Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
zienhal
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:26 pm

Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby zienhal » Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:53 pm

The schools you are considering: Temple, Rutgers, Seton Hall, St. John's, Syracuse

Temple: 20k scholly Rutgers:12k scholly St. John's: 35K scholly Syracuse: 33K scholly
These are all per year.

Dont remember the exact numbers but COA would in order from cheapest to most expensive be:
Syracuse, Temple, St. John's, Rutgers then Seton Hall. The range is about 95k at 'Cuse to about 130K at Seton Hall.

-How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings
Loans!
-Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
Would LOVE to work in New York City, don't mind working in Philly and California.
-Your general career goals
Employment (FT long term Bar passage required) and ability to pay loans.
-Your LSAT/GPA numbers
2.96/161


I live in Southern California. I also got accepted to Loyola but they want sticker. I'm waiting for UC Hastings, GW (long shot), William and Mary (long shot) and George Mason.

mach9zero
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:02 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby mach9zero » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:10 pm

I wish the GPa wouldn't drag you down, because you have strong LSAT numbers for a full ride from Rutgers, Seton Hall, and 'Cuse. Temple has been stingy with scholarships, so I'm surprised it's that high.

That said, if you want New York, you need to stay New York. Rutgers-Newark has strong placement in the nNJ region, and dips into NYC. I'd never pay the cost at Seton Hall, that's nuts, I'd also never pay 95k at Syracuse.

At this stage, I'd personally pick Rutgers-Newark if your goal is the New York metro-region. It's not landing you a Big Law spot unless you're top 5%, but St. Johns and 'Cuse have abysmal employment prospects.

As far as Philly, Temple has a strong alumni network, but their numbers haven't been as impressive in the past year. If I'm not mistaken, Rutgers Camden and Nova have placed stronger than Temple. You might want to even look into Drexels program, because with your higher LSAT you'd be closer towards getting a full ride. At the cost, Temple would be expensive since you're out of state and won't be elgible for in-state any year. Rutgers will go in-state after your first year (with most actually getting it before they start if they move to NJ early enough).

BigZuck
Posts: 10879
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby BigZuck » Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:58 am

You're going to have an incredibly hard time paying off your loans if you go to any of those schools. Its tough for splitters. Honestly, if I were in your shoes I probably just wouldn't go to law school. If I did go to law school, I would retake until I got into a T14 like Northwestern.

User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby 052220151 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:03 am

Dude, you gotta retake. The only other option to retaking is not going.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby timbs4339 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:03 am

It's going to be very tough to get enough money from the schools to make it worth it.

User avatar
Otunga
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:56 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby Otunga » Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:08 am

You have to conquer LS from these schools listed to have a chance at NYC biglaw, if that's something you'd like, meaning you have to beat almost everyone in your class. A retake is a must. Then if you score 170+, you can ED UVA/RD NW or get a full ride at lower-ranked schools if you don't want to take all those loans.
Last edited by Otunga on Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
deadpanic
Posts: 1172
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:09 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby deadpanic » Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:10 am

So, you live in California and are moving across the country to attend a regional school in New Jersey/NY/Philly and taking out about 6 figures in loans to possibly never become a lawyer? Please don't do this to yourself.

You should really retake or not go. I'm not trying to rain on your parade...just being candid.

User avatar
northwood
Posts: 4872
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 7:29 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby northwood » Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:25 am

what are the requirements that you must meet in order to keep your scholarship? IIRC, Cuse and St.Johns have pretty strenuous stipulations, and the COA for both of these schools is pretty steep if you lose your scholarship. As for the others, I am not sure, but I think Temple and Seton Hall are private ( which may cost more than out of state tuition at a state school). Likewise, for Rutgers, is there a way for you to be considered a resident of New Jersey? Are you willing to wait a year and become a resident before law school if you cant be eligible to be considered a resident once you start?( this may have the added advantage of allowing you a chance to live and work there to see if you really would be amiable in living across the country from your family). Also, what is the cost of living at these schools? You need to figure this out to help you get better idea of what the actual costs will be. All of these schools are super regional, and as NYC is your goal, none of them would be in your best interest to attend in order to get a decent NYC job. IF you do strike out of NYC, you are faced with another problem: how to convince employers in your school's local market that you are not a flight risk.

TLDR, before you make a final decision, recalculate the total cost of attendance, and take into consideration the possibility of losing the scholarship (so you have a best case scenario and a worst case scenario- you only keep it for one year- will you drop and leave, or will you stay and pay?)

Skump
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby Skump » Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:40 pm

The schools you are considering: Temple, Rutgers, Seton Hall, St. John's, Syracuse
Temple: 20k scholly Rutgers:12k scholly St. John's: 35K scholly Syracuse: 33K scholly


How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings
Loans!


I live in Southern California.


Here's the deal. You're signing up for six figures of debt to attend a school which, under the countenance of a smiling God, might offer an entree into shitlaw - assuming regional ties. Which you lack.

nopenopenope.gif

RLowry23
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:11 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby RLowry23 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:23 pm

northwood wrote:, I am not sure, but I think Temple and Seton Hall are private ( which may cost more than out of state tuition at a state school).


Temple isn't a state school, but it's a state sponsored school. It is 42k per year (estimated total COA) in-state vs. 56k (again, estimated total COA).

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby JCougar » Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:33 pm

deadpanic wrote:Please don't do this to yourself.

User avatar
TheSpanishMain
Posts: 4147
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:26 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby TheSpanishMain » Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:54 am

This is a horrible idea.

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby MrAnon » Sat Feb 15, 2014 4:03 pm

Your current prospects, whatever they are, are better than where you'll be in 3 years with any of these schools.

User avatar
OutCold
Posts: 419
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:57 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby OutCold » Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:58 am

None of these schools are worth paying money for, let alone that much money. None of these schools will get you NYC, Temple might get you a local gov job in Philly if you are at the top of the class and extremely lucky. You are from California, which will be another huge strike against you when you are applying for the highly regional jobs that these schools place into (when their grads are even able to find legal jobs at all). All in all, you are probably throwing your life away if you go 100k in debt to attend one of these schools.

FutureSuperLawyer
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:09 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby FutureSuperLawyer » Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:42 pm

Don't listen to the losers. Seton Hall has a great program to teach you PRACTICAL SKILLS, the kind that will enable you to practice right out of law schools. Law firms and gov't agencies can't afford to train lawyers anymore so they'll be hiring Seton Hall grads once they see how well this program works.

Also, dude, I understand your position on waiting a year and retaking; I was there last year. Everyone told me to retake and wait a year but they just did'nt get it. When I told a babe I worked at starbucks, she dropped me right away; now, when I tell her I'm in law school I get her every time. Law School is a three year party, and I can pay for all of it with gov't loans.

Losers on TLS will tell you you'll have a problem after you graduate since you'll have no money and won't be able to pay the loans back. But the first thing you'll learn in law school, is that bank's don't waste money going after people who have no money. I had no money before I went to law school, and, with my 3.0 GPA in political science, no prospects for getting any. So, I won't be any worse after law school. Again, in case you missed it last time, the first thing you learn in law school is that banks don't waste time going after people who have no money. Everytime someone gives you BS about "non-dischargable debt" explain to them, THERE'S NO DEBTORS PRISON ANYMORE. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY, BANKS WILL LEAVE YOU ALONE.

User avatar
Synch
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:33 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby Synch » Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:54 pm

^^ what in the hell. So much crazy.

Turtledove
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:31 pm

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby Turtledove » Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:06 pm

FutureSuperLawyer wrote:Don't listen to the losers. Seton Hall has a great program to teach you PRACTICAL SKILLS, the kind that will enable you to practice right out of law schools. Law firms and gov't agencies can't afford to train lawyers anymore so they'll be hiring Seton Hall grads once they see how well this program works.

Also, dude, I understand your position on waiting a year and retaking; I was there last year. Everyone told me to retake and wait a year but they just did'nt get it. When I told a babe I worked at starbucks, she dropped me right away; now, when I tell her I'm in law school I get her every time. Law School is a three year party, and I can pay for all of it with gov't loans.

Losers on TLS will tell you you'll have a problem after you graduate since you'll have no money and won't be able to pay the loans back. But the first thing you'll learn in law school, is that bank's don't waste money going after people who have no money. I had no money before I went to law school, and, with my 3.0 GPA in political science, no prospects for getting any. So, I won't be any worse after law school. Again, in case you missed it last time, the first thing you learn in law school is that banks don't waste time going after people who have no money. Everytime someone gives you BS about "non-dischargable debt" explain to them, THERE'S NO DEBTORS PRISON ANYMORE. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY, BANKS WILL LEAVE YOU ALONE.


Obvious flame is obvious.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22879
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Seton Hall v Rutgers v Temple v St. John's v Syracuse

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:03 pm

FutureSuperLawyer wrote:Don't listen to the losers. Seton Hall has a great program to teach you PRACTICAL SKILLS, the kind that will enable you to practice right out of law schools. Law firms and gov't agencies can't afford to train lawyers anymore so they'll be hiring Seton Hall grads once they see how well this program works.

Also, dude, I understand your position on waiting a year and retaking; I was there last year. Everyone told me to retake and wait a year but they just did'nt get it. When I told a babe I worked at starbucks, she dropped me right away; now, when I tell her I'm in law school I get her every time. Law School is a three year party, and I can pay for all of it with gov't loans.

Losers on TLS will tell you you'll have a problem after you graduate since you'll have no money and won't be able to pay the loans back. But the first thing you'll learn in law school, is that bank's don't waste money going after people who have no money. I had no money before I went to law school, and, with my 3.0 GPA in political science, no prospects for getting any. So, I won't be any worse after law school. Again, in case you missed it last time, the first thing you learn in law school is that banks don't waste time going after people who have no money. Everytime someone gives you BS about "non-dischargable debt" explain to them, THERE'S NO DEBTORS PRISON ANYMORE. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY, BANKS WILL LEAVE YOU ALONE.

Yeah, so you need to take some time off and think about why you shouldn't troll the on-topics.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FutureLitigator and 5 guests