Severely Under-performed on Feb LSAT - 153/3.33 UGPA Forum

[bmathers]

By the way, would you rec applying to Drexel and Duquesne (regional schools for my interest of maybe practicing in PA), or holding off till next cycle, since I am likely going to hold out one more year (LSATs)? Is Drexel respected in the PA market?

Ideally, I would like to score in the 160s and go to Villanova on a scholarship.

No. I'm very familiar with these schools and Drexel is absolute bottom of the barrel, right there with Widener.

Thank you.

So, for PA, the list is Nova, Temple, PSU, UPenn, and Pitt being the only worthwhile schools in-state?

How about schools in neighboring states, like OSU, URichmond, UMD, Cuse, Rutgers, UTK?? Thanks

[Danger Zone]

All of the schools are highly regional. If you want to work in Pittsburgh, go to U Pitt. If you want to work in South Jersey, Rutgers Camden, and so on.

[JazzyMac]

No worries; I'm on your side. I've thought a lot about the "advice" given on these threads, and there are many reasons and justifications:

- A lot of younger folks that are not necessarily K-JD, but just have not spent too much time in the real world, with real people, living a real life.
- "Top Law Schools" as the name of this website predicates, would speak, of course, about what it takes to get into top schools. So first and foremost is earning a top LSAT score. No matter what most folks' thoughts are on this score, schools are a slave to those numbers 99% of the time and will not risk donor money to use that "whole person concept"--no matter how touted otherwise.
- People assuming, weirdly, that Top Law School = Big Law. No matter how many people mention they don't care about Big Law, and the many avenues outside of Big Law, it still doesn't change the assumption that "the only way to get into Big Law is by a Top Law School".
- Another weird point is how working Big Law directly correlates with poor health, poor sleep, and quite a few other health problems and issues, and yet even when a post indicates a person's interest in a different field, a thread will still steer into "Big Law or Bust", "TTT is death", etc., etc.
- I've spoken to 150 - 175 scorers, and ALL of them say that the forums are interesting, but not really helpful since they are so narrow-minded. That says a lot.

- Anecdotal: A 144 LSAT scorer licensed with the U.S. Supreme Court

In the end, you will do fine no matter what you choose. Having lived a life where 49th place (in any sense) doesn't necessarily equal failure, I'm not highly concerned over some of the "advice" in these threads. Separate the wheat from the chaff, as you're doing and you'll be fine.

[muskies970]

Donald Trump's America ITT

[Danger Zone]

No worries; I'm on your side. I've thought a lot about the "advice" given on these threads, and there are many reasons and justifications:

- A lot of younger folks that are not necessarily K-JD, but just have not spent too much time in the real world, with real people, living a real life.
- "Top Law Schools" as the name of this website predicates, would speak, of course, about what it takes to get into top schools. So first and foremost is earning a top LSAT score. No matter what most folks' thoughts are on this score, schools are a slave to those numbers 99% of the time and will not risk donor money to use that "whole person concept"--no matter how touted otherwise.
- People assuming, weirdly, that Top Law School = Big Law. No matter how many people mention they don't care about Big Law, and the many avenues outside of Big Law, it still doesn't change the assumption that "the only way to get into Big Law is by a Top Law School".
- Another weird point is how working Big Law directly correlates with poor health, poor sleep, and quite a few other health problems and issues, and yet even when a post indicates a person's interest in a different field, a thread will still steer into "Big Law or Bust", "TTT is death", etc., etc.
- I've spoken to 150 - 175 scorers, and ALL of them say that the forums are interesting, but not really helpful since they are so narrow-minded. That says a lot.

- Anecdotal: A 144 LSAT scorer licensed with the U.S. Supreme Court

In the end, you will do fine no matter what you choose. Having lived a life where 49th place (in any sense) doesn't necessarily equal failure, I'm not highly concerned over some of the "advice" in these threads. Separate the wheat from the chaff, as you're doing and you'll be fine.

Lmao everyone pick your favorite part of this post

Mine is "licensed with the Supreme Court" as if that's meaningful

[muskies970]

No worries; I'm on your side. I've thought a lot about the "advice" given on these threads, and there are many reasons and justifications:

- A lot of younger folks that are not necessarily K-JD, but just have not spent too much time in the real world, with real people, living a real life.
- "Top Law Schools" as the name of this website predicates, would speak, of course, about what it takes to get into top schools. So first and foremost is earning a top LSAT score. No matter what most folks' thoughts are on this score, schools are a slave to those numbers 99% of the time and will not risk donor money to use that "whole person concept"--no matter how touted otherwise.
- People assuming, weirdly, that Top Law School = Big Law. No matter how many people mention they don't care about Big Law, and the many avenues outside of Big Law, it still doesn't change the assumption that "the only way to get into Big Law is by a Top Law School".
- Another weird point is how working Big Law directly correlates with poor health, poor sleep, and quite a few other health problems and issues, and yet even when a post indicates a person's interest in a different field, a thread will still steer into "Big Law or Bust", "TTT is death", etc., etc.
- I've spoken to 150 - 175 scorers, and ALL of them say that the forums are interesting, but not really helpful since they are so narrow-minded. That says a lot.

- Anecdotal: A 144 LSAT scorer licensed with the U.S. Supreme Court

In the end, you will do fine no matter what you choose. Having lived a life where 49th place (in any sense) doesn't necessarily equal failure, I'm not highly concerned over some of the "advice" in these threads. Separate the wheat from the chaff, as you're doing and you'll be fine.

Lmao everyone pick your favorite part of this post

Mine is "licensed with the Supreme Court" as if that's meaningful

Mine is "I've spoken to 150 - 175 scorers, and ALL of them say that the forums are interesting, but not really helpful since they are so narrow-minded. That says a lot."

I can't tell if he means 150 to 175 people who have scored on the LSAT, or people who have scored 150-175. Either way, at least we know ALL of them say these forums aren't helpful. AND that says A LOT

[fliptrip]

I give you credit, Jazzy, you definitely present the contrarian view with passion and verve.

1. I don't disagree with you that a lot of the advice on here certainly reflects some things about the relative lack of life experience of those who are giving it. The risk aversion, name calling, and lack of boundary respect all speak pretty strongly to that. Just so you're careful to not paint with so broad a brush, I'm older, I've worked a long time, employed people, earned a professional degree, succeeded wildy, and fallen flat on my face, so I don't think that screwing up your law school choice is going to ruin your life, nor do I think having a solid steady job that pays you $65k a year is a sentence to permanent misery. However, it is important to realize that just because the presentation of some of the advice here is inartful and the life experiences of the presenters less than ideal, that does NOT mean it's wrong. Also, at the very least, it provides folks with more information. More information can never be a bad thing.

2. I think you don't give enough credit to the extent to which people's goals are determined before school choices are suggested. If you want to work for government in the State of Colorado, you are almost certainly wasting money and opportunity to network by choosing some t-14 over the University of Colorado.

3. It's objectively verifiable that Top Law Schools are the most likely pathway to working in Big Law. The BL+FC % of the T14 is 64% The BL+FC % of the next 14 schools is 24%. That's just a fact. I think what you're trying to say is that you believe that people assume that anyone who wants to go to law school wants BigLaw and I don't think that's necessarily true in large numbers, but if it is, you are right, advice that ignores a stated desire not to do BigLaw is useless advice indeed and I hope that folks who come here for advice are able to ignore people who continue to insist they do something else. This happened last week with someone who has basically dedicated her life to PI and someone came out of the woodwork and told her she should do BigLaw to maximize her earning potential to ensure her kid lived in a safe neighborhood or some other mess. Yes, that person said that, but plenty of other folks in the thread took her at her word in terms of her goals and advised her from there. I participated in that thread and I guess I could have been more forceful in countering that advice, but it seemed to make more sense to just let the weight of the other advice hold sway.

4. Being admitted to the Supreme Court Bar with a low LSAT doesn't really prove anything. There's no doubt that there are many talented attorneys who did not do great on the LSAT. I think that attempts to read deeper meanings into LSAT scores is a complete waste of time. The LSAT is a tool for admission to law school, nothing more, nothing less. If you have the LSAT score you need to go to the school that works for you and your goals, then terrific. But, if you're someone who says they want to work for WLRK but they have a 147 LSAT, that person is going to have to retake the test because they will not get into a law school that can get them WLRK with that score. Let's take current OP, for instance. He would like to practice in Pennsylvania possibly. The only school he has right now is Akron and that's not a great bet for practicing in PA. There are much better schools for doing that which he can attain with an LSAT 7 points higher. It's obviously in his best interest to retake the test. Nobody tried to tell this guy to retake to get to 170+ so he could have a shot at Penn, Michigan, and UVA.

[bmathers]

I really am not liking into Big Law BC I want to keep a semblance of a work/life balance. I personally make decent money with incredible tax benefits (spending power is much higher) as a single male entrepreneur. I have a bay-front house, but I'm desiring to go through law school BC I love learning and want to do law. However, I am not going to sell out my lifestyle for biglaw money and lifestyle.

[fliptrip]

I really am not liking into Big Law BC I want to keep a semblance of a work/life balance. I personally make decent money with incredible tax benefits (spending power is much higher) as a single male entrepreneur. I have a bay-front house, but I'm desiring to go through law school BC I love learning and want to do law. However, I am not going to sell out my lifestyle for biglaw money and lifestyle.

And there's nothing wrong with that. If you've thought through all of this and you're comfortable then what can anyone really say? It's your life. I think you've got a clear sense of what the best schools are for your goals and you've already committed to retaking so they can make sense for you. Sounds good to this internet rando.

[Tls2016]

I'm admitted to the Supreme Court and I'm not even a litigator. It doesn't mean anything.

[JazzyMac]

I give you credit, Jazzy, you definitely present the contrarian view with passion and verve.

You mind putting that on a memo with a letterhead? Oh no reason, please and thankyouverymuch.

[Clearly]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically. You'll see as many suggestions for state flag ships with money, to lower the other side of the equation. You see retake a lot because you need a high lsat for either option. I don't see that as elite, I see that as avoiding shit decision making... We can't help that a high lsat is just as necessary for full rides to avoid biglaw as it is to get into a school that gets biglaw.

[bmathers]

it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

I guess that is the basis of the debate. As a general statement, that seems to be true - however, there are a lot of factors that can influence affordability.

[Danger Zone]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically. You'll see as many suggestions for state flag ships with money, to lower the other side of the equation. You see retake a lot because you need a high lsat for either option. I don't see that as elite, I see that as avoiding shit decision making... We can't help that a high lsat is just as necessary for full rides to avoid biglaw as it is to get into a school that gets biglaw.

YES, THIS

[JazzyMac]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

[A. Nony Mouse]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

What other legal job will pay off $250k in the same time frame?

[Danger Zone]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

What other legal job will pay off $250k in the same time frame?

I'll tell ya what job: being a Supreme Court licensed attorney, that's what job!

[JazzyMac]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

What other legal job will pay off $250k in the same time frame?

I'll tell ya what job: being a Supreme Court licensed attorney, that's what job!

I think you proved your point in an earlier post...but perhaps since you were ignored, felt the need to repeat yourself for emphasis or annoyance (not sure which).

Point is, one's success cannot be only/simply framed with the big law mentality, and nor will having a big law job or mentality always prove successful. However, if you want to keep repeating yourself because...why? Go right ahead. Broken records are hits these days. (not really)

[A. Nony Mouse]

Big law isn't the only route to success, but no one has claimed it is. Success is different from being able to pay off sticker price for law school in a reasonable timeframe. What are the other options you had in mind?

[Danger Zone]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

What other legal job will pay off $250k in the same time frame?

I'll tell ya what job: being a Supreme Court licensed attorney, that's what job!

I think you proved your point in an earlier post...but perhaps since you were ignored, felt the need to repeat yourself for emphasis or annoyance (not sure which).

Point is, one's success cannot be only/simply framed with the big law mentality, and nor will having a big law job or mentality always prove successful. However, if you want to keep repeating yourself because...why? Go right ahead. Broken records are hits these days. (not really)

Curious why you answered this post and not Nony's substantive question

[Tls2016]

It's not just paying off debt. There is a huge oversupply of lawyers and most grads are going to end up making less than they could have in another career if they hadn't spent 3 years in law school. Few people think they will be making $45,000 after 3 years of graduate school and hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition and COA yet it happens to many grads. Or people don't pass the bar and never practice. Or they never find jobs in law. This isn't just TTTT grads. Grads from lots of schools end up here.

Read the Vale of Tears, even T 14 grads can strike out or misread their market and struggle for jobs while fighting low self esteem and depression. Law is a tough gig with a high barrier to entry.

I feel fairly confident that at least half of the posters and lurkers on TLS will regret law, will struggle and will wish they had devoted that time and energy to other careers. Others, the top of the top will be wildly successful.

Higher ranked schools tend to lessen the risk you will be working in a small firm making less per hour than a good nanny in Manhattan even if you don't want biglaw. So it isn't just repaying debt or unsupported elitism. 0Ls have more data than we did years ago about jobs, yet the applicants still show up thinking they will beat the curve, ace law school and succeed. Most of them won't.

[052220152]

This thread is a strong example of why people who are not qualified to give admissions/law school advice should not give it. You're applying with a 3.33/153, clearly know very little about job outcomes and the legal market, but feel comfortable telling other applicants to go to Michigan State based on a single anecdote.

Again, bringing an unrelated job thread into this one. Really? Do we have so little to do, that we must follow message board posters around to other threads, finding sly ways to refer to past comments? Come on, people.

If the advice of this board was taken as law, 2/3 of all law schools would be shut down. I know the 60% median employment rate in this nation within the first 9 months of entering the work force as an attorney. I'm half tempted to say "eff it", purposely go to a TTT and succeed just to blow your mind.

I have a network marketing business within the top 5% of the company. You want to talk about a low percentage? How about people who succeed in the network marketing business. However, if I took the advice that I'm sure is prevalent on here, I would have never even started for fear of the low % of success.

The best investment that you can make is in yourself - it is the only investment that you have 100% control of. Enough with these cheap shots.

if you can't handle me at my worst then you don't deserve me at my best.

I realize that a lot of people on this forum are in their early-20s and living in academia, so their views are a bit far from reality. I also realize that I have many attorney friends and have grown up my entire life around lawyers and judges. That all being said - if some of the "superiority-complex" attitudes that I have seen around here are prevalent and indicative to the general law school population these days, I want nothing what-so-ever to do with it. The last thing I need is talked down to and everything explained to me like a child.

You need things explained to you like a child because you aren't understanding things.

No worries; I'm on your side. I've thought a lot about the "advice" given on these threads, and there are many reasons and justifications:

- A lot of younger folks that are not necessarily K-JD, but just have not spent too much time in the real world, with real people, living a real life.
- "Top Law Schools" as the name of this website predicates, would speak, of course, about what it takes to get into top schools. So first and foremost is earning a top LSAT score. No matter what most folks' thoughts are on this score, schools are a slave to those numbers 99% of the time and will not risk donor money to use that "whole person concept"--no matter how touted otherwise.
- People assuming, weirdly, that Top Law School = Big Law. No matter how many people mention they don't care about Big Law, and the many avenues outside of Big Law, it still doesn't change the assumption that "the only way to get into Big Law is by a Top Law School".
- Another weird point is how working Big Law directly correlates with poor health, poor sleep, and quite a few other health problems and issues, and yet even when a post indicates a person's interest in a different field, a thread will still steer into "Big Law or Bust", "TTT is death", etc., etc.
- I've spoken to 150 - 175 scorers, and ALL of them say that the forums are interesting, but not really helpful since they are so narrow-minded. That says a lot.

- Anecdotal: A 144 LSAT scorer licensed with the U.S. Supreme Court

In the end, you will do fine no matter what you choose. Having lived a life where 49th place (in any sense) doesn't necessarily equal failure, I'm not highly concerned over some of the "advice" in these threads. Separate the wheat from the chaff, as you're doing and you'll be fine.

seriously 190 work right here

I really am not liking into Big Law BC I want to keep a semblance of a work/life balance. I personally make decent money with incredible tax benefits (spending power is much higher) as a single male entrepreneur. I have a bay-front house, but I'm desiring to go through law school BC I love learning and want to do law. However, I am not going to sell out my lifestyle for biglaw money and lifestyle.

so you want work life balance, being a single male entrepreneur, keep up your baller bay front lifestyle but youre not going to sell out and do biglaw?

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

What other legal job will pay off $250k in the same time frame?

I'll tell ya what job: being a Supreme Court licensed attorney, that's what job!

I think you proved your point in an earlier post...but perhaps since you were ignored, felt the need to repeat yourself for emphasis or annoyance (not sure which).

Point is, one's success cannot be only/simply framed with the big law mentality, and nor will having a big law job or mentality always prove successful. However, if you want to keep repeating yourself because...why? Go right ahead. Broken records are hits these days. (not really)

you're a shit writer.


nony, these two dudes are the same dude, just go ahead and ban

[JazzyMac]

It's not biglaw or bust btw. It's rational economic decision making. Biglaw comes up cuz it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically.

Um, realistically...no, not the *only* job.

What other legal job will pay off $250k in the same time frame?

I'll tell ya what job: being a Supreme Court licensed attorney, that's what job!

I think you proved your point in an earlier post...but perhaps since you were ignored, felt the need to repeat yourself for emphasis or annoyance (not sure which).

Point is, one's success cannot be only/simply framed with the big law mentality, and nor will having a big law job or mentality always prove successful. However, if you want to keep repeating yourself because...why? Go right ahead. Broken records are hits these days. (not really)

Curious why you answered this post and not Nony's substantive question

I didn't answer it initially because you crapped on it with your comment. Non's initial comment was "it's the only job that will pay off sticker realistically", which is definitely not the case. Logically speaking and splitting hairs, any job can pay off school. THEN, Nony added, "in the same timeframe", which again I could disagree with, but with not having salaries of Big Law in comparison to say, government jobs, private sectors, military, DINK-ers (double income, no kids), living low-key with public transportation, etc., etc. Assumably when Nony asked the question, he had all those answers, which I can't tell you.

But common sense says that since only a percentage of folks even work big law, in comparison to those who go to top law schools, then there are a lot of people paying off their schools in some form or fashion, and yet not working big law. How many? I couldn't tell ya.

[Danger Zone]

any job can pay off school

Yeah we're done here.

[Tls2016]

any job can pay off school

Yeah we're done here.

In theory this is true if PAYE works and you don't mind carrying the stress of ever increasing debt for 25 years.
Does that mean borrowing the non dischargable debt in the first place was a good idea? If you don't end up with a job as a lawyer (or JD preferred at least) is it worth the debt and 3 years that could have been invested elsewhere.
Law school is a coin flip gamble (or worse) for most people. But they end up with the debt regardless of outcome. That is why 0 Ls need to be careful in decision making.