Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:26 pm

The basics:

The schools you are considering
Any t-14 that will have me, UCLA/U$C, UCI(?)
The total Cost of Attendance
Probably sticker
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)
Southern California born, raised and schooled
Your general career goals
Moderate material comfort, with the remainder of my happiness afforded by proximity to family, friends, and the beach
Your LSAT/GPA numbers
170/2.9 (B.S., math)
How many times you have taken the LSAT
One time(Oct 2010)

The thread title basically says the rest. Is there any defensible law school route to Southern California for a splitter?

User avatar
twenty
Posts: 3153
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby twenty » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:37 pm

slowboat wrote:Any t-14 that will have me, UCLA/U$C, UCI(?)


UCLA and USC are very unlikely, UCI is not worth going to at the price you'd have to pay, if they'd take you at all. Unfortunately, being sub-3.0, even ED UVA's going to be a tough sell.

You have an okay chance at Northwestern with an increased LSAT (read: 173+) Also, this thread should probably be in chances rather than choosing.

Unfortunately for you, none of this:

Your general career goals
Moderate material comfort, with the remainder of my happiness afforded by proximity to family, friends, and the beach


Is going to happen from NU. So personally, I'd probably skip law school.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9639
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby jbagelboy » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:53 pm

This is more of a "what are my chances" than a "choosing a law school" topic, but ill bite.

Unfortunately no, law school is not a very realistic option for you right now in SoCal. USC/UCLA are unlikely to admit you with sub-3.0 -- but even if they did off the WL it would be at sticker, which is unjustifiable. I wouldnt attend UCI for free anyway, and you are out at Cal/SLS. No other law schools in the state are worth consideration if your goal is to be employed as an attorney.

Are you still a senior in college? If so, finish your senior year, get your GPA as high above 3.0 as possible, and see where you stand for Fall 2014. Don't think about applying right now.

If not, do you have work experience post-grad? How many years? That 170 LSAT coupled with a few years of post-grad WE could help you overcome the GPA at Northwestern (this would not be possible coming out directly from UG). However, given your goals, sticker at NU is a tricky bargain. Getting back to CA is already a toss-up, and you'll be looking at $300K in debt. Not a great start for a comfortable, moderately material life.

Rather than law school, what are your options with your math major? What track did you choose, i.e., pure, applied, stats, ect. Do you have any programming utility in ruby/python? Go for software engineering positions then. Given your goals (comfort, beach, friends), taking on superior debt loads for a 30-40% chance at CA biglaw doesnt seem like the most direct route. Consider networking via alumni at your UG for positions in analytics, research, economic consulting (lower tier firms) or just take the CPA exam -- its very learnable for math background.

Best of luck

User avatar
TheThriller
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:12 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby TheThriller » Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:00 pm

OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14

User avatar
Robespierre
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 7:02 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby Robespierre » Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:07 pm

TheThriller wrote:OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14


This. Cali is GULC's #3 state for placing its students. And 2.9/170 has a shot in the current environment of declining applications. And OP can consider the part-time program which would allow him to work and limit his debt.

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:22 pm

jbagelboy wrote:This is more of a "what are my chances" than a "choosing a law school" topic, but ill bite.

Yeah, wasn't sure where to put it.

jbagelboy wrote:Unfortunately no, law school is not a very realistic option for you right now in SoCal. USC/UCLA are unlikely to admit you with sub-3.0 -- but even if they did off the WL it would be at sticker, which is unjustifiable. I wouldnt attend UCI for free anyway, and you are out at Cal/SLS. No other law schools in the state are worth consideration if your goal is to be employed as an attorney.

Are you still a senior in college? If so, finish your senior year, get your GPA as high above 3.0 as possible, and see where you stand for Fall 2014. Don't think about applying right now.

Graduated June 2011.

jbagelboy wrote:If not, do you have work experience post-grad? How many years? That 170 LSAT coupled with a few years of post-grad WE could help you overcome the GPA at Northwestern (this would not be possible coming out directly from UG). However, given your goals, sticker at NU is a tricky bargain. Getting back to CA is already a toss-up, and you'll be looking at $300K in debt. Not a great start for a comfortable, moderately material life.

Limited work experience. Did the LSAT instructor gig briefly after graduation, then some SAT/high school tutoring stuff around my hometown before relocating to the east coast, where I am currently. Been working since December part-time in an office/clerical/bookkeeping type job. Professional aspirations have been shelved as I pursue athletic goals in a non-revenue Olympic sport (rowing). Basically current job allows me to pay for food and shelter, with added benefit of allowing me to sit between training sessions.

jbagelboy wrote:Rather than law school, what are your options with your math major? What track did you choose, i.e., pure, applied, stats, ect. Do you have any programming utility in ruby/python? Go for software engineering positions then. Given your goals (comfort, beach, friends), taking on superior debt loads for a 30-40% chance at CA biglaw doesnt seem like the most direct route. Consider networking via alumni at your UG for positions in analytics, research, economic consulting (lower tier firms) or just take the CPA exam -- its very learnable for math background.

Pure math, unfortunately. Limited programming utility, took Java in high school, C++ as a general math pre-req in undergrad. Been toying around with Perl and Python online tutorials, know very basic HTML stuff.

I got a close enough sniff at the national team this year to keep me hungry to train for the next year, but I guess I'm facing down the reality of turning 25 next summer and having limited career options. I know that using law school as a panacea for career uncertainty is a terrible reason to go, but I guess I'm trying to get a feel for just how terrible. Initial responses seem to indicate pretty freaking terrible haha.

jbagelboy wrote:Best of luck

Thanks, I truly appreciate the advice.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15487
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:00 pm

You have a chance to get to Southern California after law school, but going to law school there is almost certainly a non-starter. Which makes the whole situation pretty tricky if you have your heart set on ending up there.

User avatar
Doorkeeper
Posts: 4872
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:25 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby Doorkeeper » Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:16 pm

I would retake the October LSAT for a 173+ and aim for GULC, Northwestern, or ED UVA.

Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.

BigZuck
Posts: 10859
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby BigZuck » Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:21 am

If this was me it would be

Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker

Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18418
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby bk1 » Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:22 am

Moved to appropriate forum.

User avatar
ManoftheHour
Posts: 3402
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:03 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby ManoftheHour » Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:25 am

BigZuck wrote:If this was me it would be

Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker

Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)


What about ND? They sent 10% of their last class to CA. WUSTL only sent about 5-6%.

On that note, how come ND doesn't get as much love from TLS as WUSTL? Looking at LST, ND's stats are superior...at least at first glance.

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:07 am

bk1 wrote:Moved to appropriate forum.
Thanks.

TheThriller wrote:OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14
Robespierre wrote:
TheThriller wrote:OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14


This. Cali is GULC's #3 state for placing its students. And 2.9/170 has a shot in the current environment of declining applications. And OP can consider the part-time program which would allow him to work and limit his debt.
Doorkeeper wrote:I would retake the October LSAT for a 173+ and aim for GULC, Northwestern, or ED UVA.

Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.
Is the focus on Georgetown/UVA/NU because those are the only t14 where I might have a shot? Or put another way, do they offer any specific advantages over other lower t14s in getting graduates back to CA? Both Duke and Penn, for example, place a higher percentage than GULC in CA (though taking into consideration GULC huge classes they actually put more people). I know Penn on paper is an auto ding, but I got a WL there from a January app this cycle. Would Penn sticker be a defensible option?

Also, re: retake, would there be a large enough change to my outcomes to justify the effort of studying for what is far from a sure increase? A 170 puts me at or above the median for all the schools in discussion.

BigZuck wrote:If this was me it would be

Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker

Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)
Is there an actual chance of a full ride at WUSTL? More so than an admit to a lower t14?

ManoftheHour wrote:
BigZuck wrote:If this was me it would be

Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker

Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)


What about ND? They sent 10% of their last class to CA. WUSTL only sent about 5-6%.

On that note, how come ND doesn't get as much love from TLS as WUSTL? Looking at LST, ND's stats are superior...at least at first glance.
This might not be substantiated, but the general feeling I get from browsing the forums that for ND vs. WUSTL, the latter is more loosey goosey with money than is the former.

Tiago Splitter wrote:You have a chance to get to Southern California after law school, but going to law school there is almost certainly a non-starter. Which makes the whole situation pretty tricky if you have your heart set on ending up there.
Yeah, sucks to suck at undergrad.

Thanks everyone for the feedback.

User avatar
hoos89
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby hoos89 » Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:01 pm

/
Last edited by hoos89 on Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15411
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby sublime » Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:05 pm

..

BigZuck
Posts: 10859
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby BigZuck » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:03 pm

I don't see Duke or Penn ever happening for that GPA. NU and maybe GULC and UVA are the only T14s that I think would consider a sub-3.0 and I would be very leery of all of those schools at sticker, especially if you're trying to get back to CA.

User avatar
bananasplit19
Posts: 686
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby bananasplit19 » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:04 pm

Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.

After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).

So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.

I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.

BigZuck
Posts: 10859
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby BigZuck » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:11 pm

bananasplit19 wrote:Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.

After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).

So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.

I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.


About how many Southern CA midlaw jobs are out there and how easy is it for a UCI grad to get them?

Anyway if the OP could snag UCI for freesies I think that's a great option.

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:14 pm

hoos89 wrote:
ManoftheHour wrote:What about ND? They sent 10% of their last class to CA. WUSTL only sent about 5-6%.

On that note, how come ND doesn't get as much love from TLS as WUSTL? Looking at LST, ND's stats are superior...at least at first glance.


A lot of WUSTL students are vocal on TLS. But mainly, WUSTL is known for making it rain more than their peers. They pretty much threw a full ride at every 166 LSAT in c/o 2016. So yes...OP does have a chance at a full ride from WUSTL IF that continues. I doubt that is sustainable though, and usually anyone over WUSTL's LSAT median will get in with money, but often less than a full ride. I had the same numbers (2.91/170) in c/o 2015 and got no T14 admissions and $60k from WUSTL ($30k from GWU), but obviously the landscape has changed a bit.

Also, 10% is still a small number. If OP wanted to go to California from either school it would take some hustling.
Makes sense. Where did you end up going, if you don't mind me asking?

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:16 pm

BigZuck wrote:I don't see Duke or Penn ever happening for that GPA. NU and maybe GULC and UVA are the only T14s that I think would consider a sub-3.0 and I would be very leery of all of those schools at sticker, especially if you're trying to get back to CA.
Yeah I hear ya on Duke/Penn. I think the Penn WL just gives me a little more optimism about my chances were I to apply earlier/ED, though it's probably misguided.

User avatar
bananasplit19
Posts: 686
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby bananasplit19 » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:25 pm

BigZuck wrote:
bananasplit19 wrote:Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.

After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).

So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.

I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.


About how many Southern CA midlaw jobs are out there and how easy is it for a UCI grad to get them?

Anyway if the OP could snag UCI for freesies I think that's a great option.

I don't have anything except anecdotes about SoCal MidLaw, but those anecdotes come from 2Ls, 3Ls, and recent grads from UCLA, USC, and UCI (yeah, I was one of those 0Ls that bothered everyone; I literally got opinions from every subset from all three schools :lol: ). From what I hear, it's not fish-in-a-barrel, but it's definitely doable. From my perspective, it's a similar vibe to BigLaw chances from Northwestern students/grads.

One especially frugal friend graduated from UCLA with around $100k in debt, got a MidLaw job (<15 attorney firm) and was out of debt in 21 months. An extreme example, but if you can squeeze your COA to five-digits at graduation, something to consider.

I'm not blindly advocating it (I didn't end up taking that route, after all), just saying that it's something worth exploring if the scholarship money is there!

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:25 pm

bananasplit19 wrote:Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.

After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).

So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.

I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.
BigZuck wrote:About how many Southern CA midlaw jobs are out there and how easy is it for a UCI grad to get them?

Anyway if the OP could snag UCI for freesies I think that's a great option.
That was along the lines of my thinking towards UCI, as well. COA would be further lowered by the ability to commute from home.

I'm a bit wary of my ability to get a ton of money from UCI. I've applied there two years in a row now, both times I think literally on the application deadline (my ambivalence towards law school stretches back a-ways). First time I was admitted with 15k/yr, unsuccessfully asked for more money, did not attend. This cycle was a WL. Would applying a third time work against me? ("Not this guy again"). Probably over-thinking it, but something to consider.

User avatar
bananasplit19
Posts: 686
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby bananasplit19 » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:28 pm

slowboat wrote:I'm a bit wary of my ability to get a ton of money from UCI. I've applied there two years in a row now, both times I think literally on the application deadline (my ambivalence towards law school stretches back a-ways). First time I was admitted with 15k/yr, unsuccessfully asked for more money, did not attend. This cycle was a WL. Would applying a third time work against me? ("Not this guy again"). Probably over-thinking it, but something to consider.

Sorry to hear, OP. For what it's worth, I had a sub-3 GPA, but I also had a couple points on you on the LSAT and some extra WE. Maybe a retake is in order, as others have suggested? It might open up some wallets at T14 (as it did for me) on top of UCI.

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:51 pm

bananasplit19 wrote:Sorry to hear, OP. For what it's worth, I had a sub-3 GPA, but I also had a couple points on you on the LSAT and some extra WE. Maybe a retake is in order, as others have suggested? It might open up some wallets at T14 (as it did for me) on top of UCI.
Man I was really hoping retake was not the answer, haha. I'll say again, sucks to suck at undergrad.

Guess I'll start hunting for a retake plan in the LSAT forum (anyone have recommendations?).

User avatar
hoos89
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby hoos89 » Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:34 pm

/
Last edited by hoos89 on Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

slowboat
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm

Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?

Postby slowboat » Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:00 pm

I guess before I commit too much energy to this:
slowboat wrote:Man I was really hoping retake was not the answer, haha. I'll say again, sucks to suck at undergrad.

Guess I'll start hunting for a retake plan in the LSAT forum (anyone have recommendations?).
I should confirm that this:
Doorkeeper wrote:I would retake the October LSAT for a 173+ and aim for GULC, Northwestern, or ED UVA.

Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.
is credited? As in, does a sticker t14 acceptance that a hypothetical 173+ gets me make SoCal-or-bust more tenable?




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pretzel and 6 guests