Chicago, Cornell, or BU Forum

[Tiago Splitter]

Well if I take a year off I have to work in order to live and pay off the UG loans which will start because I won't be enrolled in classes anymore. Working 40-60hrs a week does not leave much time for studying and the studying I would do would most likely be half-assed. Like I said I already tried studying while working (157) and then I studied while in school (168). The quality of studying while I'm working is not nearly as good as while I'm at school. Working would be a necessity if I take a year off. I also can't guarantee I'll get a better score. In my mind the pros do not outweigh the cons.

So then stop acting like the debt is a big deal. You have an opportunity to substantially decrease your debt by improving your LSAT score. You refuse to take that opportunity. Many of us have studied for the LSAT while working full time and ended up doing just fine.

[kerrigaa]

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston. The question here about Boston is which school has the lowest amount of competition for number of available Boston spots. Chicago has few trying for Boston and many Boston spots (firms at OCI would allow interviews for Boston offices, but most people filled those slots with other market interviews). I actually used this strategy to get CBs to the rarer markets-- make sure you are the only one on the schedule interviewing for that location and you have a money chance at a CB.

Are people really going to let this one go?

I mean--I was thinking Harvard... but ya I let it go.

[woeisme]

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston. The question here about Boston is which school has the lowest amount of competition for number of available Boston spots. Chicago has few trying for Boston and many Boston spots (firms at OCI would allow interviews for Boston offices, but most people filled those slots with other market interviews). I actually used this strategy to get CBs to the rarer markets-- make sure you are the only one on the schedule interviewing for that location and you have a money chance at a CB.

Are people really going to let this one go?

I sort of indirectly attacked that comment. I'll do it directly now...

for Boston region, it's probably something like ... Harvard > Yale > Stanford > Columbia/NYU/Chicago/Penn/Cornell > Duke/Virginia/Michigan/NU/Berkeley > GULC > BU/BC

[Bronck]

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston. The question here about Boston is which school has the lowest amount of competition for number of available Boston spots. Chicago has few trying for Boston and many Boston spots (firms at OCI would allow interviews for Boston offices, but most people filled those slots with other market interviews). I actually used this strategy to get CBs to the rarer markets-- make sure you are the only one on the schedule interviewing for that location and you have a money chance at a CB.

Are people really going to let this one go?

It's Taipei, nobody really takes his comments seriously anyway.

[Nelson]

Well if I take a year off I have to work in order to live and pay off the UG loans which will start because I won't be enrolled in classes anymore. Working 40-60hrs a week does not leave much time for studying and the studying I would do would most likely be half-assed. Like I said I already tried studying while working (157) and then I studied while in school (168). The quality of studying while I'm working is not nearly as good as while I'm at school. Working would be a necessity if I take a year off. I also can't guarantee I'll get a better score. In my mind the pros do not outweigh the cons.

So then stop acting like the debt is a big deal. You have an opportunity to substantially decrease your debt by improving your LSAT score. You refuse to take that opportunity. Many of us have studied for the LSAT while working full time and ended up doing just fine.

Never ceases to amaze me how much people complain about studying for the LSAT while working a 40 hour week. But they insist they'll be totally fine grinding 2000+ billable hours in NYC biglaw.

[kerrigaa]

Well if I take a year off I have to work in order to live and pay off the UG loans which will start because I won't be enrolled in classes anymore. Working 40-60hrs a week does not leave much time for studying and the studying I would do would most likely be half-assed. Like I said I already tried studying while working (157) and then I studied while in school (168). The quality of studying while I'm working is not nearly as good as while I'm at school. Working would be a necessity if I take a year off. I also can't guarantee I'll get a better score. In my mind the pros do not outweigh the cons.

So then stop acting like the debt is a big deal. You have an opportunity to substantially decrease your debt by improving your LSAT score. You refuse to take that opportunity. Many of us have studied for the LSAT while working full time and ended up doing just fine.

How am I acting like debt is a big deal? Oh, when I said I can worry about it in 3 years? Or when I said I can buy one less Ferrari? Or was it when I said I'll put half my salary to pay it off in ~5 years? I'm pretty sure the majority of people in this thread are the debt adverse ones and I've been playing the other side just to make sure I've seen all arguments. I'm looking for a balance between chances at Biglaw and less debt. If Cornell gives me the same chance at biglaw as Chicago and costs 33k less, then maybe that's what I should choose. If Chicago gives me a substantial increase in my chance at biglaw then maybe it's worth the extra 33k.

[Tiago Splitter]

How am I acting like debt is a big deal? Oh, when I said I can worry about it in 3 years? Or when I said I can buy one less Ferrari? Or was it when I said I'll put half my salary to pay it off in ~5 years? I'm pretty sure the majority of people in this thread are the debt adverse ones and I've been playing the other side just to make sure I've seen all arguments. I'm looking for a balance between chances at Biglaw and less debt. If Cornell gives me the same chance at biglaw as Chicago and costs 33k less, then maybe that's what I should choose. If Chicago gives me a substantial increase in my chance at biglaw then maybe it's worth the extra 33k.

In fairness your attitude has actually been rather non-chalant.

It would take a lot more than 33K for me to take Cornell over Chicago.

[kerrigaa]

Never ceases to amaze me how much people complain about studying for the LSAT while working a 40 hour week. But they insist they'll be totally fine grinding 2000+ billable hours in NYC biglaw.

It's not that I can't do it. There was a noticeable difference in the quality of studying. Outside of that, quite frankly I don't want to take a year off and I don't want to take the LSAT again. There's a chance that my score doesn't increase at all and then I've wasted a year.

[Blindmelon]

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston. The question here about Boston is which school has the lowest amount of competition for number of available Boston spots. Chicago has few trying for Boston and many Boston spots (firms at OCI would allow interviews for Boston offices, but most people filled those slots with other market interviews). I actually used this strategy to get CBs to the rarer markets-- make sure you are the only one on the schedule interviewing for that location and you have a money chance at a CB.

Are people really going to let this one go?

I sort of indirectly attacked that comment. I'll do it directly now...

for Boston region, it's probably something like ... Harvard > Yale > Stanford > Columbia/NYU/Chicago/Penn/Cornell > Duke/Virginia/Michigan/NU/Berkeley > GULC > BU/BC

Not totally related to this thread, but from my experience Boston is: Y > H > S > C/C/N > UVA (the best non-T6 by a bit) > Cornell/Penn/Duke/NU > Mich/Berkley > GULC (don't think its much better than BU/BC) > BU/BC > everyone else.

[CanadianWolf]

OP: With a 4.0/168 & acceptances from Chicago & Cornell, you are in position to negotiate with BU for a full tuition & fees plus stipend scholarship (or, at least, for more than $25,000 per year scholarship). Many of those offered full scholarships to BU are likely to decline in favor of a T-6 law school, therefore, additional scholarship funds should become available.

[TLS_noobie]

OP: With a 4.0/168 & acceptances from Chicago & Cornell, you are in position to negotiate with BU for a full tuition & fees plus stipend scholarship (or, at least, for more than $25,000 per year scholarship). Many of those offered full scholarships to BU are likely to decline in favor of a T-6 law school, therefore, additional scholarship funds should become available.

This sounds like TCR.

[kerrigaa]

I was waiting on my financial aid from Cornell before I went further with asking for money. I have emailed BU asking for an increased amount and Chicago asking if they could reconsider the lack of an offer. I don't believe I am in a position to get a full tuition scholly +stipend from BU, as I applied Early Decision (which is a full tuition scholarship) and was declined.

[TaipeiMort]

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston. The question here about Boston is which school has the lowest amount of competition for number of available Boston spots. Chicago has few trying for Boston and many Boston spots (firms at OCI would allow interviews for Boston offices, but most people filled those slots with other market interviews). I actually used this strategy to get CBs to the rarer markets-- make sure you are the only one on the schedule interviewing for that location and you have a money chance at a CB.

Are people really going to let this one go?

Read the rest of my post. Harvard is better x100000 in a vacuum, but at good schools you should be concerned with the level of competition you'll be facing from classmates as well as the school's placing ability. My statement was that Chicago's pstudent body isn't fighting for Boston, so it is easier if you have ties that almost anywhere. At Harvard you'll be dueling with gunners for Boston.

[CanadianWolf]

OP: But you didn't have an acceptance from Chicago when you were declined by BU for the full tuition & fees plus stipend award; nor did you have a Cornell acceptance with a $45,000 scholarship offer. Overall, applications are down this year. Your position has strengthened considerably since you initially applied ED to BU.

P.S. Not too many applicants turn down a T-6 to attend BU. I suspect that BU admissions is aware of this fact.

[kerrigaa]

Well I can certainly hope that helps. I'll wait for them to email back.

[CanadianWolf]

Out of curiosity: If you had acceptances from Harvard, Yale, Stanford or Columbia, would you hesitate matriculating to any of those four at full sticker price over BU's current offer ?

[kerrigaa]

Out of curiosity: If you had acceptances from Harvard, Yale, Stanford or Columbia, would you hesitate matriculating to any of those four at full sticker price over BU's current offer ?

YHS I would not at all hesitate. Unfortunately I did not apply to any of those.

[elm84dr]

Boston Firms seem to hire

Harvard---BU/BC---Then Top 14 in order, on down, then once out of the Top 30 or so, Suffolk and Northeastern.

[woeisme]

Boston Firms seem to hire

Harvard---BU/BC---Then Top 14 in order, on down, then once out of the Top 30 or so, Suffolk and Northeastern.

This is probably true with some of the smaller regional firms, but no way national firms are taking BU/BC over a Cornell or Penn, especially if person has boston ties.

[Blindmelon]

Boston Firms seem to hire

Harvard---BU/BC---Then Top 14 in order, on down, then once out of the Top 30 or so, Suffolk and Northeastern.

This is probably true with some of the smaller regional firms, but no way national firms are taking BU/BC over a Cornell or Penn, especially if person has boston ties.

I agree with this. Hickley/S&W/Nutter and other mid-size/smaller but well paying firms tend to stick to Boston natives, but when you hit the big guys, the T14ers have an advantage (especially UVA).

[Emma.]

Boston Firms seem to hire

Harvard---BU/BC---Then Top 14 in order, on down, then once out of the Top 30 or so, Suffolk and Northeastern.

This is probably true with some of the smaller regional firms, but no way national firms are taking BU/BC over a Cornell or Penn, especially if person has boston ties.

I agree with this. Hickley/S&W/Nutter and other mid-size/smaller but well paying firms tend to stick to Boston natives, but when you hit the big guys, the T14ers have an advantage (especially UVA).

Ropes noms up UChicago grads. Om nom nom.

[kerrigaa]

Ropes noms up UChicago grads. Om nom nom.

In Boston? On their website I can't find anyone from UChicago at the Boston office.

[Blindmelon]

Ropes noms up UChicago grads. Om nom nom.

In Boston? On their website I can't find anyone from UChicago at the Boston office.

I haven't come across many UChicago grads at all, but that doesn't mean they don't get tons of offers. Harvard absolutely pwns Ropes/Wilmer.

[Blessedassurance]

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston.

You do realize Harvard is in Cambridge, MA right? Give it a rest, no amount of trolling is going to will Chicago into the Holy Trinity.

[concurrent fork]

Ropes noms up UChicago grads. Om nom nom.

In Boston? On their website I can't find anyone from UChicago at the Boston office.

I haven't come across many UChicago grads at all, but that doesn't mean they don't get tons of offers. Harvard absolutely pwns Ropes/Wilmer.

The level of UChi trolling in this thread is fucking staggering. Ropes has virtually no UChi grads at all.

I am just going to say that the only place better than Chicago with ties to Boston would be Yale with ties for Boston. The question here about Boston is which school has the lowest amount of competition for number of available Boston spots. Chicago has few trying for Boston and many Boston spots (firms at OCI would allow interviews for Boston offices, but most people filled those slots with other market interviews). I actually used this strategy to get CBs to the rarer markets-- make sure you are the only one on the schedule interviewing for that location and you have a money chance at a CB.

Are people really going to let this one go?

Read the rest of my post. Harvard is better x100000 in a vacuum, but at good schools you should be concerned with the level of competition you'll be facing from classmates as well as the school's placing ability. My statement was that Chicago's pstudent body isn't fighting for Boston, so it is easier if you have ties that almost anywhere. At Harvard you'll be dueling with gunners for Boston.

I can't decide whether this is just schtick or if you are actually that delusional.