cdotson2 wrote:Just to add a counterbalance to what everyone is saying TLS is notorious for thinking that LS admissions is 100% predictable, and it might have been at some point. However, last cycle when I applied I was wait-listed from duke up to columbia, was rejected from michigan and then got into Stanford and Harvard. I have also talked to numerous other students at HLS (and on TLS) who had odd cycles last year, with more than one person being rejected from one of the bottom t14. People like to say it's yield protect, but that doesn't explain why people would be rejected from lower schools. Scholarships are much harder to predict than admission outcomes, and admissions outcomes are not as black and white as TLS thinks they are. I got 150K from cornell, 0 from Georgetown, 65K from duke, and I didn't get a full ride to the T30 regional school I applied to. Especially for named scholarship's that you have to interview for (like the Mordecai), it is unlikely that just submitting the same app will help at all.
No one has said anything about submitting the same application though. They've said the OP should scrub their application vigorously to detect any weak points and submit stronger apps in the fall. The only part people are saying leave alone, very counter to typical TLS wisdom, are the LSAT/GPA. The objective parts are in the wheelhouse for being competitive for named scholarships (which you're right are in no way guaranteed, but there are additional non-named scholarships that at least approach similar amounts like a Dean's scholly at UVA for $150k), so what must be askew is some weakness in the rest of the applications. It could be an unimpressive resume (like OP mentioned with lower-ranked UG), it could be weak essays, it could be YP because didn't write persuasive "Why X" essays, or it could be any number of other reasons. So while I agree a full ride isn't a guaranteed outcome, with the right application tailored properly, the OP should have better options for their very generic goals.
ETA: OP, do you have any counter argument to my post on the previous page? Can you provide a financially rational reason or even an actual professional reason why waiting and reapplying wouldn't make sense for you beyond not wanting to wait?