tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
Center2450
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:34 pm

tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Center2450 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:49 pm

In at both. No money at either. From Florida. I can't decide. Not particularly attached to any location. Just curious as to what people have to say about each. I know the basic statistics, just curious if anyone has any experience with either school.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby 09042014 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:03 pm

Center2450 wrote:In at both. No money at either. From Florida. I can't decide. Not particularly attached to any location. Just curious as to what people have to say about each. I know the basic statistics, just curious if anyone has any experience with either school.


Do you want to work in Boston or North Carolina?

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:13 pm

No money? See how hard it is to get in-state at UNC. If it's easy, go there. If it's hard, go to neither.

User avatar
NoleinNY
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby NoleinNY » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:18 pm

Unless a) you want to stay in the South (specifically NC) b) have major cost reservations or c) can do without law school this year I vote Boston College. Based solely off visiting BC, and how I (and everyone else) got treated by the UNC admissions department. Everyone at BC, including students, faculty and staff, were ridiculously nice. The campus is beautiful, their ability to place in Big Law (if you were interested in that sort of thing) and clerkships are very good.


Of course, if you choosing NC or not attending this year meant I'd be taken off the BC waitlist AND given some other dude's scholly money... :P
Last edited by NoleinNY on Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:20 pm

PS neither is worth sticker. Keep that in mind.

User avatar
NoleinNY
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby NoleinNY » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:30 pm

rad law wrote:No money? See how hard it is to get in-state at UNC. If it's easy, go there. If it's hard, go to neither.


North Carolina law (G.S. 116-143.1) provides, "To qualify as a resident for tuition purposes, a person must have established legal residence (domicile) in North Carolina and maintained that legal residence for 12 months immediately prior to his or her classification as a resident for tuition purposes."

From UNC's Website:

20. How do I qualify for resident tuition?
Applicants seeking to pay the resident tuition rate must complete an additional residency form and submit that form with the application for admission. Based on the information reported on the residency form, a determination will be made regarding the applicant's intention to make North Carolina his/her place of permanent domicile. Students who do not qualify for resident tuition during the first year of law school may re-petition for resident status during their second and/or third years of school. Residency decisions will only be made in conjunction with an application for admission. It is not possible to have a residency determination made prior to the submission of an application.

Edit: Bolded to highlight potentially difficult part.

Center2450
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Center2450 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:33 pm

Alright new scenario.

Say both schools were free and I don't care where I live after. I am just interested in quality of education, national recognition, etc.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:33 pm

rad law wrote:PS neither is worth sticker. Keep that in mind.


Credited. Any other options?

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby 98234872348 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:35 pm

Your considerations should be:

a.
Desert Fox wrote:Do you want to work in Boston or North Carolina?


and b.
rad law wrote:PS neither is worth sticker. Keep that in mind.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:37 pm

Center2450 wrote:Alright new scenario.

Say both schools were free and I don't care where I live after. I am just interested in quality of education, national recognition, etc.


Not much national rep. Don't count on leaving their respective regions, though the higher grades you get the more possibilities you'll have. These schools are strong regionals. I would tell you to pick a region and stick with it.

User avatar
Regionality
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:13 am

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Regionality » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:58 pm

UNC never has a "sticker" price tag. OOS tuition is 30k/yr, which is the equivalent of a 15k annual scholarship without stipulations to a full-priced private school.

If in-state tuition is possible after 1L, then its the equivalent of getting your scholarship raised to 30k/yr without stipulations.

So I disagree that UNC is not worth sticker, because sticker doesn't exist there.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:59 pm

Regionality wrote:UNC never has a "sticker" price tag. OOS tuition is 30k/yr, which is the equivalent of a 15k annual scholarship without stipulations to a full-priced private school.

If in-state tuition is possible after 1L, then its the equivalent of getting your scholarship raised to 30k/yr without stipulations.

So I disagree that UNC is not worth sticker, because sticker doesn't exist there.


edit: That was just tuition, not COA. So never mind.

I'd lean towards NC in this situation. OP, do you have any other options?
Last edited by romothesavior on Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:03 pm

Regionality wrote:UNC never has a "sticker" price tag. OOS tuition is 30k/yr, which is the equivalent of a 15k annual scholarship without stipulations to a full-priced private school.

If in-state tuition is possible after 1L, then its the equivalent of getting your scholarship raised to 30k/yr without stipulations.

So I disagree that UNC is not worth sticker, because sticker doesn't exist there.


Factor in COL and it's still not worth going $150k into debt for a 15% shot at NLJ250 (and that was during the boom).

User avatar
Regionality
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:13 am

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Regionality » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:06 pm

rad law wrote:
Regionality wrote:UNC never has a "sticker" price tag. OOS tuition is 30k/yr, which is the equivalent of a 15k annual scholarship without stipulations to a full-priced private school.

If in-state tuition is possible after 1L, then its the equivalent of getting your scholarship raised to 30k/yr without stipulations.

So I disagree that UNC is not worth sticker, because sticker doesn't exist there.


Factor in COL and it's still not worth going $150k into debt for a 15% shot at NLJ250 (and that was during the boom).


That's a dumb thing to say. If someone got a 15k/yr scholly to BC people would be jumping all over it. It's all relative and you just like saying things aren't worth sticker which completely ignores that sticker is a word, not a specific cost, and that costs at different law schools are actually different.

Edit: And it would be entirely possible to live in NC for 10k/yr, meaning it would total out to 120k in debt...all of a sudden it's 80k cheaper than the unrepayable oft-cited 200k of non-forgivable debt. UNC is a mid-tier 1 school...it's gonna get people jobs that can pay back 750 dollars/month in loan repayments.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:20 pm

Regionality wrote:
That's a dumb thing to say. If someone got a 15k/yr scholly to BC people would be jumping all over it. It's all relative and you just like saying things aren't worth sticker which completely ignores that sticker is a word, not a specific cost, and that costs at different law schools are actually different.


I wouldn't go to BC for only 15k. That's not a good idea either.

Edit: And it would be entirely possible to live in NC for 10k/yr, meaning it would total out to 120k in debt...all of a sudden it's 80k cheaper than the unrepayable oft-cited 200k of non-forgivable debt. UNC is a mid-tier 1 school...it's gonna get people jobs that can pay back 750 dollars/month in loan repayments.


For deciding what to do/where to go, it is entirely reasonable to assume full COL without further info.

And I don't know what world you live in, but $120k is still a massive amount of debt for UNC.

User avatar
Regionality
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:13 am

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Regionality » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:30 pm

rad law wrote:
Regionality wrote:
That's a dumb thing to say. If someone got a 15k/yr scholly to BC people would be jumping all over it. It's all relative and you just like saying things aren't worth sticker which completely ignores that sticker is a word, not a specific cost, and that costs at different law schools are actually different.


I wouldn't go to BC for only 15k. That's not a good idea either.

Edit: And it would be entirely possible to live in NC for 10k/yr, meaning it would total out to 120k in debt...all of a sudden it's 80k cheaper than the unrepayable oft-cited 200k of non-forgivable debt. UNC is a mid-tier 1 school...it's gonna get people jobs that can pay back 750 dollars/month in loan repayments.


For deciding what to do/where to go, it is entirely reasonable to assume full COL without further info.

And I don't know what world you live in, but $120k is still a massive amount of debt for UNC.


No, really, it isn't. 200k is. 120k is a 40% discount to what everyone refers to as "sticker". Sticker is such a stupid, lazy word. It basically has grown to mean COA of 60-70k/yr, which is what people should say when they mean sticker. Sticker just means without a scholarship, but not having a scholarship to a dozen T1 law schools still means spending 30-70% less than "sticker" at a private law school w/o a scholly (both for in state and OOS situations)

The word sticker is actually quite a lazy and unhelpful term, and considering how unbelievably detail-oriented and hyper-correcting many TLSers are, it's unbelievable to me that sticker can mean anything from tuition of 25k/yr (or less for in-state tuition) to 48k/yr and it is used so often without actually talking hard numbers.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:34 pm

I like both of you and I agree with both of you to some degree. Regionality is right that "sticker" is too encompassing and that it can sometimes be misleading, while Radlaw is right that 120-150k is probably too much for UNC. I'll have about 100k in debt from WUSTL and it is ALWAYS in the back of my mind.

Also, while I agree that the term "sticker" is often misleading, I still can't think of a school outside the T20 I'd pay sticker for. I don't even think I would pay sticker outside of T10. So the distinction Regionality is making may be correct, but I still don't know how significant it is. 120k+ for a purely regional school with decent job prospects doesn't seem wise.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:39 pm

Regionality wrote:
rad law wrote:
Regionality wrote:
That's a dumb thing to say. If someone got a 15k/yr scholly to BC people would be jumping all over it. It's all relative and you just like saying things aren't worth sticker which completely ignores that sticker is a word, not a specific cost, and that costs at different law schools are actually different.


I wouldn't go to BC for only 15k. That's not a good idea either.

Edit: And it would be entirely possible to live in NC for 10k/yr, meaning it would total out to 120k in debt...all of a sudden it's 80k cheaper than the unrepayable oft-cited 200k of non-forgivable debt. UNC is a mid-tier 1 school...it's gonna get people jobs that can pay back 750 dollars/month in loan repayments.


For deciding what to do/where to go, it is entirely reasonable to assume full COL without further info.

And I don't know what world you live in, but $120k is still a massive amount of debt for UNC.


No, really, it isn't. 200k is. 120k is a 40% discount to what everyone refers to as "sticker". Sticker is such a stupid, lazy word. It basically has grown to mean COA of 60-70k/yr, which is what people should say when they mean sticker. Sticker just means without a scholarship, but not having a scholarship to a dozen T1 law schools still means spending 30-70% less than "sticker" at a private law school w/o a scholly (both for in state and OOS situations)

The word sticker is actually quite a lazy and unhelpful term, and considering how unbelievably detail-oriented and hyper-correcting many TLSers are, it's unbelievable to me that sticker can mean anything from tuition of 25k/yr (or less for in-state tuition) to 48k/yr and it is used so often without actually talking hard numbers.


Doesn't matter if it's a discount. $120k is a lot for a 15% shot (max) at the jobs that will give you the best chance of paying it off. $120k might be lowballing it anyways. You're not getting it.

For the purposes of TLS, in-state =/= sticker, at least in any thread I've read.

bestusernameever
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby bestusernameever » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:40 pm

Dude. With this much debt, it highly consider deferring, retaking the LSAT and hoping to get a better scholarship offer at another school. Its just not worth it for either one of these schools at "sticker" or "full price" (what TLSers want to call it)

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:50 pm

romothesavior wrote:I like both of you and I agree with both of you to some degree. Regionality is right that "sticker" is too encompassing and that it can sometimes be misleading, while Radlaw is right that 120-150k is probably too much for UNC. I'll have about 100k in debt from WUSTL and it is ALWAYS in the back of my mind.

Also, while I agree that the term "sticker" is often misleading, I still can't think of a school outside the T20 I'd pay sticker for. I don't even think I would pay sticker outside of T10. So the distinction Regionality is making may be correct, but I still don't know how significant it is. 120k+ for a purely regional school with decent job prospects doesn't seem wise.


Sticker encompasses a lot, but the difference between even $160k sticker and $200k sticker is not enough to make enough of a difference for me for most schools.

I'm one of those "HYSCCN are the only schools that are worth sticker" people (In-state =/= sticker).

tram988
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:51 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby tram988 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:21 pm

Lol seriously? Assuming both at sticker, BC in 2009 was placing 35% in NLJ250 while UNC was placing 15%.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

Also, BC has an advantageous location.

Even UNC had a lower clerkship rate than BC: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=75513

Furthermore, BC has been vacillating between rank #19 and #28 since 1987; when did UNC break t-30? Not that I'm a ranking whore, but it still shows that BC has been a top school for a long time.

Disclosure: I'm attending BC this fall but it seems to me to be a fairly easy choice assuming sticker at both. Both are regional schools, however, BC is appears to be the stronger regional. I also must say UNC is a great school and certainly was a contender for me.

fenway
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:30 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby fenway » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:37 pm

romothesavior wrote:I like both of you and I agree with both of you to some degree. Regionality is right that "sticker" is too encompassing and that it can sometimes be misleading, while Radlaw is right that 120-150k is probably too much for UNC. I'll have about 100k in debt from WUSTL and it is ALWAYS in the back of my mind.

Also, while I agree that the term "sticker" is often misleading, I still can't think of a school outside the T20 I'd pay sticker for. I don't even think I would pay sticker outside of T10. So the distinction Regionality is making may be correct, but I still don't know how significant it is. 120k+ for a purely regional school with decent job prospects doesn't seem wise.


i think your comments in the context of graduating into the current economy are understandable. however, I think looking long-term you may be slightly too conservative. furthermore, t-20 doesn't really mean anything (I think you effectively concede this with your comment about t-10). If you want to work in the Southest, UNC is going to be a reasonable long-term decision even at full tuition. Same goes for BC in New England. For someone who is looking to have more national options, it would not be a measured investment in any economy to assume such portability outside t-10/11. nonetheless, the demand for lawyers is going to extend beyond the enrollments for the t-10/11 at a near point in the coming future, so shying away from solid schools like UNC and BC with the mindset of staying in region might be a little too cautious. once you step down from the strong regional level of UNC/BCish schools, I would agree more with the belief that law school is a pretty risky investment considering the occasional volatility of the legal employment market. the vast majority of "lawyers" who are included in these alarming unemployment/debt statistics went to schools below (and proportionately far below) the strong regional and up threshold in terms of reputation. the number of exceptions you can point to for schools like BC/UNC (or I suppose t-10 even in present circumstances) are going to be higher in this current fiscal state, but in the scope of things those examples will continue to remain exceptions to a common rule

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby Grizz » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:41 pm

fenway wrote:
romothesavior wrote:I like both of you and I agree with both of you to some degree. Regionality is right that "sticker" is too encompassing and that it can sometimes be misleading, while Radlaw is right that 120-150k is probably too much for UNC. I'll have about 100k in debt from WUSTL and it is ALWAYS in the back of my mind.

Also, while I agree that the term "sticker" is often misleading, I still can't think of a school outside the T20 I'd pay sticker for. I don't even think I would pay sticker outside of T10. So the distinction Regionality is making may be correct, but I still don't know how significant it is. 120k+ for a purely regional school with decent job prospects doesn't seem wise.


i think your comments in the context of graduating into the current economy are understandable. however, I think looking long-term you may be slightly too conservative. furthermore, t-20 doesn't really mean anything (I think you effectively concede this with your comment about t-10). If you want to work in the Southest, UNC is going to be a reasonable long-term decision even at full tuition. Same goes for BC in New England. For someone who is looking to have more national options, it would not be a measured investment in any economy to assume such portability outside t-10/11. nonetheless, the demand for lawyers is going to extend beyond the enrollments for the t-10/11 at a near point in the coming future, so shying away from solid schools like UNC and BC with the mindset of staying in region might be a little too cautious. once you step down from the strong regional level of UNC/BCish schools, I would agree more with the belief that law school is a pretty risky investment considering the occasional volatility of the legal employment market. the vast majority of "lawyers" who are included in these alarming unemployment/debt statistics went to schools below (and proportionately far below) the strong regional and up threshold in terms of reputation. the number of exceptions you can point to for schools like BC/UNC (or I suppose t-10 even in present circumstances) are going to be higher in this current fiscal state, but in the scope of things those examples will continue to remain exceptions to a common rule


Even at strong regionals, there are no sure things or sure jobs. You can talk about long-term all you want, but most people only get one shot at biglaw, which offers the best chance to take care of large debts (like those caused by paying sticker). If you're cool with paying 10%-15% of your above-poverty income to the govt. for 25 years until you can IBR it though, be my guest.

fenway
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:30 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby fenway » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:44 pm

tram988 wrote:Lol seriously? Assuming both at sticker, BC in 2009 was placing 35% in NLJ250 while UNC was placing 15%.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

Also, BC has an advantageous location.

Even UNC had a lower clerkship rate than BC: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=75513

Furthermore, BC has been vacillating between rank #19 and #28 since 1987; when did UNC break t-30? Not that I'm a ranking whore, but it still shows that BC has been a top school for a long time.

Disclosure: I'm attending BC this fall but it seems to me to be a fairly easy choice assuming sticker at both. Both are regional schools, however, BC is appears to be the stronger regional. I also must say UNC is a great school and certainly was a contender for me.



*BC is in a stronger region. I wouldn't say that it is a "stronger regional" in a comparative sense between BC and UNC. The choice is purely one of geographic preference. Both great schools. Congrats on the admit. You should prepare adequately over the summer for the Godzilla challenge at Eagles Deli in Circle.

fenway
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:30 pm

Re: tied at 28: UNC vs. Boston College

Postby fenway » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:48 pm

rad law wrote:
fenway wrote:
romothesavior wrote:I like both of you and I agree with both of you to some degree. Regionality is right that "sticker" is too encompassing and that it can sometimes be misleading, while Radlaw is right that 120-150k is probably too much for UNC. I'll have about 100k in debt from WUSTL and it is ALWAYS in the back of my mind.

Also, while I agree that the term "sticker" is often misleading, I still can't think of a school outside the T20 I'd pay sticker for. I don't even think I would pay sticker outside of T10. So the distinction Regionality is making may be correct, but I still don't know how significant it is. 120k+ for a purely regional school with decent job prospects doesn't seem wise.


i think your comments in the context of graduating into the current economy are understandable. however, I think looking long-term you may be slightly too conservative. furthermore, t-20 doesn't really mean anything (I think you effectively concede this with your comment about t-10). If you want to work in the Southest, UNC is going to be a reasonable long-term decision even at full tuition. Same goes for BC in New England. For someone who is looking to have more national options, it would not be a measured investment in any economy to assume such portability outside t-10/11. nonetheless, the demand for lawyers is going to extend beyond the enrollments for the t-10/11 at a near point in the coming future, so shying away from solid schools like UNC and BC with the mindset of staying in region might be a little too cautious. once you step down from the strong regional level of UNC/BCish schools, I would agree more with the belief that law school is a pretty risky investment considering the occasional volatility of the legal employment market. the vast majority of "lawyers" who are included in these alarming unemployment/debt statistics went to schools below (and proportionately far below) the strong regional and up threshold in terms of reputation. the number of exceptions you can point to for schools like BC/UNC (or I suppose t-10 even in present circumstances) are going to be higher in this current fiscal state, but in the scope of things those examples will continue to remain exceptions to a common rule


Even at strong regionals, there are no sure things or sure jobs. You can talk about long-term all you want, but most people only get one shot at biglaw, which offers the best chance to take care of large debts (like those caused by paying sticker). If you're cool with paying 10%-15% of your above-poverty income to the govt. for 25 years until you can IBR it though, be my guest.



haha, well it's good to know there's one person I will never see as a debt statistic. power to you, big guy




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest