Actually more interestingly, it shows that law school admissions have long been quite meritocratic with significant emphasis given to LSAT and GPA. Which are characteristics given high importance in the USNWR law school ranking.
Note however with the law schools abandoning USNWR, becoming more holistic and less emphasis on traditional merit, it’s not clear that someone like Jack Smith will get admitted to HLS in the future.
There are almost none that are only opened by a prestigious undergrad degree. If you attend a prestigious university for grad school that’s generally what counts for the rest of your career, regardless of your undergrad institution.
Finance and consulting are notable exceptions.
I think you missed the word only.
That’s certainly not true in consulting, and very rare in finance. It may help to attend a prestigious undergrad institution, but it’s not the only way in.
You had to qualify your own statement with an “almost” and a “generally.” Without those words, your statement would have been incorrect. That is the point.
There are also opportunities that present themselves at universities that might be considered less prestigious, or even not prestigious at all that aren’t available to those at prestigious institutions. There is a perception that prestigious institutions will avail one of all the opportunities of “lesser” schools, and then some. That’s not true. They are simply different.
We’ve gone over this ad nauseum on this cite. It is simply not true that consulting and finance positions are only possible through prestigious undergrads.
Frankly I don’t understand your point. There are generally no absolutes in life.
Somewhere in the US this year, someone will get into med school with an improbably low undergrad GPA. Still, the best advice for students is to try to get the highest undergrad GPA they can achieve if they want to go to medical school.
Similarly, to work for a top investment bank, or consulting with MBB, it is best to come from a prestigious university with your undergrad degree. This may be upsetting to you but it is the truth. My point in all of these posts is that this almost religious passion that some people have on this site for advising students not to pursue prestige can be the incorrect advice in some instances.
If I haven’t made my point clear by now, it is beyond my capacity and I never will.
Actually, I thought you were making a different point and was responding to that. From the second part of your post #41, the point I thought you were trying to make is that you cannot get open the highest doors with only an undergraduate degree, and that a graduate degree was required. Never mind.
I know, and in the past have given examples that say it is possible to get into selective IB positions from non-target schools (such as Alabama), but that more work is required.
So all of this ink is being spilled over how to launch a career in IB and MBB? I guess that the students interested in these niche fields are still paying attention but everyone else tuned out long ago.
LOL, and about the 1,000th thread to end up in the same place.
Not just those fields. Those were just some examples.
I’m pretty sure students like Jack Smith will always do well, even if law schools stick with their decision to withdraw from USNWR participation.
He was clearly a brilliant student, and I have the feeling that even beyond test scores and grades, he probably had incredible recommendations and people helping him from SUNY Oneonta…as I have seen the large fish in a small pond often have more resources being used for them than many may suppose are even available in those small ponds.
And schools like Harvard Law love to point out those acceptances from the ‘unexpected’ school. That too is part of their holistic review. 
I would hope that everyone posting could agree on several factors that can and often do contribute to eventual professional success. The following list is hardly all inclusive. Personal drive, intellectual ability, family resources and support, access to academic opportunity, luck, etc.
The availability or lack of these resources often creates a pathway towards personal and professional outcomes.
Reasonable people will tend to agree that a child born into poverty faces obstacles that a high socio economic kid likely won’t face. A child blessed with great intellectual ability will be more likely to thrive then a child not as blessed and so on.
At the same time our collective experience thankfully proves that humans have the capacity to surpass and overcome any and all limitations and obstacles.
Prestigious schools tend to be a touch point for kids who have either benefited throughout their lives from having experienced many of these positive factors or who have successfully overcome shortcomings or hardship. Elite schools go out of their ways to attract the well connected, highly motivated, proven track record, along with those amazing kids who have overcome challenges and risen to to the top. This intersection of talent and societal leverage is what these institutions are built upon.
Consequently those kids that attend these prestigious institutions tend to disproportionately achieve professional success. They are pre vetted and then offered amazing resources and are surrounded by like minded and motivated peers and a network of alum. They incrementally benefit as graduates by a society that “recognizes” their credentials as high achievers with access to other high achievers.
So yes it helps to attend an elite but it is hardly a guarantee. The individual and circumstances still matter as a determinant of outcome.
Conversely we thankfully live in a society in which you don’t need to attend a specific school or be born with money to thrive and can overcome health or family challenges and hard work is often as important as book smarts. While it is a recent realization by i banks and consulting firms that the top students at a state school may (and often do) outperform bottom quartile kids from Ivies that understanding is now not just understood but being acted upon.
Once again I will use the term pathways. A kid who has checked every societal box of achievement and has access to resources along the way will invariably have an easier time getting into an “elite” profession. Conversely the path for an amazingly talented but under credentialed graduate will likely be more challenging but hardly insurmountable.
The good news is that we are experiencing a time when elite schools have broadened access to their campuses based on potential for achievement and employers are digging deeper into applicant pools looking at the individual vs credential. Simply put you don’t need to attend an elite college to succeed but it likely helps in my opinion. The reason it helps however is mostly a function of it serving as a data point on a path that others can now follow or join by virtue of hard work, talent and intellect.
Sorry for the long winded post but as I read through the thread it occurred to me that many of the comments that appeared divergent were not in fact mutually exclusive. Lastly a shout out to @itsgettingreal21 who has helped my thoughts on this subject evolve over time.
Feel free to elaborate.
No more IB! From here on posts are going to be deleted without warning. Feel free to move the discussion to PM. Thank you!
Yes, CC needs a comet emoji for topics that reappear regularly. 
I think part of the issue is the word “prestigious” which conjures up top 10 and top 20 schools. UGA college of business sends kids to New York to work as consultants and for MBB every year. Granted, it’s not a ton of them and they are typically groomed through the Corsair society at Terry to get these jobs but it is not rare. Would it be easier coming from an Ivy, absolutely.
A family member from Indiana went to IU and interned in NYC as a consultant and accepted a full time job there. Of highly ranked business schools, Kelley is probably the easiest to get into and has great results.
One of my friend’s kids is at Texas and working at Goldman Saks in NYC this summer (think that is where she said - major player I had heard of).
My Georgia Tech kid has an internship at a consulting firm in NYC this summer (his job is in engineering consulting but they do lots of other stuff).
These are all strong state schools with good to great business programs but not the ones you typically hear of when talking about prestigious business schools, except perhaps Texas. I know Kelley is up there to ranking wise but not what people usually think of.
That’s just it. It’s not unexpected at all.
I think it’s useful to see just how different holistic admission is between Harvard College and Harvard Law School. Here is a scattergram of admissions to Harvard College from Niche.
And here is one for Harvard Law School from Law School Numbers.
I recognize that these are two different sources with likely different methodologies and different biases, but I think that the essential truth remains. When it comes to Harvard College admissions, you can have perfect stats and that alone gives you very little information about your chance of admission. Therefore it has the common (and mostly accurate) perception that they are “reaches for all”.
But when it comes just about any law school except Yale, you could determine if it is a match (meaning roughly 50% chance of admission) based just upon having a sufficiently high GPA and LSAT.
