UT versus Duke

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

Duke or Texas?

Duke
59
52%
Texas
54
48%
 
Total votes: 113

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby WokeUpInACar » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:45 pm

I actually think this is really close. I'd be shocked if UT doesn't give you more $ if you play hardball with them though.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby beachbum » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:52 pm

WokeUpInACar wrote:I actually think this is really close. I'd be shocked if UT doesn't give you more $ if you play hardball with them though.


This.

Otherwise, it comes down to your risk preference. As another poster pointed out, you're basically aiming for top third at Texas or top half at Duke. Is that difference in placement worth $40k to you?

If it were me (note: horribly biased), I'd go with Duke, if only because the debt from either school is going to make biglaw a necessity, and Duke gives you a better shot at biglaw. But, then, $40k is nothing to sneeze at.

BigZuck
Posts: 10873
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby BigZuck » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:56 pm

WokeUpInACar wrote:I actually think this is really close. I'd be shocked if UT doesn't give you more $ if you play hardball with them though.


I have been discouraged at all the people they have shot down in negotiations so far this cycle. But if they offer me 30K more I will deposit on the spot. I'm hoping in state applicants at or above both 75ths will be at a premium to them but we shall see.

Appreciate the thoughts guys, keep them coming!

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby WokeUpInACar » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:00 pm

BigZuck wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:I actually think this is really close. I'd be shocked if UT doesn't give you more $ if you play hardball with them though.


I have been discouraged at all the people they have shot down in negotiations so far this cycle. But if they offer me 30K more I will deposit on the spot. I'm hoping in state applicants at or above both 75ths will be at a premium to them but we shall see.

Appreciate the thoughts guys, keep them coming!

Me too, but it's still SO early. I bet their tune is going to change quite a bit between now and June.

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Ti Malice » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:20 pm

I think Duke is worth the extra $40K. Don't give up on getting more money out of UT, though.

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby rickgrimes69 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:41 pm

You'll need Biglaw to pay off $120k just as readily as $160k, and Duke gives you a significantly better chance at that. With your ties to TX, it won't be hard to bring a Duke degree back home. Duke is TCR at current prices. If you can get UT to negotiate and bring your total COL under $100k, I would change my answer.

User avatar
J-e-L-L-o
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby J-e-L-L-o » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:15 pm

Crowing wrote:I am actually going to vote for Duke here. It seems like while you prefer TX biglaw you want biglaw period over just being in TX. The COL difference as presented in the OP doesn't seem to justify the significant drop in high-end opportunities between Duke and UT. If you need biglaw either way, for that difference it seems UT is actually riskier despite the lower cost.


+1

User avatar
fruitoftheloom
Posts: 395
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:38 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby fruitoftheloom » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:15 pm

OP - keep in mind that when you start at Texas your tuition is locked and includes all fees except for health insurance (if you need that). IE, no increases. Additionally, the market for teachers is actually pretty tight right now, so I'm somewhat concerned that your wife may be unemployed if you move to NC. Because she has a job in Austin, I am going to vote UT. If she works, you should be borrowing no more than 5-10k per year (max) for living expenses. I don't see your debt from UT exceeding 75k pre interest and 100k post unless you just live stupidly during law school.

That being said, I'd still try to negotiate w/ UT for additional $$.

User avatar
Aawaldrop
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:28 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Aawaldrop » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:46 pm

fruitoftheloom wrote:OP - keep in mind that when you start at Texas your tuition is locked and includes all fees except for health insurance (if you need that). IE, no increases. Additionally, the market for teachers is actually pretty tight right now, so I'm somewhat concerned that your wife may be unemployed if you move to NC. Because she has a job in Austin, I am going to vote UT. If she works, you should be borrowing no more than 5-10k per year (max) for living expenses. I don't see your debt from UT exceeding 75k pre interest and 100k post unless you just live stupidly during law school.

That being said, I'd still try to negotiate w/ UT for additional $$.


Did not know that. OP, I'd lean towards UT if they offer you more money.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Dr. Dre » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:21 pm

Duke

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby lawyerwannabe » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:41 pm

Greenandgold wrote:Keep following up with those schools that WL you. Good chance you get off of one or more of those.


This cannot be a serious post. Most of the country views Duke on the same level as they do any of the schools OP is WLed at. OP is not WLed at HYS.

To answer the OP: I do not think there is a wrong answer is this situation. Visit both campuses and go where you will feel the most comfortable spending three years of your life. GL!

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Greenandgold » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:48 pm

lawyerwannabe wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:Keep following up with those schools that WL you. Good chance you get off of one or more of those.


This cannot be a serious post. Most of the country views Duke on the same level as they do any of the schools OP is WLed at. OP is not WLed at HYS.

To answer the OP: I do not think there is a wrong answer is this situation. Visit both campuses and go where you will feel the most comfortable spending three years of your life. GL!


If you think most of the country views Duke as on the same level as Chicago and Penn you're out of your mind. Just look at the employment outcomes.

ETA: It's not what "most of the country" thinks that's important anyways. It's about what employers think.

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby lawyerwannabe » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:51 pm

Greenandgold wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:Keep following up with those schools that WL you. Good chance you get off of one or more of those.


This cannot be a serious post. Most of the country views Duke on the same level as they do any of the schools OP is WLed at. OP is not WLed at HYS.

To answer the OP: I do not think there is a wrong answer is this situation. Visit both campuses and go where you will feel the most comfortable spending three years of your life. GL!


If you think most of the country views Duke as on the same level as Chicago and Penn you're out of your mind. Just look at the employment outcomes.

ETA: It's not even about what "most of the country" thinks that's important anyways. It's about what employers think.


I'm talking about employers. Chicago and Penn's employment outcomes are largely driven by how employers in Chicago and NYC, respectively, view the schools. Neither school offers a noticeable advantage for TX or CA hiring, which is what the OP is primarily concerned about.

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Greenandgold » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:53 pm

lawyerwannabe wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:Keep following up with those schools that WL you. Good chance you get off of one or more of those.


This cannot be a serious post. Most of the country views Duke on the same level as they do any of the schools OP is WLed at. OP is not WLed at HYS.

To answer the OP: I do not think there is a wrong answer is this situation. Visit both campuses and go where you will feel the most comfortable spending three years of your life. GL!


If you think most of the country views Duke as on the same level as Chicago and Penn you're out of your mind. Just look at the employment outcomes.

ETA: It's not even about what "most of the country" thinks that's important anyways. It's about what employers think.


I'm talking about employers. Chicago and Penn's employment outcomes are largely driven by how employers in Chicago and NYC, respectively, view the schools. Neither school offers a noticeable advantage for TX or CA hiring, which is what the OP is primarily concerned about.


Are you just pulling this stuff out of your ass or do you have something to back that up?

User avatar
Aawaldrop
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:28 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Aawaldrop » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:55 pm

Greenandgold wrote:Are you just pulling this stuff out of your ass or do you have something to back that up?


Duke EDII after rejected ED chicago

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby lawyerwannabe » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:04 pm

Due to self-selection, no one can ever be entirely sure of a school's reach. However, it is quite clear that Chicago's and Penn's hiring disparities are driven by large city hiring by looking at the NLJ250 breakdown. So that does not speak to how employers in TX or CA view those schools. The only school I have hard data on is Duke. And the data shows that most major TX firms are willing to dip below median for Duke students. Also, anecdotally, I do not know anyone who had trouble landing TX biglaw from Duke.

Note: I did interview in either TX or CA.
Last edited by lawyerwannabe on Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Elston Gunn
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Elston Gunn » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:05 pm

I'm fairly extreme on this but if you want biglaw (which you do), and the stated numbers of 35% vs. 60% in AIII+Biglaw are accurate, then Duke is worth much more than $40K more than UT . Making vs. missing biglaw is IMO something that will seriously affect your career for 35+ years.

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Greenandgold » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:11 pm

lawyerwannabe wrote:Due to self-selection, know one can ever be entirely sure of a school's reach. However, it is quite clear that Chicago's and Penn's hiring disparities are driven by large city hiring by looking at the NLJ250 breakdown. So that does not speak to how employers in TX or CA view those schools. The only school I have hard data on is Duke. And the data shows that most major TX firms are willing to dip below median for Duke students. Also, anecdotally, I do not know anyone who had trouble landing TX biglaw from Duke.

Note: I did interview in either TX or CA.


The biglaw firms in Texas and California are members of the NLJ250... Chicago and Penn's superior placement among those firms doesn't tell you anything what city these firms offices are in.

And where the hell is this data that you're talking about? OP's supposed to just trust some random Duke student that Duke will give him just as good of a shot at biglaw in Texas as Chicago or Penn? What a joke.

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby lawyerwannabe » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:14 pm

Greenandgold wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:Due to self-selection, know one can ever be entirely sure of a school's reach. However, it is quite clear that Chicago's and Penn's hiring disparities are driven by large city hiring by looking at the NLJ250 breakdown. So that does not speak to how employers in TX or CA view those schools. The only school I have hard data on is Duke. And the data shows that most major TX firms are willing to dip below median for Duke students. Also, anecdotally, I do not know anyone who had trouble landing TX biglaw from Duke.

Note: I did interview in either TX or CA.


The biglaw firms in Texas and California are members of the NLJ250... Chicago and Penn's superior placement among those firms doesn't tell you anything what city these firms offices are in.

And where the hell is this data that you're talking about? OP's supposed to just trust some random Duke student that Duke will give him just as good of a shot at biglaw in Texas as Chicago or Penn? What a joke.


I am looking at OCI data. While I admittedly should have said that Duke would give OP a good shot and not have compared the chances Duke gives compared with Penn or Chicago because I do not have the data, do you actually have any data beyond what US News is telling you to think?

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

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby rad lulz » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:18 pm

rickgrimes69 wrote:You'll need Biglaw to pay off $120k just as readily as $160k, and Duke gives you a significantly better chance at that. With your ties to TX, it won't be hard to bring a Duke degree back home. Duke is TCR at current prices. If you can get UT to negotiate and bring your total COL under $100k, I would change my answer.

BigZuck
Posts: 10873
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby BigZuck » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:21 pm

I would consider the schools I'm waitlisted at along with NYU and Columbia but my debt aversion (along with the fact that that I'm not sure that a lot of those schools are objectively worth 67K more than Duke) means that I probably would pass at sticker. And that's what my numbers would get me most likely so they aren't really that much of a consideration at this point.

Does anyone think 54K at Michigan would motivate Duke to offer more than 67K? Likewise might 67K at Duke motivate Michigan to offer more than 54K?

Still waiting on Cornell and NU and they would definitely be in the picture but I really don't know what to expect from them, if anything. That's why I'm thinking it might just be UT versus Duke.

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Greenandgold » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:28 pm

lawyerwannabe wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:Due to self-selection, know one can ever be entirely sure of a school's reach. However, it is quite clear that Chicago's and Penn's hiring disparities are driven by large city hiring by looking at the NLJ250 breakdown. So that does not speak to how employers in TX or CA view those schools. The only school I have hard data on is Duke. And the data shows that most major TX firms are willing to dip below median for Duke students. Also, anecdotally, I do not know anyone who had trouble landing TX biglaw from Duke.

Note: I did interview in either TX or CA.


The biglaw firms in Texas and California are members of the NLJ250... Chicago and Penn's superior placement among those firms doesn't tell you anything what city these firms offices are in.

And where the hell is this data that you're talking about? OP's supposed to just trust some random Duke student that Duke will give him just as good of a shot at biglaw in Texas as Chicago or Penn? What a joke.


I am looking at OCI data. While I admittedly should have said that Duke would give OP a good shot and not have compared the chances Duke gives compared with Penn or Chicago because I do not have the data, do you actually have any data beyond what US News is telling you to think?


Yea, I have the NLJ250 data showing better employment outcomes for Chicago and Penn students in regard to those firms. The biglaw firms in Texas and California are members of the NLJ250. That's much stronger evidence than your anecdotal evidence about Duke.

Also, OP, just because you're waitlisted doesn't mean you won't get money when you get off. Chicago offered just about everyone money off of the waitlist last year. If you're interested in those schools, keep in touch with them and let them know. If your numbers were so bad that you didn't have a shot you wouldn't be on the waitlist at all.

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby lawyerwannabe » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:36 pm

Greenandgold wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:Due to self-selection, know one can ever be entirely sure of a school's reach. However, it is quite clear that Chicago's and Penn's hiring disparities are driven by large city hiring by looking at the NLJ250 breakdown. So that does not speak to how employers in TX or CA view those schools. The only school I have hard data on is Duke. And the data shows that most major TX firms are willing to dip below median for Duke students. Also, anecdotally, I do not know anyone who had trouble landing TX biglaw from Duke.

Note: I did interview in either TX or CA.


The biglaw firms in Texas and California are members of the NLJ250... Chicago and Penn's superior placement among those firms doesn't tell you anything what city these firms offices are in.

And where the hell is this data that you're talking about? OP's supposed to just trust some random Duke student that Duke will give him just as good of a shot at biglaw in Texas as Chicago or Penn? What a joke.


I am looking at OCI data. While I admittedly should have said that Duke would give OP a good shot and not have compared the chances Duke gives compared with Penn or Chicago because I do not have the data, do you actually have any data beyond what US News is telling you to think?


Yea, I have the NLJ250 data showing better employment outcomes for Chicago and Penn students in regard to those firms. The biglaw firms in Texas and California are members of the NLJ250. That's much stronger evidence than your anecdotal evidence about Duke.

Also, OP, just because you're waitlisted doesn't mean you won't get money when you get off. Chicago offered just about everyone money off of the waitlist last year. If you're interested in those schools, keep in touch with them and let them know. If your numbers were so bad that you didn't have a shot you wouldn't be on the waitlist at all.


Care to elaborate. I just did a cursory glance and I see little difference in placement. Also, what you state does not address self-selection. At least my data suggests TX firms dip below median at Duke, which shows what Duke students TX firms take who are actually looking for jobs there (meaning the self-selection issue is solved).

I don't want to go back and forth with you anymore. Just funny how you call out what I say as baseless, I provide actually evidence and then you do not provide any evidence for your position.

And yes, I am just one random Duke student giving perspective. You don't need to reiterate that again. Everyone on here is just one student from one school sharing their own law school experiences. People looking for advice know that and can take from the different posts what they will.

User avatar
Aawaldrop
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:28 am

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby Aawaldrop » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:43 pm

I think the problem doesn't stem from the evidence that Duke dips below medians, it was that the conclusion there was no marginal benefit of CCN over Duke in that aspect.

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: UT versus Duke

Postby lawyerwannabe » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:47 pm

Aawaldrop wrote:I think the problem doesn't stem from the evidence that Duke dips below medians, it was that the conclusion there was no marginal benefit of CCN over Duke in that aspect.


PMed you.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests