ASU vs. UO

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )

Which should I attend?

Arizona State University
13
62%
University of Oregon
8
38%
 
Total votes: 21

PB&J
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:53 pm

ASU vs. UO

Postby PB&J » Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:09 pm

ASU would cost $4k/yr and UO would be $24k/yr
I would much rather live and work in Oregon and do not want to live in Phoenix but is the difference in cost worth it?

imbored25
Posts: 361
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 8:58 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby imbored25 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:21 pm

where are you from

User avatar
Veyron
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Veyron » Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:23 pm

Not unless if you are from Or and want to work there. Otherwise yes.

PB&J
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:53 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby PB&J » Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:43 am

From Arizona and went to undergrad there but would rather work in the northwest. My scholarship from ASU was $20k/yr while UofO only offered $10k/yr. Would it be beneficial to try to negotiate for greater scholarship funds from the UofO in this situation?

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby stillwater » Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:50 am

No, you should go to ASU. You have connections there. 1) PNW is an insular market 2) law school isn't a vacation.

User avatar
Veyron
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Veyron » Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:54 am

PB&J wrote:From Arizona and went to undergrad there but would rather work in the northwest. My scholarship from ASU was $20k/yr while UofO only offered $10k/yr. Would it be beneficial to try to negotiate for greater scholarship funds from the UofO in this situation?


Cr. With that background you aren't really going to be able to get a job in Oregon unless you have a connection you're not mentioning.

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:30 pm

OP, TLS overstates "ties" and it is really annoying. Above poster just told you that there was no way you were going to get a job in Oregon if you graduated from the University of Oregon. Absurd.

People want to make money, and if you can convince an employer that you are going to make that employer more money than the dooder from Eugene, you win. Certainly there are exceptions, but trumping up "ties" and making it the most important consideration in choosing between two states school is lunacy, regardless of whether two bros once struck out in Seattle big law, blamed "ties,"posted about it on TLS, and it came out the other side of the echo chamber as "PNW = insular TCR"

Your connections to Arizona might turn out to be an asset for you from ASU, might not be. Your going to have to hustle from both schools to get any sort of real legal job. You can work in Oregon from UO. Is the difference in $$$ worth it to you? I bet if you hustle and get a job from UO, you'll be making 50k.
Last edited by Lord Randolph McDuff on Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

PolySuyGuy
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:59 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby PolySuyGuy » Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:06 pm

PB&J wrote: My scholarship from ASU was $20k/yr while UofO only offered $10k/yr. Would it be beneficial to try to negotiate for greater scholarship funds from the UofO in this situation?


Contact Oregon. Tell them what ASU offered and tell them you are having a hard time deciding and hope they can make the decision easy for you.

Make sure you say Go DUCKS a lot. :lol:

chasgoose
Posts: 715
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby chasgoose » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:01 pm

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:OP, TLS overstates "ties" and it is really annoying. Above poster just told you that there was no way you were going to get a job in Oregon if you graduated from the University of Oregon. Absurd.

People want to make money, and if you can convince an employer that you are going to make that employer more money than the dooder from Eugene, you win. Certainly there are exceptions, but trumping up "ties" and making it the most important consideration in choosing between two states school is lunacy, regardless of whether two bros once struck out in Seattle big law, blamed "ties,"posted about it on TLS, and it came out the other side of the echo chamber as "PNW = insular TCR"

Your connections to Arizona might turn out to be an asset for you from ASU, might not be. Your going to have to hustle from both schools to get any sort of real legal job. You can work in Oregon from UO. Is the difference in $$$ worth it to you? I bet if you hustle and get a job from UO, you'll be making 50k.


Yeah for ties it should be enough that you chose to go to the University of Oregon. People just spout off ties nonsense without thinking why firms require them for non-NYC markets. They are going to lose money on you for your first three years, they don't want to make that investment in you and have you gallivant off to some other location, having ties helps make them feel more secure that you won't do that. Choosing to attend law school in Oregon and saying you want to stay there would allay those fears.

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby sunynp » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:09 pm

chasgoose wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:OP, TLS overstates "ties" and it is really annoying. Above poster just told you that there was no way you were going to get a job in Oregon if you graduated from the University of Oregon. Absurd.

People want to make money, and if you can convince an employer that you are going to make that employer more money than the dooder from Eugene, you win. Certainly there are exceptions, but trumping up "ties" and making it the most important consideration in choosing between two states school is lunacy, regardless of whether two bros once struck out in Seattle big law, blamed "ties,"posted about it on TLS, and it came out the other side of the echo chamber as "PNW = insular TCR"

Your connections to Arizona might turn out to be an asset for you from ASU, might not be. Your going to have to hustle from both schools to get any sort of real legal job. You can work in Oregon from UO. Is the difference in $$$ worth it to you? I bet if you hustle and get a job from UO, you'll be making 50k.


Yeah for ties it should be enough that you chose to go to the University of Oregon. People just spout off ties nonsense without thinking why firms require them for non-NYC markets. They are going to lose money on you for your first three years, they don't want to make that investment in you and have you gallivant off to some other location, having ties helps make them feel more secure that you won't do that. Choosing to attend law school in Oregon and saying you want to stay there would allay those fears.


Have you done OCI in the PNW? I haven't so I can't comment on what they are looking for, but I know it is a tiny market. I think there are very very few SA jobs that are up for grabs at OCI.. My view is that in a very tight job market ties are important for several reasons. If you have experience with the hiring market there, I'm sure your info is valuable to OP. (this is an honest question btw, not trying to be a smartass.)

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Tom Joad » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:15 pm

Ties thread? Calling Romo and the Boys.
Image
ETA: (Full Disclosure: 0L Alert) Assuming you graduate at median from OU, why would PNW law firms hire you when they have their picks of home grown median OU students? That is what the ties argument is all about. If you were a hiring partner and one job candidate was from the area you grew up in and one wasn't, all things being equal, wouldn't you give the job to the hometown bro every time?

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:26 pm

sunynp wrote:
chasgoose wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:OP, TLS overstates "ties" and it is really annoying. Above poster just told you that there was no way you were going to get a job in Oregon if you graduated from the University of Oregon. Absurd.

People want to make money, and if you can convince an employer that you are going to make that employer more money than the dooder from Eugene, you win. Certainly there are exceptions, but trumping up "ties" and making it the most important consideration in choosing between two states school is lunacy, regardless of whether two bros once struck out in Seattle big law, blamed "ties,"posted about it on TLS, and it came out the other side of the echo chamber as "PNW = insular TCR"

Your connections to Arizona might turn out to be an asset for you from ASU, might not be. Your going to have to hustle from both schools to get any sort of real legal job. You can work in Oregon from UO. Is the difference in $$$ worth it to you? I bet if you hustle and get a job from UO, you'll be making 50k.


Yeah for ties it should be enough that you chose to go to the University of Oregon. People just spout off ties nonsense without thinking why firms require them for non-NYC markets. They are going to lose money on you for your first three years, they don't want to make that investment in you and have you gallivant off to some other location, having ties helps make them feel more secure that you won't do that. Choosing to attend law school in Oregon and saying you want to stay there would allay those fears.


Have you done OCI in the PNW? I haven't so I can't comment on what they are looking for, but I know it is a tiny market. I think there are very very few SA jobs that are up for grabs at OCI.. My view is that in a very tight job market ties are important for several reasons. If you have experience with the hiring market there, I'm sure your info is valuable to OP. (this is an honest question btw, not trying to be a smartass.)


What percentage of UO grads get there job through OCI? I bet it's like 3%. Just because the websites called top law schools doesn't mean you can assume that OP wants biglaw. From the schools he's looking at I'd say that's the furthest thing from his mind.

Non OCI hiring is an entirely different beast regardless of the outspoken assumptions from a bunch of T14 biglaw or bust types on this site.

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Tom Joad » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:29 pm

OP should probably check out this thread so he can make up his or her own mind about the importance of ties.

My take: even if the effect is small, when your entire career and hundreds of thousands of dollars of nondischargable debt are on the line, I would try to hedge my bets.

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:34 pm

Tom Joad wrote:Ties thread? Calling Romo and the Boys.
Image
ETA: (Full Disclosure: 0L Alert) Assuming you graduate at median from OU, why would PNW law firms hire you when they have their picks of home grown median OU students? That is what the ties argument is all about. If you were a hiring partner and one job candidate was from the area you grew up in and one wasn't, all things being equal, wouldn't you give the job to the hometown bro every time?


No. Median students at these schools, like pretty much all students at these schools, get their job though networking. There are no "hiring partners," as the firms are small and may only add someone every 3 or 4 years. I could elaborate but I'm going to sleep. Suffice to say law students don't get their job from some meat market where "hiring partners" are evaluating resumes from super identical candidates. That is big law hiring, which accounts for about 5 percent of lawyers.

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby rad lulz » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:36 pm

Tom Joad wrote:OP should probably check out this thread so he can make up his or her own mind about the importance of ties.

My take: even if the effect is small, when your entire career and hundreds of thousands of dollars of nondischargable debt are on the line, I would try to hedge my bets.

To sup up: 0Ls and 1Ls try to tell 2Ls and 3Ls how legal hiring works.

OP, go to ASU because that's where your ties are and it has slightly better employment outcomes.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=183053

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby rad lulz » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:37 pm

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:No. Median students at these schools, like pretty much all students at these schools, get their job though networking. There are no "hiring partners," as the firms are small and may only add someone every 3 or 4 years. I could elaborate but I'm going to sleep. Suffice to say law students don't get their job from some meat market where "hiring partners" are evaluating resumes from super identical candidates. That is big law hiring, which accounts for about 5 percent of lawyers.

I'd rather not start out at a networking disadvantage when compared to my classmates, but that's just me.

User avatar
DCDuck
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:27 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby DCDuck » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:45 pm

UO is not worth the extra money. That's a big debt difference.

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:26 am

rad lulz wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:No. Median students at these schools, like pretty much all students at these schools, get their job though networking. There are no "hiring partners," as the firms are small and may only add someone every 3 or 4 years. I could elaborate but I'm going to sleep. Suffice to say law students don't get their job from some meat market where "hiring partners" are evaluating resumes from super identical candidates. That is big law hiring, which accounts for about 5 percent of lawyers.

I'd rather not start out at a networking disadvantage when compared to my classmates, but that's just me.


Surely you would be at a certain level of disadvantage compared to some really connected homers, but that also can be the case if you go to your local school. I mean, I had a network back home, but many didn't. I can't disagree with your point though because you've just stated a preference. In my view, the "networking disadvantage" is so small that it shouldn't be overstated, like, you are NOT going to get a job in Oregon from UO, as was said above in this thread.

I mean, unless someone has a serious network, we are talking conversation starters? Again, this isn't big law hiring with "hiring partners." This is meeting people casually through school and networking events sponsored by the school, bar association, the coffee shop, etc. Your network grows the same way it did in high school-- just make that first friend, and you've access to a bunch more. Tell me who you would like better better-- the guy who is from down the road but spits in your face when he talks or the guy from Arizona that laughs at your jokes and makes everyone's wives feel respected and comfortable? The newfound obsession with overstating ties just gets applications to forgo their dream of living in X state to stay home and really kill it back home with all those super sweet "ties." That's not helping anyone.

No way the two large law firms back home --mcafee taft and crowe-- would hire some dude with no ties to oklahoma who wasn't marrying an okie, because that dude would likely bail and mcafee and crowe don't wanna take chances because they have enough capable okies to fill their 1 or 2 spots a year anyway. However, you can go to OU Law and network into shitlaw sans ties. The increased amount you will have to work for shitlaw than the homer for Enid is statistically insignificant. Should "where do you have ties" be the first thing this applicant is asked on TLS?

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby stillwater » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:30 am

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
rad lulz wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:No. Median students at these schools, like pretty much all students at these schools, get their job though networking. There are no "hiring partners," as the firms are small and may only add someone every 3 or 4 years. I could elaborate but I'm going to sleep. Suffice to say law students don't get their job from some meat market where "hiring partners" are evaluating resumes from super identical candidates. That is big law hiring, which accounts for about 5 percent of lawyers.

I'd rather not start out at a networking disadvantage when compared to my classmates, but that's just me.


Surely you would be at a certain level of disadvantage compared to some really connected homers, but that also can be the case if you go to your local school. I mean, I had a network back home, but many didn't. I can't disagree with your point though because you've just stated a preference. In my view, the "networking disadvantage" is so small that it shouldn't be overstated, like, you are NOT going to get a job in Oregon from UO, as was said above in this thread.

I mean, unless someone has a serious network, we are talking conversation starters? Again, this isn't big law hiring with "hiring partners." This is meeting people casually through school and networking events sponsored by the school, bar association, the coffee shop, etc. Your network grows the same way it did in high school-- just make that first friend, and you've access to a bunch more. Tell me who you would like better better-- the guy who is from down the road but spits in your face when he talks or the guy from Arizona that laughs at your jokes and makes everyone's wives feel respected and comfortable? The newfound obsession with overstating ties just gets applications to forgo their dream of living in X state to stay home and really kill it back home with all those super sweet "ties." That's not helping anyone.

No way the two large law firms back home --mcafee taft and crowe-- would hire some dude with no ties to oklahoma who wasn't marrying an okie, because that dude would likely bail and mcafee and crowe don't wanna take chances because they have enough capable okies to fill their 1 or 2 spots a year anyway. However, you can go to OU Law and network into shitlaw sans ties. The increased amount you will have to work for shitlaw than the homer for Enid is statistically insignificant. Should "where do you have ties" be the first thing this applicant is asked on TLS?


I think a lot of people confuse probable and possible in these types of discussions. Of course it is possible to get a job, but the aim is to stack the deck as much as you can in your favor. Taking a vacation for law school to an area you have no ties leaves it possible to get a job, but it isn't probable. It just simply isn't a smart allocation of resources, time and money.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby flem » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:33 am

Oh for fuck's sake this argument again?

User avatar
MTBike
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 10:19 am

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby MTBike » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:37 am

flem wrote:Oh for fuck's sake this argument again?


+1

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:38 am

stillwater wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
rad lulz wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:No. Median students at these schools, like pretty much all students at these schools, get their job though networking. There are no "hiring partners," as the firms are small and may only add someone every 3 or 4 years. I could elaborate but I'm going to sleep. Suffice to say law students don't get their job from some meat market where "hiring partners" are evaluating resumes from super identical candidates. That is big law hiring, which accounts for about 5 percent of lawyers.

I'd rather not start out at a networking disadvantage when compared to my classmates, but that's just me.


Surely you would be at a certain level of disadvantage compared to some really connected homers, but that also can be the case if you go to your local school. I mean, I had a network back home, but many didn't. I can't disagree with your point though because you've just stated a preference. In my view, the "networking disadvantage" is so small that it shouldn't be overstated, like, you are NOT going to get a job in Oregon from UO, as was said above in this thread.

I mean, unless someone has a serious network, we are talking conversation starters? Again, this isn't big law hiring with "hiring partners." This is meeting people casually through school and networking events sponsored by the school, bar association, the coffee shop, etc. Your network grows the same way it did in high school-- just make that first friend, and you've access to a bunch more. Tell me who you would like better better-- the guy who is from down the road but spits in your face when he talks or the guy from Arizona that laughs at your jokes and makes everyone's wives feel respected and comfortable? The newfound obsession with overstating ties just gets applications to forgo their dream of living in X state to stay home and really kill it back home with all those super sweet "ties." That's not helping anyone.

No way the two large law firms back home --mcafee taft and crowe-- would hire some dude with no ties to oklahoma who wasn't marrying an okie, because that dude would likely bail and mcafee and crowe don't wanna take chances because they have enough capable okies to fill their 1 or 2 spots a year anyway. However, you can go to OU Law and network into shitlaw sans ties. The increased amount you will have to work for shitlaw than the homer for Enid is statistically insignificant. Should "where do you have ties" be the first thing this applicant is asked on TLS?


I think a lot of people confuse probable and possible in these types of discussions. Of course it is possible to get a job, but the aim is to stack the deck as much as you can in your favor. Taking a vacation for law school to an area you have no ties leaves it possible to get a job, but it isn't probable. It just simply isn't a smart allocation of resources, time and money.


No.

What are you basing your opinion off of?

You are a attorney who wants to grow your firm. Do you hire the state school dude who is the most capable candidate and is best for business, or the less capable one who happens to have "ties" beyond going to the state school?

Whoever comes and says "oh no you'd be in a big soupy middle and no one could tell who the better candidate was," does not understand small law legal hiring. Most 2-10 shops hire people when they find a good person, not because they need someone. There won't be a billion other resumes because no one knew to apply in the first place. It is just you and how much money you could potentially make the firm. They hire you or they stay the same size.

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:40 am

flem wrote:Oh for fuck's sake this argument again?


Dude got told not to go to UO cuz he wouldn't get a job in Oregon from the school. Tie-breaker determines employment to THAT extent.

I'd like to reiterate that my original vote in the first shit-show was "overstated."

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby flem » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:41 am

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
Dude got told not to go to UO cuz he wouldn't get a job in Oregon from the school. Tie-breaker determines employment to THAT extent.

I'd like to reiterate that my original vote in the first shit-show was "overstated."


I personally wouldn't go to Oregon because of terrible employment prospects. Not having ties there would be one of my lesser concerns.

In this case I'd go to ASU but only because it's dirt-ass-cheap.

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: ASU vs. UO

Postby rad lulz » Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:25 pm

flem wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
Dude got told not to go to UO cuz he wouldn't get a job in Oregon from the school. Tie-breaker determines employment to THAT extent.

I'd like to reiterate that my original vote in the first shit-show was "overstated."


I personally wouldn't go to Oregon because of terrible employment prospects. Not having ties there would be one of my lesser concerns.

In this case I'd go to ASU but only because it's dirt-ass-cheap.

Basically this.

LRM poasts a lot for a dude whose every argument was addressed by the other thread.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 4 guests