Pitt or WVU? Forum

[OnTheRise]

I am assuming that I will get into both Pitt and WVU however I expect to get significantly more money from WVU. I really like Pitt and would like to work in the Pittsburgh area but WVU would be much cheaper. So, should I attend my favorite school and the one located where I would like to work or the cheap one? I also have apps in at Ohio State and Case Western and should be accepted to both of them as well

[Nova]

I am assuming that I will get into

No.

So, should I attend my favorite school and the one located where I would like to work or the cheap one?

If you dont want to live in WV, dont go to WVU.

Attend Pitt if its economically feasable.

Also, Retake.

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

I am assuming that I will get into

No.

So, should I attend my favorite school and the one located where I would like to work or the cheap one?

If you dont want to live in WV, dont go to WVU.

Attend Pitt if its economically feasable.

Also, Retake.

Too many assumptions

[BigZuck]

I am assuming that I will get into

No.

So, should I attend my favorite school and the one located where I would like to work or the cheap one?

If you dont want to live in WV, dont go to WVU.

Attend Pitt if its economically feasable.

Also, Retake.

Too many assumptions

Nice ninja edit I don't think Nova was being douchey at all.

Also: Retake

[Trogdorburninator]

I'm from WV, and if you want to live and practice in WV, then choose WVU. If not, don't go there because it's nearly impossible to break into other markets.

Also, I'm not sure if the retaking comment was a joke, but if you do want to practice in WV and get into WVU, there's no point in retaking. Almost all of the lawyers here graduated from WVU.

[nebula666]

I'm from WV, and if you want to live and practice in WV, then choose WVU. If not, don't go there because it's nearly impossible to break into other markets.

Also, I'm not sure if the retaking comment was a joke, but if you do want to practice in WV and get into WVU, there's no point in retaking. Almost all of the lawyers here graduated from WVU.

He said he wants to work in Pittsburgh.

[Trogdorburninator]

Just saying, if plans change, or if he decided that some significant $$$ from WVU can make him more flexible about his living preferences after law school, then it's possible that WVU may still be in the cards.

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

I am assuming that I will get into

No.

So, should I attend my favorite school and the one located where I would like to work or the cheap one?

If you dont want to live in WV, dont go to WVU.

Attend Pitt if its economically feasable.

Also, Retake.

Too many assumptions

Nice ninja edit I don't think Nova was being douchey at all.

Also: Retake

Saying OP wouldn't get it having zero knowledge of numbers or literally ANYthing else. Sounds like a douche to me...

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

I also wouldn't take any advice from someone saying retake when they go to Minnesota. 60%
of MN grads get jobs as lawyers...and 8% of those grads are employed by The U.

Should've retaken, Nova.

[Nova]

Saying OP wouldn't get it having zero knowledge of numbers or literally ANYthing else. Sounds like a douche to me...

The point was you shouldnt assume youll get in to schools, even if you are above the medians.

OPs numbers are 3.2/161. (s)he has 30 posts, and it took 2 seconds to look up.

I also wouldn't take any advice from someone saying retake when they go to Minnesota. 60%
of MN grads get jobs as lawyers...and 8% of those grads are employed by The U.

Should've retaken, Nova.

Edit: This isnt about me

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

I did what was best for me.

That's what we're all trying to do

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

Not that I have to justify anything to you

l
And yet you did. *sigh*

[BigZuck]

Not that I have to justify anything to you

l
And yet you did. *sigh*

Whose alt are you?

A 161 should definitely retake, at the very least for scholarship purposes. Plenty of room for improvement.

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

Not that I have to justify anything to you

l
And yet you did. *sigh*

Whose alt are you?

A 161 should definitely retake, at the very least for scholarship purposes. Plenty of room for improvement.

I agree with the first part. Not a much the second. But that is neither here nor there. Let's give OP his thread back

[OnTheRise]

You are right, I did score a 161 but retaking is not an option. I appreciate all the input but I cannot retake again so I will have to live with the score that I got and go to the best school that I can. Obviously, I do not know that I will be accepted to any school but we are talking entirely on hypotheticals. Basically what I am asking is if it would be worth it to go to a school where I would be paying much more to attend but it is the higher ranked school and is located where I would like to work and live? I know the decision would be different for everyone and I will have to do what makes the most sense for me and my family but I just wanted to hear some other people's perspective on it.

[Dmini7]

You are right, I did score a 161 but retaking is not an option. I appreciate all the input but I cannot retake again so I will have to live with the score that I got and go to the best school that I can. Obviously, I do not know that I will be accepted to any school but we are talking entirely on hypotheticals. Basically what I am asking is if it would be worth it to go to a school where I would be paying much more to attend but it is the higher ranked school and is located where I would like to work and live? I know the decision would be different for everyone and I will have to do what makes the most sense for me and my family but I just wanted to hear some other people's perspective on it.

If you want to work in Pittsburgh, go to Pitt. The city and surrounding areas is basically a monopoly of Pitt graduates.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

OP, why is retaking not an option?

AbbeyRoadLaw--I only go to UT, but I think OP should probably retake if possible. Is UT good enough for me to make that suggestion or do I have to set up the bat signal for a person from a higher ranked school to come into this thread to say the same thing? (FTR: I retook twice and found it very helpful--163 to 166 to 174.)

Also, lying about your stats in your profile is dumb. Especially when you have said your stats in a previous post.

numbas?

3.8/162

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

OP, why is retaking not an option?

AbbeyRoadLaw--I only go to UT, but I think OP should probably retake if possible. Is UT good enough for me to make that suggestion or do I have to set up the bat signal for a person from a higher ranked school to come into this thread to say the same thing? (FTR: I retook twice and found it very helpful--163 to 166 to 174.)

Also, lying about your stats in your profile is dumb. Especially when you have said your stats in a previous post.

numbas?

3.8/162

Before retake home dawg, but I'm flattered you went through all of my previous posts to try and prove me wrong. Bravo.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

OP, why is retaking not an option?

AbbeyRoadLaw--I only go to UT, but I think OP should probably retake if possible. Is UT good enough for me to make that suggestion or do I have to set up the bat signal for a person from a higher ranked school to come into this thread to say the same thing? (FTR: I retook twice and found it very helpful--163 to 166 to 174.)

Also, lying about your stats in your profile is dumb. Especially when you have said your stats in a previous post.

numbas?

3.8/162

Before retake home dawg, but I'm flattered you went through all of my previous posts to try and prove me wrong. Bravo.

I don't really care what your LSAT score is, but it's not too believable that you currently have a 178, especially with the schools you're applying to. And my reason for glancing your posts was to figure out who you were and why you were being a dick. Whether you have a 162 or 178 doesn't mean much at all (and having a 162 by no means "proves you wrong"). Just seemed like a weird thing to make-up.

Btw- you never actually responded to the substance of my post.

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

I don't really care what your LSAT score is, but it's not too believable that you currently have a 178, especially with the schools you're applying to. And my reason for glancing your posts was to figure out who you were and why you were being a dick. Whether you have a 162 or 178 doesn't mean much at all (and having a 162 by no means "proves you wrong"). Just seemed like a weird thing to make-up.

Btw- you never actually responded to the substance of my post.

I see nothing wrong in applying to schools of all calibers, especially with fee waives. Snail mail is nice. To assume that I have not applied somewhere because of the fact that I have not written in that forum would be foolish.

I may be new to posting here, but not new to reading here. And truthfully, a good number of people here come off as self-righteous dickbags. I do not understand how spelling out a school's stats (stats that are not particularly strong, mind you) is behaving in such a way.

[Pip42]

Annnnnnnnnd back to the original question.

For me - I would go to whichever one gave me the best financial deal. This is of course predicated on the fact that you MUST be comfortable with living and working in West Virginia if that is the best deal. If its Pitt or bust then... Well go Pitt... but know that you could likely get more $$$ with a higher LSAT. Hell - this cycle could be so strange that a retake in Feb. may be a good option for negotiating scholly money if you get in. Best of both worlds - acceptence and then more money based on new higher LSAT... Assuming you do better.


In any event, good luck.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

I don't really care what your LSAT score is, but it's not too believable that you currently have a 178, especially with the schools you're applying to. And my reason for glancing your posts was to figure out who you were and why you were being a dick. Whether you have a 162 or 178 doesn't mean much at all (and having a 162 by no means "proves you wrong"). Just seemed like a weird thing to make-up.

Btw- you never actually responded to the substance of my post.

I see nothing wrong in applying to schools of all calibers, especially with fee waives. Snail mail is nice. To assume that I have not applied somewhere because of the fact that I have not written in that forum would be foolish.

I may be new to posting here, but not new to reading here. And truthfully, a good number of people here come off as self-righteous dickbags. I do not understand how spelling out a school's stats (stats that are not particularly strong, mind you) is behaving in such a way.

Retake is generally good advice--it is beside the point the person giving the advice is going to Minnesota. Telling OP he should ignore someone on that ground is silly, since the advice is still probably the best advice for the OP. (Though maybe OP actually does have a legit reason why he take retake. He still hasn't answered yet.) That's why it's a dick move to do since it only contributes BAD advice to the thread (and is a pointless callout).

[AbbeyRoadLaw]

I don't really care what your LSAT score is, but it's not too believable that you currently have a 178, especially with the schools you're applying to. And my reason for glancing your posts was to figure out who you were and why you were being a dick. Whether you have a 162 or 178 doesn't mean much at all (and having a 162 by no means "proves you wrong"). Just seemed like a weird thing to make-up.

Btw- you never actually responded to the substance of my post.

I see nothing wrong in applying to schools of all calibers, especially with fee waives. Snail mail is nice. To assume that I have not applied somewhere because of the fact that I have not written in that forum would be foolish.

I may be new to posting here, but not new to reading here. And truthfully, a good number of people here come off as self-righteous dickbags. I do not understand how spelling out a school's stats (stats that are not particularly strong, mind you) is behaving in such a way.

Retake is generally good advice--it is beside the point the person giving the advice is going to Minnesota. Telling OP he should ignore someone on that ground is silly, since the advice is still probably the best advice for the OP. (Though maybe OP actually does have a legit reason why he take retake. He still hasn't answered yet.) That's why it's a dick move to do since it only contributes BAD advice to the thread (and is a pointless callout).

The issue was not with retaking is normally a good idea- I agree that it is. It was the manner in which it was done, as well as simply denying that OP would get into the schools he has applied to. To be fair, I was a bit dickish, however. I just do not like when posters with a longer history here simply discount the OP's question/do not give any thought processes behind their advice to retake.

[Rahviveh]

I don't really care what your LSAT score is, but it's not too believable that you currently have a 178, especially with the schools you're applying to. And my reason for glancing your posts was to figure out who you were and why you were being a dick. Whether you have a 162 or 178 doesn't mean much at all (and having a 162 by no means "proves you wrong"). Just seemed like a weird thing to make-up.

Btw- you never actually responded to the substance of my post.

I see nothing wrong in applying to schools of all calibers, especially with fee waives. Snail mail is nice. To assume that I have not applied somewhere because of the fact that I have not written in that forum would be foolish.

I may be new to posting here, but not new to reading here. And truthfully, a good number of people here come off as self-righteous dickbags. I do not understand how spelling out a school's stats (stats that are not particularly strong, mind you) is behaving in such a way.

Retake is generally good advice--it is beside the point the person giving the advice is going to Minnesota. Telling OP he should ignore someone on that ground is silly, since the advice is still probably the best advice for the OP. (Though maybe OP actually does have a legit reason why he take retake. He still hasn't answered yet.) That's why it's a dick move to do since it only contributes BAD advice to the thread (and is a pointless callout).

The issue was not with retaking is normally a good idea- I agree that it is. It was the manner in which it was done, as well as simply denying that OP would get into the schools he has applied to. To be fair, I was a bit dickish, however. I just do not like when posters with a longer history here simply discount the OP's question/do not give any thought processes behind their advice to retake.

Who gives a fuck? I wish we had 30 brain dead monkeys posting in these threads saying retake over and over. 99% of the time if you don't have at least a 168 you should be taking it again. And 99% of the time people don't listen to that advice anyways.

[Rahviveh]

Also OP is working in Pitt more important than getting a job period? If not then I would consider other schools