Lawyers like prestige.
But, of course, debt sucks.
Congrats on having such a hard choice!
Good luck ! You seemed to have it all figured out.
@combsni116 said:
As I have posted before, I was accepted into the University Chicago but it doesn't look like I'm going to have much help financially. However, I have received full ride offers from Chicago Kent, Michigan State, DePaul, and Indiana McKinney. I have also gotten into a couple of top 25 schools but I am facing a similar dilemma. **My ultimate goal is to get into big law and I have been told that if I graduate in the top 5% at a tier 2 school then that shouldn't be a problem. Curves matter to me too and I also want to take that into consideration when choosing a school"_
Well saying you expect to be in the top 5% of a tier 2 school isn't taking that much into consideration. Did you take into consideration that 100% of the students there expect to be in the top 5%? Why not be top 5% at CHi? Why not re-take the LSAT and get a full scholly? You're clearly smart and have the belief you are top 5%.....
I know you think you're different and you're obviously a smart guy. But you don't seem to want to discuss the merits of your decision; you seem to want everyone to tell you what you've already chosen is the right thing and confirm that taking the $$$ and banking on top 5% at Kent is the better idea. Right? I know that feeling because I do it a lot with lesser decisions. Like buying a stupid expensive car or a new iPhone.
Well I can objectively say that if big law is your goal, going to Kent is an objectively bad idea. PERIOD. Betting you'll be in the top 5% ... also a bad idea. Period. I think you have an awesome opportunity that you worked very hard for and you shouldn't throw it away for some tier 2 school if you want big law. That's at the crux of my argument here: You want big law. It's hard enough to get from damn GT now -a-days from their top 10% ... Yeah, shit is real out there. You don't hear about it because it gets covered up and numbers get fudged. But GT is really losing its T14 status and Cornel is acting strange this cycle indicating that something is going on. Several theories, but I'll save that for another time. This is way more important.
I'm telling you man, I was the same way. Always the top. Valedictorian. Tons of awards from high school to the day I spoke at graduation. Then I got a job where I work now where every one told me basically to chill out with that attitude. First, it drives people mad. Second, have you ever honestly been surrounded by people who are your actual intellectual peers? To be honest, outside of a few AP classes in High school 5-6 years ago I never was. Not until I started my job. It knocks you down a few pegs and you realize that everyone in the room is as smart as you. Yup. Some smarter. Better. Gotta except it. It doesn't mean you don't try to be the best you can be. But it also doesn't mean the answer is to go through life with an inflated ego.
One of my best mentors told me that law school, big law, and life in many ways is like finding treasure. And if you don't have a map, you are fucked. I know I repeated myself before, but I care enough to repeat it again. Hard work and being smart -- those are necessary conditions to do well in law school/big law; they aren't sufficient. Sometimes people at the top of their classes get dinged from firms because of their attitude, the way they look, etc. Shit happens man and you have to prepare for it. If you think you can be the top 5% of anything get into iBanking and make some real money, haha ;) Just busting your chops...
If you graduate basically at all from UChi you can get a big law job. Top 20% and you can easily snag V20 if you interview well. And If that's your ultimate goal, why would you not do one of my most important things and go to a top school? That's the X on the map to big law my friend. Going to a top school. Finances are important to consider, but like I said, the issue is life expectancy for juniors at big firms are low. (I know, I know, this won't be you) Which is everyone who I know who now works in big law's famous last words. So realize that if and when you let go or leave because you hate it, your Kent degree isn't really going to be worth much to other firms/recruiters/companies. However, like I said, something important to consider is your UChi degree will follow you for the rest of your life and help you get jobs people at Kent couldn't dream of. The financial risk seems like a lot, but doing some quick back of the napkin math, you'd make millions more if you went to UChi. And we are due for another crash... big law work is slowing down at a bunch if firms. Another crash hits top 1% at Kent is going to be hurting.
However, I admire your drive, but at some point it becomes arrogance. Humble out a bit, dude. Keep that killer fire inside, but think about the "What ifs?" Shit, what if you find out you hate law? A lot of people do and they leave. They come work where I work. And again, with a UChi JD you can get into finance, business, consulting, just about anything......... Kent degree not so much.
I know I wrote a lot, but I know its a BIG decision to make! I just think it comes down to if you want big law go to a top school. It's really that simple. If you want to work at Goldman go to Wharton. Don't get an MBA from Iowa State and justify it with the anecdote that some dude who's a VP went there. There's always exceptions. But in law, it's always better to go by the rules. Hehe see what I did there.
Good luck with whatever you decide. I actually have a few pals who work at top firms who might talk to you via skype or something if you'd be interested. Probably busy, but I'm sure you can exchange emails and they'd help me help you out in deciding.
At the end of the day, UChi is an amazing school and congrats for getting in! Just don't be the old drunk guy in 30 years working traffic court in an old suit talking about how I got into UChi back in 2017.... LOL at those dudes. I know a couple. Guy named Burt drinks Wild Turkey out of a thermos. I don't think he got into UChi to be fair though.
Congrats on both! My vote would be for Chicago as well. I was waitlisted there last year and easily would have gone for it if they would have accepted me. Reasons why? They are consistently one of the top schools, if not the top, in the NJL rankings and have some of the best firm placement. Clerkship ranking is top 5 every year when it comes to federal clerkships. Academia is a viable opportunity. Literally whatever you wanna do you probably can coming out of Chicago.
Cons: it is arguably more rigorous than other schools. Money (obvi). Super rigorous and unusual grading system (can go either way actually).
Again it's your decision. The pros definitely out weigh the cons if you ask me. But regardless, I would definitely choose Chicago.
I vote for University of Chicago. What a really great accomplishment.
Just gonna throw this out there - I actually got a job in the legal sector before going to law school, and it was a great move, because I have such a better idea what I do and don't like, and where I would and would not like to work. Had no idea how much I actually love complicated points of law, love real estate transactions, love paperwork, etc. I'm not being sarcastic, but I wouldn't have known this without experience. Throwing your eggs in the BigLaw basket is pretty risky when you don't have any idea if you'll love it or hate it, just gonna throw that out there. You might know what you like right now, but you really don't know what your tastes will be like 5 years from now. Chicago opens doors, but bro, I know of lawyers at firms size 15-20 with seriously messed up lives (alcohol problems, etc) from all the stress and workload. I can't imagine BigLaw to be much better. Be really careful before you throw everything in that direction. I worked at a DA's office before, and DA's in my area (CA) usually make around 60 grand a year, but have much more of a work life balance than do most other lawyers and it's EXTREMELY satisfying work. Check out your options and know what they are. Lower ranked schools are limiting, but so is debt. Also in my opinion, however, Chicago just sounds incredible. I mean Milton Friedman, Stephen Levitt and Stephen Dubbner, Richard Epstein, Barak Obama, James Q. Wilson, the list goes on - Some of the greatest intellectuals (especially economists) who've ever lived hail from there. What an incredible place to study. On a deeply personal level though, I can say this. Everyone says "I grew up poor," etc., all that BS, but really, growing up my Dad was a mechanic and my Mom worked at a grocery store. Maybe I wasn't as poor as someone who has to eat paint chips to stay alive, but heres what I did learn: If you can make enough to meet your basic needs (food, health insurance, etc.), you can live a really happy life. You don't need a ton of money, and really, after a while money can actually hold you back from things that matter. All this to say eff BigLaw, in my opinion, and also in my opinion, I think you'll probably say off BigLaw at some point.
@combsni116 said:
@denis206 you have an interesting take. I don't know why I would only last 3 years in biglaw. Granted I only know Partners at a couple big law firms but I've been told that most people quit. I was told that a lot of them think it is a ruthless business and that is why they end up leaving. Even if it is, I've never had a problem being ruthless or doing whatever it takes to get ahead. But as you have pointed out, you never know how you are going to feel about something until you get in it and there is a chance that I will hate it and the hours that come along with working at a biglaw firm. Uchicago definitely gives me all the prestige that I will need. However, there is another school that is second-tier but they have connections to a Supreme Court Justice. Clarence Thomas has given many clerkships to students that go to Creighton. This isn't to say that they would take the cake over Chicago but my point is there are opportunities everywhere. I absolutely agree with everyone, when they say that the University Chicago will open doors in a lot of places will not open or that will not become open to me until much later in my career. However, this decision is not as easy for me as other people are making it out to be. Both of Indiana University's law schools are on the table and Michigan state is appealing because it is in my home state and my soon-to-be fiance lives here. I like Chicago Kent because that is the school that all but one of my connections in the city went to the other went to DePaul.
I hear you man. To answer your question why you'd only last 3 years in BL? Well it is a multi-facetted answer. 1) Most people find it miserable and become broken and eventually leave or are given a soft push out. There is a lock-step up and out model. (Developed and known as the Cravath model) Essentially, you are promoted to failure. I implore you to talk to some big lawyers that you can get to know and trust. I mention it a lot, but I work with maybe 10% "Big law refugees" we call them, and EVER SINGLE ONE has expressed the same thing. The misery and the constant fire drills and bullshit work. It can't be that all those smart people came to the same conclusion, so much so that they would take pay cuts to go into finance. (Pay cuts at least for now.... but still leave law all together.) The fact that many have top degrees allow them to get into consulting, finance, and ibanking.... You aren't going to get an interview without a top 6 degree. Also, most people don't leave big law because of the ruthlessness of it... That's just... no. They get pushed out or leave when they find they want to have a family and move to less demanding in-house jobs or get out of law all together. The average BL V500 employee lasts 3 years or less. They WANT to push you out because clients don't want to pay you more for doc review and simple tasks that first years can do for much less. It's the way of the business model. And you may be the perfect person who will "do whatever it takes to get ahead." However, trust me, firms and Wall Street are FULL of people just like you.
Connections I hate to tell you are really overrated when it comes to post-law school employment. Everyone knows someone, but when it comes time for you to get a job you don't want to risk it. UCHi is 100% the right answer here and anyone I know who works in law would agree.
Donald Trump's top attorney went toThomas Cooley.... anecdotes are just that. And times have changed.
You at this point have absolutely no idea what big law is (Beyond the 160-180k) or probably what most law work consists of. Who knows what you will end up becoming interested in? UChi opens all the doors you could ask for. Kent and all the other Tier 2s are going to require nepotism, luck, and you being at the top of your class to get near any of the the rare opportunities ruthlessness will give you.
Again, reach out and network and talk to some actual lawyers. It's an amazing opportunity that I think you'd regret. Matter of fact, I'd recommend getting a job in law right now as a paralegal or as an analyst at an iBank. The work and hours are pretty comparable.
Just trying to look out for you man. Either way, again, congrats on getting into UChi. T4 school. Go and don't look back. :)
Joining the party late here.. but it seems like you are super defensive and trying to stand up for a t2/t3 alternative to UofC. That's fine. It is your life, your debt and your career that is in discussion. Obviously it impacts you more than anyone else. I think your best option is to try and leverage more scholarship money from Northwestern. Tell them you got applied to UofC and they will likely come back with a nice offer.
As far as opportunities go.. NW and UofC will basically give you the same doors if you want big law in the midwest. Both have obvious ties to Chicago firms and you will be making the same out of school at both. NW is my dream school and I don't have a damn shot at UofC, but I would not settle for a t2/t3 with your situation. Leverage a better offer a a lower ranked T14.
sounds like a wonderful idea. you figured out what all those ivy goers couldn't.
Personally, I am influenced as much by pragmatism as prestige/ambition. I would bite the debt and go to U of C. If being a lawyer is what you want, why not shoot for as high as possible. The worst likely outcome (unless you're a horrible law student) is that you're stuck for 3-4 years at a less prestigious big law job you don't like (110k) to pay off your debt. The benefits are that you get the pride of graduating from a T5, job placement in any legal field, and an amazing achievement to put on your resume for any job.
If you to a 2nd Tier school, it is possible that you will end up with a big law job; however, considerably less likely. This also will determine your entire future career in the legal profession, eliminate legally--related jobs like academics, and not be an impressive mark on your resume in general. Worst, likely outcome: You get (or don't get, given the over saturated market) a basic law job at 65k and work your way up 90k.
Most importantly from my perspective, when I'm old and crusty, I would rather look back and say, "Paying off that debt sucked for 4 years," than "I had the opportunity to go to one of the best law schools in the world and didn't."
Regardless of whether you come to share my perspective, I hope this helps!
PS: America is doomed so debt doesn't even matter, and only U of C will be respected internationally.
@combsni116 Almost everyone you will find in law school, whether it is a T-5 or T-70, will be over achievers who have always performed at a very high level. Many of them will be people who got into top-ranked law schools but chose to go lower because of the scholarship money. Everyone wants to be in the top 5 percentile of the class but only 5% of the people can do so. In other words, you will be no different than your peers and assuming you will be at the top of your class a priori is dangerous. Just food for thought!
Personally, I'd go to the best school regardless of money when we are talking calibers of top 5 and tier 2. It's a lot of money, but the door a UChi JD will open up is well worth the debt. Also, don't ever assume or make decisions that you'll be the top X% at whatever law school. Grading is very different and professors can be quite mercurial with their grading.
Chicago law, without a trust or rich parents, is going to cost you over $300k + interest in debt. Chicago gives you the best job prospects. But even if you make $170k+ as an associate, you're basically going to be living like a pauper for a long time. I don't know if that's worth it.
Do you not have offers from other T14s? I'm assuming that if you got into Chicago you should have substantial scholarship from a T10. I would attend the T10 with scholarship money and forget your full rides to second tier and T25 schools. (FWIW, that is what I'm doing, as hard as it is to pass up some of the T6. Take the money and run.)
I'm in a similar boat in regards to debt. It's a very scary number to take on. However, I can tell you that if I had been offered a spot at U of C, I would take it. Have you looked at Law School Transparency? It's ranked higher in their employment score than HYS.
https://www.lstreports.com/national/
A lot of the HYS stuff I'm sure is lower because many are doing joint MBA and going into consulting after. But if you're betting on something, U of C is a very very safe bet to have. Look, my bro went to a second tier school and got a BL job. He's been at it for a very long time now (graduated in 2007) and does a very good job and is clearly valuable to the firm. However, at the end of the day, he'll never be offered partner because he doesn't have the name brand. It's bullshit and unfair perhaps, but that's the legal world.
If you're not into BL, then yes you really need to consider whether the debt is worth it. If your dream is BL, then go with what will guarantee it for you.
Anyone have opinions on taking a full ride at a number 20 school vs. paying sticker price for a T14?
@mheannarino27 I just grew up around a lot of businessmen. Though my mother alienated her wealthy family, I have been able to keep those connections. Naturally, a lot of these people are very anti going into debt. I am also very stubborn. I could easily take over a couple businesses and make the $400,000 or $500,000 year that a lot of people would dream of but I want to pave my own path. I am far more proud of my connections to Lotus and General Motors than any connection I have with my family and I do believe that I could use a lot of my professional connections to land some of these larger jobs. I have listed a lot of the reasons why I like Chicago Kent and schools like it. I have also seen people go for the Ivy Leagues / more prestigious schools and fall on their face. My cousin went to Yale and his career isn't exactly thriving in the financial industry. I still haven't made up my mind yet. I love the University Chicago and the culture there but I have my reservations.
@combsni116 said:
@aaronkeegan92975 @denis206 there are also some midsize firms that pay pretty well. For instance, in Detroit, Butzel Long starts people off at like a hundred and five or a hundred and ten thousand. Often, pay ranges from firm to firm.
Absolutely! I've just made it my crusade to let you know that these mid sized law jobs aren't easy to land. Like I said, often they are HARDER to land than big law. A big law firm class can sometimes take 50-80 new hires a year with the model of most leaving (attrition) Mid law pays amazingly well at places like Buzel, but a lot of people if you check their firm info are laterals from V100s or straight out of top schools.
I want to put a disclaimer that a lot of this is what I've been taught and told by mentors and younger associates. But I really want to reiterate that "mid law" isn't like the easier version of big law to get. The prestige aspect is lesser and in that regard it can be and some places just are easier. Defining mid law is hard because it doesn't have that same lexicon and number-based ranking Vault firms considered big law has. But of course, "paying well" is really something that I've learned is one of the most subjective things in life. If my 18 year old self told me I could make my paycheck now my I'd be naive enough to think I would be rich and dating Mila Kunis. Then life happens, taxes hit, student loans, and just living in a city where a cardboard box is 2k.
Another interesting phenom about working in finance/big law/mid law and whatever is that there are always people you get to know who make 10x more than you. I honestly think most people would be ecstatic making 250k a year. But no matter what you tell yourself when you find out so and so partner makes 2.5 million and you see their house and life.... I don't know. It doesn't make you feel poor, but that shock goes away. Driving a BMW is great until your VP pulls up in a Ferrari. And his boss has a driver. It's all relative bs because people who tend to get into law and big law specifically are status/money obsessed driven people. So that's my take on it.
Totes right that mid law firms that pay well are out there. Just have to figure out whether you want to forgo OCI for big law or try and gun for it. Or, again, you can lateral like most associates at these firms do after 3-5 years in big law. I think that seems to be the hardest part of navigating landing these jobs right out of school. You have to sort of go "all in" sometimes and do a summer or two at a mid sized firm and hope for an offer, whereas big law firms tend to let you know upfront barring some major fuck up you'll get an offer. That's a hard thing to turn down. Mid law firms don't generally publish their offers so it's so damn hard to know what you're getting into. Also, big law summer associates that pay market give you like 3-4k a week, wine and dine you, fancy lunches, and just make you feel special. From what LITTLE I know, mid sized firms don't pay as well, don't have the wine and dine aspect and you just don't get that feeling of prefstige, which again many in this profession are after.
@aaronkeegan92975 @denis206 there are also some midsize firms that pay pretty well. For instance, in Detroit, Butzel Long starts people off at like a hundred and five or a hundred and ten thousand. Often, pay ranges from firm to firm.
P.S. Sorry to everyone for my constant grammatical and spelling errors on my comments. I swear I'm not that illiterate. I often sit up at night and answer from my iPhone/iPad and not a laptop/desktop.
For some reason it tends to have me making more spelling, grammar, and just poor sentence structure. Also, I didn't sleep tonight, but I don't have much to do today besides errands and a doc appointment.
@jhaldy10325
@denis206 Thanks for your answer! You definitely have some great points and info I wasn't sure of. I did just graduate from Texas A&M which boasts one if the elite alumni networks; extremely close knit and especially in Texas. I am planning to start my networking once this LSAT monster is slain by starting with fellow Aggies.
I definitely get the work-life balance and understand it won't be great; just the nature of the beast, but I'm ok with that. I definitely have noticed the regional school recruiting; seems like a bit more of a even playing field though my dream school is SMU.
Thanks again for your thoughts! I really appreciate it! Always good to hear a different point of view!
Of course, man! If you went to A&M and go to any of the mentioned schools and do well I would bet almost anything you can land the mid-sized job you want. Ties are big and A&M's network is massive vis-a-vis TX law, so you will be just fine. Work hard and explore. With my little experience, I think one of the biggest faults of 0Ls is saying they want something they don't even truly understand. Mid law can mean a lot of things. So just to re-iterate, the best advice I've ever gotten is to find out what type of law you're interested in and pursue it. See where it leads you. The money will come if you're good. And if your convictions are such that money isn't what motivates you, the rewards of helping folks will. I also believe there's somewhere in the middle where you can do both. I hope that's where we end up. Good money. Good work. And doing something we can stand.
This is a bit off topic, but I thought it was appropriate to post here: My best friend is in med school and we talk about law versus medicine shit quite a lot. And there are so many similarities. For instance, a lot of med students early on want to be pediatric heart surgeons or something of the sort. (Much seen as the same prestige as big law) They however never really know the stress involved and the weight of possibly fucking up. In med you might kill someone. In law, you'll have your partner throw a folder at you and admonish you -- so clearly med seems worse; but still, there's this idea that we always want to chase prestige and money without truly knowing what it is OR, more importantly, having a good life. You seem like the rare type of lawyer looking for a good balance whereby one can make a decent living and have a somewhat normal life. I admire that and think that's a very good thing! Don't lose that.
Keep that balance and happiness as your north star. The truth is (And if anyone tells you different they are bullshitting, crazy, or both) is that law is pretty boring. You read. You summarize. You do a lot of boring shit that you're told has to be done by 5pm when it doesn't have to be done until next Thursday. It's OK to do it for the money, but I also think having some end goal and perspective like you have is imperative. For me, I eventually want to be in a place where I can do several things law and non-law related. I want to start a hedge fund, write, be a success coach, a father, business owner. I want to do it all!
Sorry for another one of my long posts, just happy to hear you're on the right path it seems. A&M is an amazing school. Start networking now and you will be good at UT/Baylor/SMU. Literally, message people from mid-sized firms and just talk to them. They either won't answer or take 2-weeks and will answer and then you build a relationship. I met some random guy 10 years my senior at a V5 via Facebook. I creepily messaged him and he got back to me. It took 2 weeks, but now we've gotten drinks 2 times and talk every now and again. A good person to know and a reference should I need one... Network = Net worth. ;)
@denis206 Thanks for your answer! You definitely have some great points and info I wasn't sure of. I did just graduate from Texas A&M which boasts one if the elite alumni networks; extremely close knit and especially in Texas. I am planning to start my networking once this LSAT monster is slain by starting with fellow Aggies.
I definitely get the work-life balance and understand it won't be great; just the nature of the beast, but I'm ok with that. I definitely have noticed the regional school recruiting; seems like a bit more of a even playing field though my dream school is SMU.
Thanks again for your thoughts! I really appreciate it! Always good to hear a different point of view!
@aaronkeegan92975 said:
@denis206 So I have been following this thread pretty regularly. I have a question that is slightly off but still relevant, and I figured you (or anyone else!) could give me an interesting perspective. I have been debating in my head of whether to even to do big law. I have no want whatsoever to go work in NYC/D.C./Chicago or in the Northeast; I want to stay in Texas. The $180,000 salary isn't the end all be all for me either, so I have sort have leaned away from it. I do want some sort of work-life balance, and yes I understand it won't be perfect because this is the nature of the beast.
With that being said, I have started to look at the mid-sized firms (give or take). They still offer competitive wages (at least to me) and seem to be a bit less on the craziness. I have looked at their staffs and have seen plenty of TT and even a few TTT depending on the location (I want to be in Houston or Dallas-Fort Worth). I am aiming high for school though (Southern Methodist, University of Houston, Baylor,.....maybe UT though I don't know if my resume is what they'll be looking for).
From reading this thread though, and please forgive me if I have misconstrued what you have said, but it seems like that some of these TT and TTT don't even have a prayer to get a job period at even a mid-sized firm since the rest of the T level students will be grabbing them. Just curious on your thoughts.
Hey @aaronkeegan92975,
Happy to answer your question. Now like I've said not all T2/T3s are created equal if you will. And not all cities/states are either. Texas big law is very big on what are called 'ties." So this means that they tend to prefer people born, raised, and/or have been residents of Texas/southern region for some time. Mid-sized firms can be gotten with T3/T2 degrees... However, good paying, mid-sized firms jobs tend to be unicorns in many ways. They exist, but they are few are far between and generally don't hire as many students. The firm is just smaller, so less people in - less people out.
So it is almost paradoxically harder to some extent to land a mid-sized firm job. Many BL lawyers actually covet these mid-law jobs that pay 90k or whatever and have half the required billables as a typical big firm.
I think you've understood what I've written pretty well. If you go to a t2/t3 don't expect a big law job. It isn't that is impossible to get, but you're paying a lot of time and money for something that maybe LITERALLY 10 kids in the entire class might get. And 5 of those kids probably had connections of some sort. And the other 5 networked like crazy and had amazing grades, law review. Too much serendipity involved. Another thing I forgot to mention, is that often times where you went to UG matters a lot. A good example is a discussion I was having with a friend I know who attends Fordham. She and I were talking about Fordham and big law and all that. She brought up a great point that it seems like all the kids who get/got big law from Fordham went to Ivy Undergrads. Now this could just be that they are self-selected and are smarter, and thus had better grades. But it also is equally true that they probably had better networks. Something 0Ls often under look are the idea of networks. Which undergrad you attend and subsequent law school you choose has a massive effect on your job placement opportunities because of that network. That is again why all T2/T3s aren't the same. The older ones have larger networks and some T2s used to be T1s and that changes the calculus a bit on how useful that current T2 network could be.
However, again, TX BL market is unique and if you have ties and go to a place like Baylor or UT; do well, network, I think you might have a decent shot at big law. I'm not AS familiar with TX big law as I am with NYC/general corp. But this is what I know...
My whole thing has been to please find out why you want to practice "big law' and what type you might be interested in. Most juniors of course start out doing M&A-esque busy work as they learn quickly during their first year. I've met some happy BL lawyers and mostly stressed out ones on 2 xanax bars a day. One thing they all agree on is the work is boring and stressful at the same time. Odd combo that I never understood until I got my job now.
I imagine it being like having to do an all-nighter writing a 15-page paper due at 8am on something mundane. It isn't hard, but it sounds awful, too.
A little about me:
I started off wanting to be a finance/business lawyer helping people years ago. I didn't understand fully how balkanized the big law deal groups were. I somehow got the big law fever that many get without truly knowing what it is. I was lucky enough to find some great mentors who are ex and current attorneys show me. Through them now I know more than a few junior associates at a couple firms and I'm happy to call them friends. If you want work-life balance, law probably isn't the best profession, period. That said, if you could land a mid-sized firm job many can be just as demanding as typical BL firms, but most are not from my understanding. Firm culture varies significantly in NYC as I'm sure it does in Texas. I know Kirkland Ellis is known as a "sweatshop" whereas Vinson & Elkins is spoken about as more "less shitty." The trade off is K&E is more prefstigious, lol. And lawyers tend to care a lot about those things.
My only real advice is to explore and talk to as many people/lawyers as you can. See what type of law actual interests you and perhaps there is a group within a mid-sized firm you'd really like. Many firms have everything from employment and labor, tax, to capital markets and M&A. Some people find they hate litigation but love deal work. Others are genuinely interested in labor law... Look into it all, talk to some people (Hell, I've randomly linkedin messaged a few people and learned some cool stuff) Many want to help. Lawyers love talking about themselves, lmao.
So just to recap: If you're from TX a mid-sized firm job from Baylor/UT is certainly possible. I think top 20% a year from UT gets BL and I'm assuming that means mid law is also very possible from top 20-30%. (Check the 509s because I'm guessing here)
Mid-sized firm jobs are in some cases harder to get then big firms because they hire less people. So keep that in mind. And check the bios anytime you see a T3 grad at a firm. If they were hired in 2005 then .... well ... that's different then if they were class of 2014.
Find out some more about what interests you specifically about different areas of law. Like I said, for me I'm genuinely interested in finance. I've worked doing it now and have found that the legal side seems to be more where I'm going to be better off because of my skill set. To be promoted past where I'm at now I need better math and analytical skills or an MBA. None of which I am interested in. I much better fit into the lawyer realm of deal work. So off to be a scribe for an iBank hopefully in a few years. I am grateful that I know what I'm getting into.
Keep an open mind. If I go to law school and fall in love with something else, I'm going to give it a shot. A long time ago I interned at a real estate law office and actually remember really liking it. It was face-paced, not boring, and seemed legit: like you were talking with people and just rubber stamping forms. I liked the personal aspect of it all. Not that I did much more than shadow and file shit.
I hope I've answered you're question though. If not feel free to send a PM for more specifics. :)
This is a link to a 3 minute video about a Georgetown Law grad who makes $40,000 per year and lives with his Mom. It's worth watching if you are considering any law debt. It could save your life, financially.
If you have over $100k from Northwestern, I'd take it.
Northwestern is an AWESOME school. Its big law numbers are great, especially in Chicago. Plus, with your connections, Northwestern with money is an easy sell imo. You don't even need to be at the top of the pack with connections (which is NEVER a guarantee, even at a second-tier school - even if I have no doubt that you are smart and hardworking) to land Chicago big law if you go to Northwestern.
Sure, it might not be as prestigious, which isn't great if you want to be a judge or in academia. But from what I understand, if you are going solely the firm route, Northwestern is a perfectly great school. It also gives you the option to move out of the Midwest, should that need ever arise. Dunno if you can really do that with the other schools you are looking at.
OK not to be that person but I'm going to say it again: do you not have other T14 offers with money?
I get why you don't want $300k in debt. That's really not fun, and it may not be worth it for many people. But the offers you have (or at least listed here) are really extreme. Choosing between UChi and second tier schools is really like apples and oranges and I'm not sure how your options are so...different.
If you've somehow decided that you are not going to take your other T14 offers with money...you should really reconsider. That would be a happy medium here.
If UChi is your only T14 acceptance and you're extremely debt averse/leaning toward a second tier...you should maybe reapply next year with a higher LSAT or at least apply to more schools. A UChi acceptance should almost always equal scholarship money at a lower T14.