Top Law Schools

So I was just accepted to Tulane with a 30,000/yr as long as I maintain a 3.0 GPA. I would end up around 90,000 in debt which would be about the same debt as if I went to W and M.
What really interests me about Tulane is living in New Orleans for three years (the culture and music). I don't really have a preference for LA or VA. It seems that Tulane has some national reach and they have a great maritime law program which I would be really interested in.
I am from Florida but I'm interested in moving away, UF would be the cheapest option for me.
I was also accepted to USC and BU but at sticker (or at least they have given me no scholarships that I no about). I shouldn't even consider these, correct?
What do people think, Tulane or W&M?
Is Tulane worth the 90,000 in debt?
(Also, I am working in China so visiting the schools is out of the question)

W&M doesn't have national reach. Their maritime law program is worthless since there are so few jobs in that field and specialty programs don't help people get jobs.

If you want to work in LA after law school, go to Tulane. If you want to work in VA after law school, go to W&M. If you want to work somewhere else don't go to either of those schools. USC/BU aren't worth sticker.

Where do you want to work after law school?

jazzfest is cool, but it's not worth dealing with new orleans summers and attitude.
if you fly in for it twice, youll get the new orleans experience, minus 1 or 2 rebirth shows

Check to see what the median is at Tulane. What percentage of the class would a 3.0 put you at?

bk187 wrote:W&M doesn't have national reach. Their maritime law program is worthless since there are so few jobs in that field and specialty programs don't help people get jobs.

If you want to work in LA after law school, go to Tulane. If you want to work in VA after law school, go to W&M. If you want to work somewhere else don't go to either of those schools. USC/BU aren't worth sticker.

Where do you want to work after law school?

Tulane for LA... seriously? That seems a little silly.

I also wouldn't go to BU or USC sticker. I'm a big WM fan though (super low COL and low tuition, decentish placement).

Blindmelon wrote:

bk187 wrote:W&M doesn't have national reach. Their maritime law program is worthless since there are so few jobs in that field and specialty programs don't help people get jobs.

If you want to work in LA after law school, go to Tulane. If you want to work in VA after law school, go to W&M. If you want to work somewhere else don't go to either of those schools. USC/BU aren't worth sticker.

Where do you want to work after law school?

Tulane for LA... seriously? That seems a little silly.

I also wouldn't go to BU or USC sticker. I'm a big WM fan though (super low COL and low tuition, decentish placement).

I think they meant LA as in Louisiana, not Los Angeles.

TheFailboat wrote:

Blindmelon wrote:

bk187 wrote:W&M doesn't have national reach. Their maritime law program is worthless since there are so few jobs in that field and specialty programs don't help people get jobs.

If you want to work in LA after law school, go to Tulane. If you want to work in VA after law school, go to W&M. If you want to work somewhere else don't go to either of those schools. USC/BU aren't worth sticker.

Where do you want to work after law school?

Tulane for LA... seriously? That seems a little silly.

I also wouldn't go to BU or USC sticker. I'm a big WM fan though (super low COL and low tuition, decentish placement).

I think they meant LA as in Louisiana, not Los Angeles.

This is what I meant, probably should have been clearer considering USC was in the mix.

goldenflash19 wrote:Check to see what the median is at Tulane. What percentage of the class would a 3.0 put you at?

Median at Tulane is 3.25ish. Basically, OP would have to remain in the top 75%.

bk187 wrote:Their maritime law program is worthless since there are so few jobs in that field and specialty programs don't help people get jobs.

I wouldn't go that far. While I agree that there are few jobs in that arena, maritime candidates do better on the job market than their grades would indicate. From my experience, that seems to be the case primarily because of the recognition given to Tulane in that particular area as many maritime employers visit/resume collect here. However, I do agree that frequently specialty programs are of little value.

It is going to be an uphill climb from tulane. Essentially usc places around 30-40% biglaw. Tulane is around 15% biglaw. 90k for a 15% chance at biglaw is NOT a good gamble. I would rather gamble 200k for a 35-40% chance than 90k for 15% chance.

If you aren't ok with the 200k gamble, then well... you prob shouldn't go to law school.

Actually according to NLJ250, in 2010 USC placed 28% in BigLaw and Tulane placed 11.5%. BU beat them both at 30%. This all implies though that OP wants BigLaw. If so, BU/USC would be better. Keep in mind that tuition+COL at both USC/BU would be closer to 225. I don't know if I would put down that much in hopes of ending top 30% at a T20. Also, if you'd rather live & end up in Nola than LA or Boston then your choice is made.

tennisking88 wrote:Actually according to NLJ250, in 2010 USC placed 28% in BigLaw and Tulane placed 11.5%. BU beat them both at 30%. This all implies though that OP wants BigLaw. If so, BU/USC would be better. Keep in mind that tuition+COL at both USC/BU would be closer to 225. I don't know if I would put down that much in hopes of ending top 30% at a T20. Also, if you'd rather live & end up in Nola than LA or Boston then your choice is made.

Even on full loans, BU is only 180k. Tuition is only 40k/yr. It's the best worst option. USC is brutally expensive and Tulane and W&M have awful prospects.

Edit: Didn't read the OP close enough. If W&M is only 90k, go there.

bk187 wrote:

TheFailboat wrote:

Blindmelon wrote:

bk187 wrote:W&M doesn't have national reach. Their maritime law program is worthless since there are so few jobs in that field and specialty programs don't help people get jobs.

If you want to work in LA after law school, go to Tulane. If you want to work in VA after law school, go to W&M. If you want to work somewhere else don't go to either of those schools. USC/BU aren't worth sticker.

Where do you want to work after law school?

Tulane for LA... seriously? That seems a little silly.

I also wouldn't go to BU or USC sticker. I'm a big WM fan though (super low COL and low tuition, decentish placement).

I think they meant LA as in Louisiana, not Los Angeles.

This is what I meant, probably should have been clearer considering USC was in the mix.

Ah, my bad. I should have figured given that you are one a select few non-trolly posters.

From the Tulane grads I've talked to, top 10% gets the national reach that Tulane is known for (i.e. Los Angeles, NYC, and DC but not Chicago), top 1/3 gets south central (LA, Houston, etc.) + maybe Atlanta/Florida, and median gets LA and maybe Houston. Top 10% at similarly ranked schools would not give you the kind of reach that Tulane has, but of course, no one should bank on getting top 10% as a 0L. In other words, yes, Tulane has reach... for some people, but you should be content with living in LA for a long time if you go there.

I might shoot Tulane an e-mail, telling them that I received 40,000/yr at Washington and Lee and see if they can match that. If I could get 40,000/yr which is basically full tuition, I think Tulane would then be a real competitor.

Agreed?

I don't understand how people would recommend taking 100k debt for 10% chance at biglaw over 200k for 30% chance.

Regardless 100k is still A LOT of money. I think the correct answer would be for the OP to not go to any of these schools. However, if he wants to go, I thinkt he 200k for 30% chance is a better deal than going to a school with a 10% chance with 100k debt.

.

thexfactor wrote:I don't understand how people would recommend taking 100k debt for 10% chance at biglaw over 200k for 30% chance.

Regardless 100k is still A LOT of money. I think the correct answer would be for the OP to not go to any of these schools. However, if he wants to go, I thinkt he 200k for 30% chance is a better deal than going to a school with a 10% chance with 100k debt.

Since this is my view, I'll explain my reasoning for it (maybe other people have other reasons).

For me it's about guaranteeing freedom from debt by 10 years out. Even worst case scenario getting a job at a small firm making 40-50k, with 100k debt you will be debt free by 10 years out (I understand this ignores the actual worst case scenario of not getting a legal job). With 200k you're not going to be debt free in that same scenario until 20 years or so and that is the most likely scenario out of a school that places 30% into biglaw.

I understand the go big or go home reasoning, but for me being debt free in a reasonable amount of time overrides that.

How did you even draw up this list of schools? Four schools in completely different regions of the country? All of them are solid(ish), but all of them place regionally. You say you have no preference between LA/VA, but that's not good enough. You need to examine where your ties are, and go to the school in that region. See: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 1&t=178938 Honestly, it sounds like UF, or maybe Vandy (if you can get your LSAT up) would be the best schools for you.

I also don't think these schools are worth the debt you're looking to accrue. Tulane and W&M aren't worth 90k+, and USC and BU (both pretty good schools) are not worth sticker. Your odds of getting a job that allows you to service that kind debt will be around 30-40% tops. That may even be a generous estimation. I think you should retake the LSAT in June, and see what happens with a few more points.

make a poll brahbrah

.

.375 H&H Mag. wrote:Hey, I just posted essentially the same thing in a different "W&M?" thread, but this might be useful to your decision.
If you have good grades at W&M, you have really good options. (I know, it's a big IF, but it's doable, I know.) Several people headed to V10s in NYC this summer, obviously a bunch headed to DC Big Law, the school does relatively well in the Texas BigLaw market, and I know some folks headed to both Southern California and the Bay Area. I'd say top 20% has access to these solid options, and that's just in reference to BigLaw jobs. That mobility was the convincing factor for me, and in my experience networking in a number of different markets, the name recognition is sufficient if your grades are good enough.
Again, the big issue is grades, but that is going to be the case at any school outside of very top schools.
Hope this helps.

You can't bank on great grades though, and therein lies the problem. Median at W&M is tough. Obviously good grades at any of these schools will lead to good job prospects, no one disputes that. But the risk is that planning on getting good grades is a recipe for disaster.

bk187 wrote:

thexfactor wrote:I don't understand how people would recommend taking 100k debt for 10% chance at biglaw over 200k for 30% chance.

Regardless 100k is still A LOT of money. I think the correct answer would be for the OP to not go to any of these schools. However, if he wants to go, I thinkt he 200k for 30% chance is a better deal than going to a school with a 10% chance with 100k debt.

Since this is my view, I'll explain my reasoning for it (maybe other people have other reasons).

For me it's about guaranteeing freedom from debt by 10 years out. Even worst case scenario getting a job at a small firm making 40-50k, with 100k debt you will be debt free by 10 years out (I understand this ignores the actual worst case scenario of not getting a legal job). With 200k you're not going to be debt free in that same scenario until 20 years or so and that is the most likely scenario out of a school that places 30% into biglaw.

I understand the go big or go home reasoning, but for me being debt free in a reasonable amount of time overrides that.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

Since law is bimodal if you don't hit the biglaw/big clerkship/midlaw/big fed jackpot you will likely make under 50k a year. Chances are you will have to rely on IBR to pay off 100k debt. This is why it doesn't make sense to take the 100k with 10% chance of succeeding.

Check out the new NLJ250 placement rate.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

Tulane and WM isn't even on the list. Since the number 50th spot is at 6.5%, it is likely that WM and Tulane place roughly 6%. USC places at 32%.

This means that you are giving up 100k for 5x the placement rate!

thexfactor wrote:I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

Since law is bimodal if you don't hit the biglaw/big clerkship/midlaw/big fed jackpot you will likely make under 50k a year. Chances are you will have to rely on IBR to pay off 100k debt. This is why it doesn't make sense to take the 100k with 10% chance of succeeding.

Check out the new NLJ250 placement rate.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

Tulane and WM isn't even on the list. Since the number 50th spot is at 6.5%, it is likely that WM and Tulane place roughly 6%. USC places at 32%.

This means that you are giving up 100k for 5x the placement rate!

My issue with the "X times the placement" argument is that it justifies situations of 1% vs 5%. I can appreciate valuing 30% over 6% placement, but I don't think it makes sense to couch it in terms of X times the placement.

Why would you have to rely on IBR? If you start off around 40k/year, with modest raises I don't think it's inconceivable to pay off 100k (starting principal) in 10 years. That's something like 15k/year on average (paying less at the start and ramping up later). Granted it is very modest living, but it seems possible. Of course you could take longer if you valued a higher standard of living, but at least it's a feasible option.

did you decide bro, im interested in this