Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
oleosmirf
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby oleosmirf » Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:00 pm

That would not explain a sudden drop off of $55,000 in one year. Last year Camden was about 15,000 below Newark which makes perfect sense given the NYC v. Philly thing but a 60,000 average starting salary for private sector is extremely low.

This is something that needs to be addressed during the admitted student weekend because a school cutting their employment numbers that drastically is a huge red flag...

Beeg12 wrote:I believe the discrepancy between the salaries at Camden and Newark has ONLY to do with placement geography. North Jersey is closer to NYC, and while this absolutely does not mean that graduates will work in NYC firms, it does mean that when HUGE NYC companies move to North Jersey for tax breaks, it lends to higher corporate law reliance in Newark and more liberal hiring and salaries by North Jersey firms.

How do you think there have been so many jobs created in Jersey? The state granted twice as many corporate tax breaks in 2011 than in 2010.
Aeropostale, Inc, Bed Bath and Beyond, and Realology were all given enormous tax breaks to move from NYC to Bergen and Passaic in 2011.

This I believe is a growing trend. For a long time individuals that work in NYC have been moving to North Jersey to live and save money, now big business is following their lead. The economy of the regions differ enough to easily explain the drop in pp salaries in Camden.

As far as cost of living, yes it is more expensive in North Jersey, but not anywhere in the realm of 60k/year, which is the latest difference in average salary.(according to US News, which is sketchy at best.) Analysis of each schools self reported salary information shows a difference of 45k+, still not a factor as far as cost of living.

The sentiment in this forum(Camden specifically) is that this merger, if it happens, is irrelevant to employment, and that a Rutgers diploma is all that matters. I am still unaware as to how we can speculate that a name change and reallocation of funding would not affect the views of the institution by hiring firms. It may not affect it, but personally, any extra risk associated with such a large investment is a large factor in determining matriculation.

Difference in salary does not say anything as to the quality of education a graduate will receive. Camden just places graduates into a smaller and more distressed market.

Beeg12
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:38 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby Beeg12 » Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:31 pm

that is a very good point. What could be accounting for this large variance if the reputation of Camden truly rivals that of Newark? Perhaps the placement in Philadelphia is not as strong as most assume and has shifted to South Jersey in the past year. That could be a strong reason for the sudden drop, although this is purely speculation. It would be interesting if there was access to geographic placement in each state as opposed to region.

oleosmirf
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby oleosmirf » Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:33 pm

I think it's safe to officially proclaim Newark as the "better" of the two...

Beeg12 wrote:that is a very good point. What could be accounting for this large variance if the reputation of Camden truly rivals that of Newark? Perhaps the placement in Philadelphia is not as strong as most assume and has shifted to South Jersey in the past year. That could be a strong reason for the sudden drop, although this is purely speculation. It would be interesting if there was access to geographic placement in each state as opposed to region.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:39 pm

oleosmirf wrote:I think it's safe to officially proclaim Newark as the "better" of the two...

Clearly, when their employment at graduation DROPPED by 16%! But of course, that's just one of those things you can sweep under the rug.

Speculation behind the drop is just that...speculation. When Newark receives one too many survey responses one of these years and drops off by the same amount, I hope I'm around to say I told you so. Newark is also the Howard University of the NYC-area, so many employers will go there strictly for URM students (RU-N's MSP). If you fall outside of that category, you won't fare nearly as well. If you are a URM, it would be pretty absurd to go to RU-C and lose the benefit of that program.

The quality of the education has not changed (and will not). The firms who recruit there have not changed (and will not). If you fail out Rutgers-Camden, you would fail out of Rutgers-Newark. The schools are not significantly different enough from one another to negate which geographical area you prefer.

oleosmirf
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby oleosmirf » Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:27 pm

Camden's starting salary dropped by 50%. Quality of professors, class sizes, are all fine and dandy, but if you can't get a high paying job its really all for nothing. Maybe you are looking to work at a small firm or in the public sector but for those looking to work at a large firm, those numbers suggest Rutgers is not placing there. From what I've seen this cycle, ceteris paribus, students are choosing Newark over Camden.

Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.

I'll be honest, I am certainly a beneficiary of the merger, since the lower than usual amount of applicants certainly helped me get in, but to say the proposed merger won't potentially hurt our class is just wishful thinking. Its already affected the number of applicants and the 2012 rankings...


mrtoren wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:I think it's safe to officially proclaim Newark as the "better" of the two...

Clearly, when their employment at graduation DROPPED by 16%! But of course, that's just one of those things you can sweep under the rug.

Speculation behind the drop is just that...speculation. When Newark receives one too many survey responses one of these years and drops off by the same amount, I hope I'm around to say I told you so. Newark is also the Howard University of the NYC-area, so many employers will go there strictly for URM students (RU-N's MSP). If you fall outside of that category, you won't fare nearly as well. If you are a URM, it would be pretty absurd to go to RU-C and lose the benefit of that program.

The quality of the education has not changed (and will not). The firms who recruit there have not changed (and will not). If you fail out Rutgers-Camden, you would fail out of Rutgers-Newark. The schools are not significantly different enough from one another to negate which geographical area you prefer.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:57 pm

oleosmirf wrote:Camden's starting salary dropped by 50%. Quality of professors, class sizes, are all fine and dandy, but if you can't get a high paying job its really all for nothing. Maybe you are looking to work at a small firm or in the public sector but for those looking to work at a large firm, those numbers suggest Rutgers is not placing there. From what I've seen this cycle, ceteris paribus, students are choosing Newark over Camden.

Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.

I'll be honest, I am certainly a beneficiary of the merger, since the lower than usual amount of applicants certainly helped me get in, but to say the proposed merger won't potentially hurt our class is just wishful thinking. Its already affected the number of applicants and the 2012 rankings...

** Starting private practice salary dropped by nearly 50%

Newark will continue to flounder in the high 70's and 80's; its never going to make the long-awaited, dramatic jump into the first tier. One of the starkest differences among the two is that Newark places into a region that is notably overflowing with lawyers. You have multiple top tier law schools ratcheting up the competition to an unbearable level and there is an absurd amount of unemployment or underemployment among lawyers there. Camden, however, places in South Jersey and Philadelphia; it is one of only three T100 law schools in the immediate region. Taking the mass migration of U Penn grads into account and it comes down to Temple and Rutgers-Camden. The market is smaller, the salaries are smaller, but I still believe Camden graduates have a better shot at the top jobs if they have their act together. Without knowing if the merger will go through, its difficult to predict the future. I'm optimistic though and I believe there will be more opportunities for the graduates who stick with it and stay strong.

Nonetheless, for those with the BigLaw or bust mentality, this isn't your school.

Fletcher Reed
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:23 pm

d

Postby Fletcher Reed » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:18 am

d
Last edited by Fletcher Reed on Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

oleosmirf
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby oleosmirf » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:38 am

The problem is the south jersey legal market is not fairly large. Outside of the Trenton area (which is fairly small), south jersey doesn't really have much to offer. North Jersey has far more people and the area is much wealthier. Your points about the NYC competition are very true and Camden is essentially the 3rd/4th best school in the Philly region, depending on who you ask, and its also important to note that Penn students place all over the country.

That is why the 60,000 figure is so alarming. That suggests Camden is having trouble getting their students into medium/large firms in Philly despite having far less competition compared to those of similarly ranked schools in the tri-state area.

mrtoren wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:Camden's starting salary dropped by 50%. Quality of professors, class sizes, are all fine and dandy, but if you can't get a high paying job its really all for nothing. Maybe you are looking to work at a small firm or in the public sector but for those looking to work at a large firm, those numbers suggest Rutgers is not placing there. From what I've seen this cycle, ceteris paribus, students are choosing Newark over Camden.

Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.

I'll be honest, I am certainly a beneficiary of the merger, since the lower than usual amount of applicants certainly helped me get in, but to say the proposed merger won't potentially hurt our class is just wishful thinking. Its already affected the number of applicants and the 2012 rankings...

** Starting private practice salary dropped by nearly 50%

Newark will continue to flounder in the high 70's and 80's; its never going to make the long-awaited, dramatic jump into the first tier. One of the starkest differences among the two is that Newark places into a region that is notably overflowing with lawyers. You have multiple top tier law schools ratcheting up the competition to an unbearable level and there is an absurd amount of unemployment or underemployment among lawyers there. Camden, however, places in South Jersey and Philadelphia; it is one of only three T100 law schools in the immediate region. Taking the mass migration of U Penn grads into account and it comes down to Temple and Rutgers-Camden. The market is smaller, the salaries are smaller, but I still believe Camden graduates have a better shot at the top jobs if they have their act together. Without knowing if the merger will go through, its difficult to predict the future. I'm optimistic though and I believe there will be more opportunities for the graduates who stick with it and stay strong.

Nonetheless, for those with the BigLaw or bust mentality, this isn't your school.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:33 am

Fletcher Reed wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.


You just helped me realize that it's completely possible that BEFORE the class of 2015 graduates, Rutgers-Camden becomes Rowan Law which will make it even more possible that it drops AT LEAST two spots, making it a Tier III law school. Tier 3 Rowan Law?!?!? Is this what you are saying?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?! I need some Xanax.

But hey, at least it will say Rutgers on the diploma.

Dude, you truly are a basketcase. Take a deep breath, we'll make it out alive.

User avatar
neeko
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby neeko » Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:21 am

mrtoren wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:Camden's starting salary dropped by 50%. Quality of professors, class sizes, are all fine and dandy, but if you can't get a high paying job its really all for nothing. Maybe you are looking to work at a small firm or in the public sector but for those looking to work at a large firm, those numbers suggest Rutgers is not placing there. From what I've seen this cycle, ceteris paribus, students are choosing Newark over Camden.

Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.

I'll be honest, I am certainly a beneficiary of the merger, since the lower than usual amount of applicants certainly helped me get in, but to say the proposed merger won't potentially hurt our class is just wishful thinking. Its already affected the number of applicants and the 2012 rankings...

** Starting private practice salary dropped by nearly 50%

Newark will continue to flounder in the high 70's and 80's; its never going to make the long-awaited, dramatic jump into the first tier. One of the starkest differences among the two is that Newark places into a region that is notably overflowing with lawyers. You have multiple top tier law schools ratcheting up the competition to an unbearable level and there is an absurd amount of unemployment or underemployment among lawyers there. Camden, however, places in South Jersey and Philadelphia; it is one of only three T100 law schools in the immediate region. Taking the mass migration of U Penn grads into account and it comes down to Temple and Rutgers-Camden. The market is smaller, the salaries are smaller, but I still believe Camden graduates have a better shot at the top jobs if they have their act together. Without knowing if the merger will go through, its difficult to predict the future. I'm optimistic though and I believe there will be more opportunities for the graduates who stick with it and stay strong.

Nonetheless, for those with the BigLaw or bust mentality, this isn't your school.



Villanova fell to #101. You cannot say that they are not competing in the Philly market. There is no discernible difference between RU-C at #99 and Villanova at #101. And Nova won't stay a TTT, RU-C is headed there to stay.

Beeg12
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:38 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby Beeg12 » Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:29 am

mrtoren wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:I think it's safe to officially proclaim Newark as the "better" of the two...

Clearly, when their employment at graduation DROPPED by 16%! But of course, that's just one of those things you can sweep under the rug.

Speculation behind the drop is just that...speculation. When Newark receives one too many survey responses one of these years and drops off by the same amount, I hope I'm around to say I told you so. Newark is also the Howard University of the NYC-area, so many employers will go there strictly for URM students (RU-N's MSP). If you fall outside of that category, you won't fare nearly as well. If you are a URM, it would be pretty absurd to go to RU-C and lose the benefit of that program.

The quality of the education has not changed (and will not). The firms who recruit there have not changed (and will not). If you fail out Rutgers-Camden, you would fail out of Rutgers-Newark. The schools are not significantly different enough from one another to negate which geographical area you prefer.


What do you mean when you say "one to many survey responses"? As it is from the 2010 employment data RU-N has a higher percentage of students reporting salary information. Maybe I misunderstood what you are saying. If Camden had more people reporting I would agree with you in the invalidity of the stats, but when a school has more people reporting, isn't it a better representation of whats actually going on?

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:08 am

neeko wrote:
mrtoren wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:Camden's starting salary dropped by 50%. Quality of professors, class sizes, are all fine and dandy, but if you can't get a high paying job its really all for nothing. Maybe you are looking to work at a small firm or in the public sector but for those looking to work at a large firm, those numbers suggest Rutgers is not placing there. From what I've seen this cycle, ceteris paribus, students are choosing Newark over Camden.

Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.

I'll be honest, I am certainly a beneficiary of the merger, since the lower than usual amount of applicants certainly helped me get in, but to say the proposed merger won't potentially hurt our class is just wishful thinking. Its already affected the number of applicants and the 2012 rankings...

** Starting private practice salary dropped by nearly 50%

Newark will continue to flounder in the high 70's and 80's; its never going to make the long-awaited, dramatic jump into the first tier. One of the starkest differences among the two is that Newark places into a region that is notably overflowing with lawyers. You have multiple top tier law schools ratcheting up the competition to an unbearable level and there is an absurd amount of unemployment or underemployment among lawyers there. Camden, however, places in South Jersey and Philadelphia; it is one of only three T100 law schools in the immediate region. Taking the mass migration of U Penn grads into account and it comes down to Temple and Rutgers-Camden. The market is smaller, the salaries are smaller, but I still believe Camden graduates have a better shot at the top jobs if they have their act together. Without knowing if the merger will go through, its difficult to predict the future. I'm optimistic though and I believe there will be more opportunities for the graduates who stick with it and stay strong.

Nonetheless, for those with the BigLaw or bust mentality, this isn't your school.



Villanova fell to #101. You cannot say that they are not competing in the Philly market. There is no discernible difference between RU-C at #99 and Villanova at #101. And Nova won't stay a TTT, RU-C is headed there to stay.

Why are you even in this thread? Go back to Newark's.

You have absolutely no basis and no facts to make the claims your making. Sure, Nova is still in the market, but being booted into the third tier is going to hurt the incoming classes for the next year or two. If it doesn't rebound in next year's rankings, it'll be longer. However, none of this affects you so I'm not going to waste anymore of my time.

Beeg12 wrote:What do you mean when you say "one to many survey responses"? As it is from the 2010 employment data RU-N has a higher percentage of students reporting salary information. Maybe I misunderstood what you are saying. If Camden had more people reporting I would agree with you in the invalidity of the stats, but when a school has more people reporting, isn't it a better representation of whats actually going on?

Not necessarily. Without seeing the actual raw data, its all speculation as to the spread of numbers. But article after article has called BS on first year private practice salary data among law schools. I believe Camden's is fairly accurate for the first time in years. That being said, I sincerely doubt the true PP median for Newark's class is $120,000. Also keep in mind that only a little over a quarter of the class went into private practice. Three quarters of the class, despite six figures twinkling in their eyes, took much lower salaries in other sectors.
Last edited by mrtoren on Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
neeko
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby neeko » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:16 am

mrtoren wrote:
neeko wrote:
mrtoren wrote:
oleosmirf wrote:Camden's starting salary dropped by 50%. Quality of professors, class sizes, are all fine and dandy, but if you can't get a high paying job its really all for nothing. Maybe you are looking to work at a small firm or in the public sector but for those looking to work at a large firm, those numbers suggest Rutgers is not placing there. From what I've seen this cycle, ceteris paribus, students are choosing Newark over Camden.

Rutgers dropped down to 99 in the rankings and is on the verge of losing its Rutgers affiliation which means by the time we graduate the school may very well be a Tier 3 school, whereas Newark is likely to continue its upward trend due to many students jumping ship. Its all over the news here and Camden is suffering because of it.

I'll be honest, I am certainly a beneficiary of the merger, since the lower than usual amount of applicants certainly helped me get in, but to say the proposed merger won't potentially hurt our class is just wishful thinking. Its already affected the number of applicants and the 2012 rankings...

** Starting private practice salary dropped by nearly 50%

Newark will continue to flounder in the high 70's and 80's; its never going to make the long-awaited, dramatic jump into the first tier. One of the starkest differences among the two is that Newark places into a region that is notably overflowing with lawyers. You have multiple top tier law schools ratcheting up the competition to an unbearable level and there is an absurd amount of unemployment or underemployment among lawyers there. Camden, however, places in South Jersey and Philadelphia; it is one of only three T100 law schools in the immediate region. Taking the mass migration of U Penn grads into account and it comes down to Temple and Rutgers-Camden. The market is smaller, the salaries are smaller, but I still believe Camden graduates have a better shot at the top jobs if they have their act together. Without knowing if the merger will go through, its difficult to predict the future. I'm optimistic though and I believe there will be more opportunities for the graduates who stick with it and stay strong.

Nonetheless, for those with the BigLaw or bust mentality, this isn't your school.



Villanova fell to #101. You cannot say that they are not competing in the Philly market. There is no discernible difference between RU-C at #99 and Villanova at #101. And Nova won't stay a TTT, RU-C is headed there to stay.

Why are you even in this thread? Go back to Newark's.

You have absolutely no basis and no facts to make the claims your making. Sure, Nova is still in the market, but being booted into the third tier is going to hurt the incoming classes for the next year or two. If it doesn't rebound in next year's rankings, it'll be longer. However, none of this affects you so I'm not going to waste anymore of my time.


Nova is not a shitty school, Rowan is. That's my basis.

And I was accepted into this school with $, so I can be here if I feel like it.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:33 am

neeko wrote:Nova is not a shitty school, Rowan is. That's my basis.

And I was accepted into this school with $, so I can be here if I feel like it.

First of all, Rowan is not that shitty. Despite the chaos and the name-calling the merger proposal has fostered, its actually a pretty decent and well-respected school. Its biggest drawbacks, ones which cannot be overcome, are the the lack of a substantial history, lack of name recognition, and lack of national prestige. But with a medical school and a law school, it would become a new member of a very small group of elite research institutions. Would the first couple of transition years be rough? Absolutely. Mistakes would be made, students would be lost. The world wouldn't end though.

Nevertheless, I'm still not convinced the merger will go through. There are too many unanswered questions, too many Christie gaffes, and too much popular support against it. Realistically, I could see the development of a consortium of some sort for the foreseeable future.

All you're doing in this thread is trolling. Nobody wants to hear you trash the school we're committed to; we've read the articles too, we know the facts.
Last edited by mrtoren on Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
neeko
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby neeko » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:37 am

mrtoren wrote:
neeko wrote:Nova is not a shitty school, Rowan is. That's my basis.

And I was accepted into this school with $, so I can be here if I feel like it.

First of all, Rowan is not that shitty. Despite the chaos and the name-calling the merger proposal has fostered, its actually a pretty decent and well-respected school. Its biggest drawbacks, ones which cannot be overcome, are the the lack of a substantial history, lack of name recognition, and lack of national prestige. But with a medical school and a law school, it would become a new member of a very small group of elite research institutions. Nevertheless, I'm still not convinced the merger will go through. There are too many unanswered questions, too many Christie gaffes, and too much popular support against it. Realistically, I could see the development a consortium of some sort for the foreseeable future.

All you're doing in this thread is trolling. Nobody wants to hear you trash the school we're committed to; we've read the articles too, we know the facts.


Dude, this is not the CLASS OF thread. People in this thread are not committed to this school. You can convince yourself all you want that paying sticker for a TTT is smart because you think Rowan is cool. You've obviously never lived in Jersey or anywhere even close to there. It's not cool.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:40 am

neeko wrote:Dude, this is not the CLASS OF thread. People in this thread are not committed to this school. You can convince yourself all you want that paying sticker for a TTT is smart because you think Rowan is cool. You've obviously never lived in Jersey or anywhere even close to there. It's not cool.

"Dude" this is the thread that funnels kids into the 'class of 2015' thread. Trolling here is the same as trolling there.

I think you've overstayed your welcome.

User avatar
neeko
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby neeko » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:47 am

mrtoren wrote:
neeko wrote:Dude, this is not the CLASS OF thread. People in this thread are not committed to this school. You can convince yourself all you want that paying sticker for a TTT is smart because you think Rowan is cool. You've obviously never lived in Jersey or anywhere even close to there. It's not cool.

"Dude" this is the thread that funnels kids into the 'class of 2015' thread. Trolling here is the same as trolling there.

I think you've overstayed your welcome.


I didn't ask for your opinion. Stop telling people stupid shit like that it doesn't matter if it's Rowan. If there are other people here that haven't lived in Jersey they might fall for it.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:53 am

neeko wrote:I didn't ask for your opinion. Stop telling people stupid shit like that it doesn't matter if it's Rowan. If there are other people here that haven't lived in Jersey they might fall for it.

You need to stop putting words in my mouth. I don't want a merger to happen because I think it would damage the law school for many years. However, contrary to your doomsday prophecies, it wouldn't turn Camden into an abysmal shithole. You're a troll here, you're not contributing anything of any value. We get that you think Rutgers-Camden is a poor investment under these conditions. Move along.

Beeg12
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:38 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby Beeg12 » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:11 pm

MRTOREN: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY SOMEONE IS NOT WELCOME IN ANY THREAD.

If someone comes on this thread and makes a reasonable statement based on facts it is perfectly fine. The whole point of these forums is for people to share INFORMATION about the schools, and you have stopped providing statistical support for your OPINIONS. You are beginning to take this personally, and to be perfectly honest you are not speaking with any sense in relation to any data or statistics.

You said this about employment statistics..."Not necessarily. Without seeing the actual raw data, its all speculation as to the spread of numbers. But article after article has called BS on first year private practice salary data among law schools. I believe Camden's is fairly accurate for the first time in years. That being said, I sincerely doubt the true PP median for Newark's class is $120,000. Also keep in mind that only a little over a quarter of the class went into private practice. Three quarters of the class, despite six figures twinkling in their eyes, took much lower salaries in other sectors."

How can you arbitrarily decide which school is fudging and which isnt? YOU ARE SPECULATING to bridge a gap in these numbers and are placing blame on RU-N based on what? look at the 2010 data from each school and calculate the numbers they give you. Percentage in pp is higher in newark. More of those people are reporting their salaries at newark, and their numbers are better. "I beleive" is only relevent when it is based on facts, and frankly you have none backing you up.

You are allowed to have your opinion and your choice at law school AND BY ALL MEANS SHARE IT. But do not get defensive when people reasonably cite stats and data and opinions because they don't support your obvious Camden bias.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:18 pm

Beeg12 wrote:MRTOREN: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY SOMEONE IS NOT WELCOME IN ANY THREAD.

If someone comes on this thread and makes a reasonable statement based on facts it is perfectly fine. The whole point of these forums is for people to share INFORMATION about the schools, and you have stopped providing statistical support for your OPINIONS. You are beginning to take this personally, and to be perfectly honest you are not speaking with any sense in relation to any data or statistics.

You said this about employment statistics..."Not necessarily. Without seeing the actual raw data, its all speculation as to the spread of numbers. But article after article has called BS on first year private practice salary data among law schools. I believe Camden's is fairly accurate for the first time in years. That being said, I sincerely doubt the true PP median for Newark's class is $120,000. Also keep in mind that only a little over a quarter of the class went into private practice. Three quarters of the class, despite six figures twinkling in their eyes, took much lower salaries in other sectors."

How can you arbitrarily decide which school is fudging and which isnt? YOU ARE SPECULATING to bridge a gap in these numbers and are placing blame on RU-N based on what? look at the 2010 data from each school and calculate the numbers they give you. Percentage in pp is higher in newark. More of those people are reporting their salaries at newark, and their numbers are better. "I beleive" is only relevent when it is based on facts, and frankly you have none backing you up.

You are allowed to have your opinion and your choice at law school AND BY ALL MEANS SHARE IT. But do not get defensive when people reasonably cite stats and data and opinions because they don't support your obvious Camden bias.

I get defensive when trolls go on the offensive.

Beeg12
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:38 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby Beeg12 » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:27 pm

"I get defensive when trolls go on the offensive."

This is exactly my point. How is it trolling when its logical? go to the Newark page and look at any post by "Linsanity". That is trolling. Making a reasonable analysis of employment prospects and salary statistics isn't trolling. This is a forum for people to share information and opinions. If you can't make a statement based on facts to prove your opinion how do you expect to be an attorney? are you going to call opposing counsel trolls, throw a fit and tell them they are no longer welcome in the courtroom? get it together.

User avatar
mrtoren
Posts: 733
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby mrtoren » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:34 pm

Beeg12 wrote:"I get defensive when trolls go on the offensive."

This is exactly my point. How is it trolling when its logical? go to the Newark page and look at any post by "Linsanity". That is trolling. Making a reasonable analysis of employment prospects and salary statistics isn't trolling. This is a forum for people to share information and opinions. If you can't make a statement based on facts to prove your opinion how do you expect to be an attorney? are you going to call opposing counsel trolls, throw a fit and tell them they are no longer welcome in the courtroom? get it together.

Trolling: The act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet, generally on message boards.

This thread is about acceptances, waitlists, and denials at Rutgers-Camden. It has diverged considerably into a battle over the merit of a potential merger. Any prospective law students knows the facts. What is being offered here are inflammatory opinions.

Take further discussion here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=177040

oleosmirf
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby oleosmirf » Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:09 pm

Just because other accepted students are questioning whether or not to attend Camden, doesn't make us trolls. Until I withdraw my acceptance (which I still am not decided on), I am considered part of the 2015 class. I will continue to talk about this topic with other members of the class as this pertains directly to my future.

Governor Christie (one of the most powerful republicans and could very well be our next president should Obama be re-elected) is committed to turning Rutgers-Camden into Rowan Law School. Dean Solomon has already stated that the number of applicants has decreased substantially and the admission standards for this class have been lowered to compensate for that.

Furthermore, Rutgers ranking plummeted to barely within the top 100 and their private practice numbers are now among the lowest reported in the country. It is possible that this is just a fluke and/or that Rutgers the only "honest" school and it will go back up next year but isn't it also just as likely or even more so that it will drop into TTT. It is cause for concern and debate especially when it is our future at stake...

Sure Camden will have lower class sizes and the quality of education is likely to stay the same but aren't job prospects much much much more important? What good is a quality education if you can't get a job that compensates you for it?

mrtoren wrote:
Beeg12 wrote:"I get defensive when trolls go on the offensive."

This is exactly my point. How is it trolling when its logical? go to the Newark page and look at any post by "Linsanity". That is trolling. Making a reasonable analysis of employment prospects and salary statistics isn't trolling. This is a forum for people to share information and opinions. If you can't make a statement based on facts to prove your opinion how do you expect to be an attorney? are you going to call opposing counsel trolls, throw a fit and tell them they are no longer welcome in the courtroom? get it together.

Trolling: The act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet, generally on message boards.

This thread is about acceptances, waitlists, and denials at Rutgers-Camden. It has diverged considerably into a battle over the merit of a potential merger. Any prospective law students knows the facts. What is being offered here are inflammatory opinions.

Take further discussion here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=177040

Fletcher Reed
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:23 pm

d

Postby Fletcher Reed » Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:52 pm

d
Last edited by Fletcher Reed on Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

oleosmirf
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 (2011-2012 cycle)

Postby oleosmirf » Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:04 pm

+1

Fletcher Reed wrote:mtoren: You played the troll card with me as well when I first began expressing my concerns about the school. Out of respect, I removed some of the items and even apologized to you via PM.
However, the reality is this: Just because people are saying things that are upsetting to you does not mean they are trolling. Everything that's been said lately is based on FACTS that are currently taking place. In fact, you even had the same concerns as most of us until you decided to attend RU-Camden at which time all of your concerns miraculously disappeared. I’ll cite just one example out of many: You signed a petition at ipetitions.com, did you not? And you stated the following: “As a prospective law student, I don't want to see RU-C folded into Rowan. It could devastate the law school and its graduates' employment prospective. Either fold Rowan into RU-C or keep them separate”. Let it be noted that this was prior to your decision to attend RU-Camden. Then, after making the decision to attend you stated, “The firms who recruit there have not changed (and will not)”. On one hand you stated that the employment prospects will be devastated, and then on the other you state they will remain unchanged. You didn’t back this by any evidence whatsoever. In fact, most of what you say is just personal viewpoints presented as fact. You are like a mother who puts her child up on a pedestal. Her child could be breaking the law and getting arrested, but the mother will say, “He is innocent because he’s a good kid, he’s my son, and I said so!” It wouldn’t matter if he was caught on tape committing murder. He could do no wrong. In my opinion, you are in serious denial about what’s taking place at the school you chose to attend, otherwise to both admit what’s really going on and to choose to attend the school would cause some serious inner turmoil.
If anyone is trolling it’s probably you. You are constantly arguing with those of us who are presenting FACTS and our valid concerns. Every argument you make (including the one where you call people trolls for upsetting you) is completely erroneous. Unless you can back up what you say, go find something else to do. You’ve already decided where you are going to attend. Let the rest of us talk about what’s going on and decide our futures. PLEASE STOP DERAILING US.
Lastly, you have some type of entitlement issue with this thread. Just because you created it does not mean you can control it and cry every time something is said that you don’t like. I agree with the others that you don’t have the right to regulate and control the thread. Again, you appear to be the troll here because YOU are derailing the topic. You need to stop. If anyone should “move along” it should be you. Maybe you can create a “Rutgers-Camden Class of 2015 Admitted & Attending” thread. You can make the very first post and you can hang out in there. Otherwise, the discussions taking place as we try to make a decision will continue.
To everyone else: I say we just completely ignore him because he has truly contributed absolutely nothing valuable to the conversation. Let’s continue our educated, fact-based discussion.




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”