BigZuck wrote:So if someone goes to a T14 they are an elitist, if they go to a "sub-T14" they're a prole?
I had my choice of T14s and non-T14s, I decided to slum it at a non-T14. I'm cool with it. That's also entirely irrelevant.
Not wanting to retake is fine. YOLO. It's an objectively bad decision a lot of the time though. We don't have to give out bad advice just because we are presented with false dichotomies.
No, people who go to T14s are fine, as are people who go sub-T14... I don't consider myself a prole, nor you for that matter, simply because we go to sub-T14 schools. People who deride others for the route they've taken are elitist proles. I'm just saying with the emphasis you and others place on T14s vs. everywhere else, you'd think you would've chosen to go to one. I didn't have the luxury of being able to take the February LSAT last year and neither may OP. I've answered OP's original question, yes, his scores are likely good enough to get into those schools though, obviously, if he wants to cement that, he can do so by retaking. However, he said he doesn't want to retake, if he truly doesn't want to or can't
, he has the right to know that it's not like he's destined to be a fry cook with a 3.2/168. The odds are in his favor with those numbers... maybe not rock solid, but certainly in his favor.
No such thing as can't retake. Literally. No. Such. Thing.
T14s give people the best shot at paying off big debt. A shot that is much, much, greater than going to even the next tier of schools (Vandy, UCLA, USC, UT). If you're a splitter and if you want big law then a T14 is usually your only option because even going to the next tier of schools you shouldn't go unless you have a substantial scholarship and most of the time those can be tough to get if you're a splitter. Hell, just wanting big law means a T14 is pretty much your only option.
What I said to the OP was predicated on the notion that I didn't think a 3.2/168 would get enough to make UCLA/USC worthwhile. I could be mistaken, I didn't follow their cycles too closely last summer when I had already crossed them off my list. I was pretty much around both schools 75ths and they both offered me about 120K which I thought was just on the border of not worth it. Maybe they did go buck wild for splitters and if they do so again, then I think the OP choosing to attend would be totally defensible if he can keep his debt under 100K. As I said though, I'm suspicious that that might not be possible.
If its not, then the T14 is his only real option. The other CA schools are almost uniformly terrible and I don't think they are worth going to for the most part, even if free. There is still the opportunity cost of losing three years of your life that you'll never get back in the not too unlikely scenario that you totally strike out.
Anyway, your argument is built upon the backs of so many strawmen. No one said its HYS or bust, nor T14s or bust. Solid regionals are fine as long as they are cheap. There are only two solid regionals in CA-USC and UCLA. If a splitter can get them for cheapsies, then by all means that's a good option. But as I said like 5 times, I'm skeptical that that's a realistic possibility.