"Should I stay or should I go?" Forum

[bk1]

I think confidence and drive should hold some weight

Cause your future classmates are a bunch of timid, lazy fucks.

[094320]

..

[Davidbentley]

It sounds like everyone would feel better if everything was handed to them on a silver platter. Full Scholarship that can't be taken away and $7,000,000/yr job immediately upon graduating without any interview necessary. Sounds great, but unrealistic, so like i said before, I'm extremely happy with what I've got and fully intend to take advantage of it and work hard.

-Rant over

Of the options you present, I would choose Hastings. However, it is slightly hilarious to see you extolling your virtue as a hard-worker, while at the same time shunning the opportunity to devote yourself to a task (lsat prep) that lends itself to hard work and has tangible benefits (improved score>school choices>jobs.) Instead, you are embarking upon a quest (Law School) that has a notoriously small correlation between success and hard work. The "haters gon hate" mentality is quaint, but sometimes the haters are right. Retake.

[splitbrain]

Posting on this site was a mistake. Skeptics will always have something to say no matter what the situation is. Somebody could have a full ride to Harvard and someone would say,"you know the risk involved in that scholarship? You think you can stay in the top third of your class." While these things are rationale, I believe one will drive themselves crazy with "what ifs." I think confidence and drive should hold some weight, but egh that's just me. But then again what was I thinking posting amongst out future's arrogant, know all lawyers

Nobody knows you personally so they have to go with general knowledge. It may not always be relayed in a friendly manner, sure, whatever, but the points are still valid.

Hard work does not necessarily equal success in law school, and many posters at TLS just want people to understand that. Go over to the Law Student forums and take a look at the threads titled "I worked my ass off this year and ended up below median...wtf do I do?"

All that being said, if you absolutely refuse to retake and reapply (is waiting a year really that big of a deal?), then Hastings seems like the best option you have so far.

Either way, best of luck to you.

[traehekat]

Hard work does not necessarily equal success in law school, and many posters at TLS just want people to understand that. Go over to the Law Student forums and take a look at the threads titled "I worked my ass off this year and ended up below median...wtf do I do?"

Don't forget the "Top 10%, law review editor but struck out 2L OCI" or the "significantly above median at T6 but jobless" threads.

no but seriously just work hard im sure it will work out.

[bwi208]

Hard work does not necessarily equal success in law school, and many posters at TLS just want people to understand that. Go over to the Law Student forums and take a look at the threads titled "I worked my ass off this year and ended up below median...wtf do I do?"

Don't forget the "Top 10%, law review editor but struck out 2L OCI" or the "significantly above median at T6 but jobless" threads.

no but seriously just work hard im sure it will work out.

Thank you

[romothesavior]

OP, I go to WUSTL and we have talked a bit already, so I hope you will take this to heart. I know TLS is harsh at times, but I actually think they are making a good point here (as they do in most cases). I'm a current WUSTL student who loves the school big time, but even I have to cosign on what others are saying. Let me say that I would love for you to come here and I think you would love it here. I think you could get back to California if you come here and have a fine long-term outcome. The average student here will not end up unemployed, and the national reach of the school is actually surprisingly good (although our big firm placement is pretty poor across the board). So I'm not trying to discourage you from attending.

But I also think you are taking a huge risk coming here if that's what you decide to do, and I think you could do a lot to mitigate that risk by retaking the LSAT, getting a higher score, and then coming here (or any of the schools on your list) with a big scholarship. Even a few points could make a world of difference in your cost of attendance. You could net yourself tens of thousands of dollars with just a few more points on a very learnable test, and I think you should jump all over it. Coming to WUSTL at a six-figure cost when you have no real Midwestern ties and hoping to end up back west is just a very risky proposition, and probably not the smartest investment.

Also, hard work here (or anywhere else) is not going to just magically turn into classroom or even employment success. First of all, you are going up against some incredibly bright people. Our LSAT median is a 168, and a big chunk of the class has a 170+. We have people with great grades from all the best schools in the country, people with incredible work experience, PhDs in great fields, you name it. Second, almost everyone works hard. I am sure you are very capable and intelligent, but when you take a bunch of smart, hard-working people and throw them into a forced curve, it is going to create winners and losers. A lot of the law school losers are smart and worked hard. Please keep this in mind.

So don't take what others are saying in a bad way. People are trying to help you. This is probably the biggest investment you will ever make in your entire life, so you should view it as such. Regardless of what you do, I wish you luck and I am here as a resource if you have any other questions about the school.

[bwi208]

Ya ive obviously considered the competition at my higher ranked options. However retaking and getting around a 160 doesn't make me any more likely to suceed. Just lowers the risk with more money. Who is to say ill do better than before? Then would i lose out on what I have now? Are the options I have not worth exploring? As far as hastings goes I think ill be getting almost the max they give out. Merit based rather than what I already have is only 3k more/yr. This is on top of need based at aout 10k. Is 20k worth attending? I think id b about 120k in debt. I plan on doing public interest and they offer a loan repayment program along with the federal one. But then you'll say I wont get a job to qualify right? Seems like there's no way to win

[traehekat]

Ya ive obviously considered the competition at my higher ranked options. However retaking and getting around a 160 doesn't make me any more likely to suceed. Just lowers the risk with more money. Who is to say ill do better than before? Then would i lose out on what I have now? Are the options I have not worth exploring? As far as hastings goes I think ill be getting almost the max they give out. Merit based rather than what I already have is only 3k more/yr. This is on top of need based at aout 10k. Is 20k worth attending? I think id b about 120k in debt. I plan on doing public interest and they offer a loan repayment program along with the federal one. But then you'll say I wont get a job to qualify right? Seems like there's no way to win

It's just strange for you to assume you will do fine in law school but that you will do worse if you retake the LSAT.

[PDaddy]

I would like to practice in California, but wouldn't mind getting a better job in the midwest if given the opportunity. I'm assuming Washington's name hold a lot of weight throughout the midwest, so the opportunities would be there.

LOL
If you aren't from the midwaste, your chance of getting a biglaw job in the midwest is very small. You need ties to the area. STL and other midwestern firms are very wary of transplants...

Not completely true. Chicago employers like Kirkland Ellis don't care if you are a transplant because Chicago is the type of city to which transplants locate and stay for extended periods of time. It pretty much works that way with most major market biglaw employers, whether from NY, D.C., L.A., S.F., Atlanta, etc. Houston and Dallas may be a little more conservative than the others, but ties aren't really necessary if a candidate can explain with sincerity why he/she wants to work in a particular city.

[romothesavior]

I would like to practice in California, but wouldn't mind getting a better job in the midwest if given the opportunity. I'm assuming Washington's name hold a lot of weight throughout the midwest, so the opportunities would be there.

LOL
If you aren't from the midwaste, your chance of getting a biglaw job in the midwest is very small. You need ties to the area. STL and other midwestern firms are very wary of transplants...

Not completely true. Chicago employers like Kirkland Ellis don't care if you are a transplant because Chicago is the type of city to which transplants locate and stay for extended periods of time.

Did he say "no chance at all?" No he didn't. He said "very small." In general, he is correct. Ties are important in the Midwest, even in Chicago. There are exceptions, and obviously if you are at the very tip-top of your class or at a very good law school firms will care less about ties. But for most students, they are going to matter.

Also, to counter his point (or any point) with arguably the most prestigious firm in the market as your example is just stupid.

[traehekat]

Not completely true. Chicago employers like Kirkland Ellis don't care if you are a transplant because Chicago is the type of city to which transplants locate and stay for extended periods of time. It pretty much works that way with most major market biglaw employers, whether from NY, D.C., L.A., S.F., Atlanta, etc. Houston and Dallas may be a little more conservative than the others, but ties aren't really necessary if a candidate can explain with sincerity why he/she wants to work in a particular city.

Seriously? SF is notoriously hard to crack, the others aren't even close to a cake walk. By transplant, do you mean just recently moved to a city for law school, or do you mean moving to a city when you are a teen or something?

[stolli]

/

Posting on this site was a mistake. Skeptics will always have something to say no matter what the situation is. Somebody could have a full ride to Harvard and someone would say,"you know the risk involved in that scholarship? You think you can stay in the top third of your class." While these things are rationale, I believe one will drive themselves crazy with "what ifs." I think confidence and drive should hold some weight, but egh that's just me. But then again what was I thinking posting amongst out future's arrogant, know all lawyers

honestly, i think TLS is a great resource, but a lot of the advice i got on here has been terrible. Just keep in mind, these are all law students, and law students dont know much more then non law students. its all guesses and opinions and take them with a grain of salt. Including mine.

[094320]

..

[Tiago Splitter]

/

Posting on this site was a mistake. Skeptics will always have something to say no matter what the situation is. Somebody could have a full ride to Harvard and someone would say,"you know the risk involved in that scholarship? You think you can stay in the top third of your class." While these things are rationale, I believe one will drive themselves crazy with "what ifs." I think confidence and drive should hold some weight, but egh that's just me. But then again what was I thinking posting amongst out future's arrogant, know all lawyers

honestly, i think TLS is a great resource, but a lot of the advice i got on here has been terrible. Just keep in mind, these are all law students, and law students dont know much more then non law students. its all guesses and opinions and take them with a grain of salt. Including mine.

Why would law students who have gone through the hiring process not know much more than non-law students about the hiring process? Hiring partners and recruiters can probably speak more knowledgeably about certain firms, but even then they can't compare as much. Law students have access to statistics and to each other. When talking about generalities across firms, they're probably the best qualified.

It has nothing to do with making sense, and everything to do with trying to justify a poor decision.

[traehekat]

/

Posting on this site was a mistake. Skeptics will always have something to say no matter what the situation is. Somebody could have a full ride to Harvard and someone would say,"you know the risk involved in that scholarship? You think you can stay in the top third of your class." While these things are rationale, I believe one will drive themselves crazy with "what ifs." I think confidence and drive should hold some weight, but egh that's just me. But then again what was I thinking posting amongst out future's arrogant, know all lawyers

honestly, i think TLS is a great resource, but a lot of the advice i got on here has been terrible. Just keep in mind, these are all law students, and law students dont know much more then non law students. its all guesses and opinions and take them with a grain of salt. Including mine.

Why would law students who have gone through the hiring process not know much more than non-law students about the hiring process? Hiring partners and recruiters can probably speak more knowledgeably about certain firms, but even then they can't compare as much. Law students have access to statistics and to each other. When talking about generalities across firms, they're probably the best qualified.

It has nothing to do with making sense, and everything to do with trying to justify a poor decision.

Such is the nature of the 0L.

[MrHaephestus]

/

Posting on this site was a mistake. Skeptics will always have something to say no matter what the situation is. Somebody could have a full ride to Harvard and someone would say,"you know the risk involved in that scholarship? You think you can stay in the top third of your class." While these things are rationale, I believe one will drive themselves crazy with "what ifs." I think confidence and drive should hold some weight, but egh that's just me. But then again what was I thinking posting amongst out future's arrogant, know all lawyers

honestly, i think TLS is a great resource, but a lot of the advice i got on here has been terrible. Just keep in mind, these are all law students, and law students dont know much more then non law students. its all guesses and opinions and take them with a grain of salt. Including mine.

Why would law students who have gone through the hiring process not know much more than non-law students about the hiring process? Hiring partners and recruiters can probably speak more knowledgeably about certain firms, but even then they can't compare as much. Law students have access to statistics and to each other. When talking about generalities across firms, they're probably the best qualified.

It has nothing to do with making sense, and everything to do with trying to justify a poor decision.

BINGO! Best thing I've read in awhile here. I look at all these folks asking for advice, and when they don't get the advice that validates the decision they've really already made, they denounce the responders as arrogant or some other insulting term. Seriously, if you ask for advice you should pay more attention to those who are are not candy-coating that advice. While the advice may be harsh at times, bear in mind that these folks are trying to help you out. Thank them for not blowing sunshine up your ass.

[20130312]

Besides, Harvard doesn't have TTT stips, brah.

[bwi208]

Im asking for advice in choosing between hastings and washington not whether to go or not. Idk if that was clear. Also, Just got offered 18k/yr at washington so that changes things a bit

[bk1]

Im asking for advice in choosing between hastings and washington not whether to go or not. Idk if that was clear. Also, Just got offered 18k/yr at washington so that changes things a bit

People understand that, but at the prices listed and with the goals you have, none of these are attractive options. You want to work in CA and don't have ties to the midwest so Hastings makes the most sense. But it's too expensive for the mediocre job prospects it provides. You also just can't outwork your classmates so it is foolish to bank on doing well in law school. Romo put it well when he said:

OP, I go to WUSTL and we have talked a bit already, so I hope you will take this to heart. I know TLS is harsh at times, but I actually think they are making a good point here (as they do in most cases). I'm a current WUSTL student who loves the school big time, but even I have to cosign on what others are saying. Let me say that I would love for you to come here and I think you would love it here. I think you could get back to California if you come here and have a fine long-term outcome. The average student here will not end up unemployed, and the national reach of the school is actually surprisingly good (although our big firm placement is pretty poor across the board). So I'm not trying to discourage you from attending.

But I also think you are taking a huge risk coming here if that's what you decide to do, and I think you could do a lot to mitigate that risk by retaking the LSAT, getting a higher score, and then coming here (or any of the schools on your list) with a big scholarship. Even a few points could make a world of difference in your cost of attendance. You could net yourself tens of thousands of dollars with just a few more points on a very learnable test, and I think you should jump all over it. Coming to WUSTL at a six-figure cost when you have no real Midwestern ties and hoping to end up back west is just a very risky proposition, and probably not the smartest investment.

Also, hard work here (or anywhere else) is not going to just magically turn into classroom or even employment success. First of all, you are going up against some incredibly bright people. Our LSAT median is a 168, and a big chunk of the class has a 170+. We have people with great grades from all the best schools in the country, people with incredible work experience, PhDs in great fields, you name it. Second, almost everyone works hard. I am sure you are very capable and intelligent, but when you take a bunch of smart, hard-working people and throw them into a forced curve, it is going to create winners and losers. A lot of the law school losers are smart and worked hard. Please keep this in mind.

So don't take what others are saying in a bad way. People are trying to help you. This is probably the biggest investment you will ever make in your entire life, so you should view it as such. Regardless of what you do, I wish you luck and I am here as a resource if you have any other questions about the school.

[83947368]

.

[drdolittle]

OP, have you read through this thread yet?
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=179084

Between Hastings and Wash U, what's been posted here seems accurate. I would not go to Wash U if you definitely want to get back to CA, unless it's guaranteed to be significantly cheaper (i.e., ~ $60K/3 years, or more, to make the risk of not making it back to CA or even ending up w/o a desired job anywhere worthwhile). I happen to think very highly of Wash U as an UG/G school from my prior career, but at least for NorCal, I simply can't recall running across an attorney w/ a JD from there at any of the law firms I researched. I'm sure there are successful Wash U JD's in the SF Bay Area, just relatively not many apparently. SoCal might be a slightly different story, but I can't imagine the situation's much better there for fresh Wash U JD's in terms of real job opportunities considering all the schools down there and the area's national draw.

[83947368]

.

[lutcf2021]

I love how 0Ls solicit advice from people who have been through what they are attempting to do and then become upset when the advice isn't what they wanted to hear.

Enjoy WUSTL, congrats on the acceptance.

+1

Respect the elders.

[stolli]

[/quote]
Why would law students who have gone through the hiring process not know much more than non-law students about the hiring process? Hiring partners and recruiters can probably speak more knowledgeably about certain firms, but even then they can't compare as much. Law students have access to statistics and to each other. When talking about generalities across firms, they're probably the best qualified.[/quote]


When I was choosing a law school, the general wisdom on TLS was for me to go to loyola (LA) with no scholly over WUSTL with a guaranteed 25k a year scholly. I have yet to see if they were right, but so far I'm glad i didn't follow the advice.