Davis $$$ or USC $$ (Poll) Forum

[Lasers]

san francisco rocks. the rest of norcal...not so much.

nah, there's more cool stuff in norcal, like sonoma, tahoe and yosemite. I'd go with USC, even though I think socal sucks.

well i meant to like live/work. like those areas are undoubtedly awesome, but you (probably) wouldn't live in sonoma/tahoe/yosemite areas permanently. i think besides sf, i'd rather end up in oc/la/sd than any other norcal city. don't even get me started on sacramento...oh lawd.

Ah ok, gotchya. I'd rather move out of CA than live in socal. That's just my strong aversion to socal though.

i'd also say san jose isn't bad, and the silicon valley in general.

also, what you got against socal? i'm born and bred in norcal but i love socal too. can't beat that weather.

[ilovesf]

i'd also say san jose isn't bad, and the silicon valley in general.

also, what you got against socal? i'm born and bred in norcal but i love socal too. can't beat that weather.

Oh yeah, I guess I could live in San Jose, especially now that the Niners are moving their stadium there. There are a lot of things I hate about socal, mostly relating to LA, like bad public transportation and the need to own a car, and a lot people are much more materialistic and way too into themselves. Of course that isn't everyone, but that's the general vibe I get from my time there and from the people I know from there.

[Lasers]

i'd also say san jose isn't bad, and the silicon valley in general.

also, what you got against socal? i'm born and bred in norcal but i love socal too. can't beat that weather.

Oh yeah, I guess I could live in San Jose, especially now that the Niners are moving their stadium there. There are a lot of things I hate about socal, mostly relating to LA, like bad public transportation and the need to own a car, and a lot people are much more materialistic and way too into themselves. Of course that isn't everyone, but that's the general vibe I get from my time there and from the people I know from there.

chyeah. we're spoiled in sf not having to drive everywhere. i got used to traffic though. i just sang in my car.

from the few years i spent down there, people definitely do seem more materialistic, though. got a point there.

i must say though that they have a lot going on; besides sf i think the big cities in socal offer the best quality of life.

[Borhas]

Thanks guys. I do have quite a bit of debt already, which is why I am wary of crossing the 6 figure mark.
I also wonder how useful it would be to stay in the general area where all the cool tech jobs are, vs the prestige of USC. Looks like USC is winning by a landslide..

Davis isn't in the Bay Area

this.

Pretty close. I can drive from SF to Davis in about an hour, which is comparable to SF to SV or driving between any 2 places in LA county But yea, it's out there

Uhhh maybe speeding at 3am w/ no traffic you can do that. Add 20 min for parking your car.

Realistic travel is 1.75-2 hours

[moneybagsphd]

Thanks guys. I do have quite a bit of debt already, which is why I am wary of crossing the 6 figure mark.
I also wonder how useful it would be to stay in the general area where all the cool tech jobs are, vs the prestige of USC. Looks like USC is winning by a landslide..

Total debt?

[hyffe]

Thanks guys. I do have quite a bit of debt already, which is why I am wary of crossing the 6 figure mark.
I also wonder how useful it would be to stay in the general area where all the cool tech jobs are, vs the prestige of USC. Looks like USC is winning by a landslide..

Total debt?

Roughly 60k vs 100k

[hyffe]

Just wondering.. to everyone that says how great USC's employment is... is there any particular reason their published employment statistics do not reflect this, basically AT ALL.

Per LST, USC and UCD have almost the same employment rate, and both significantly behind UCLA. Does this have something to do with USC not publishing as much info, or are they just trying to cover up that they aren't placing too well overall or what? By placing welll overall I mean USC has solid biglaw numbers (for CA,) but at least according to the figures it seems once out of the BigLaw range their students are not placing very well.

Is UCLA really that much better? I'm WL there but after visiting I liked SC a lot more..

[071816]

Do you have the requisite technical background for patent? Also do you have ties to the bay area?

[hyffe]

Do you have the requisite technical background for patent? Also do you have ties to the bay area?

Yes & yes

[moneybagsphd]

Roughly 60k vs 100k

Is that including your UG debt? What about COL?

Is UCLA really that much better? I'm WL there but after visiting I liked SC a lot more..

No, it's not. Actually, I think USC might outplace UCLA for biglaw (both will give you similar SoCal prospects)

[071816]

You should have absolutely no problem getting back to the bay assuming your grades aren't rock bottom. Contrary to TLS group think, USC kids with norcal ties and/or a technical background seem to have no trouble getting back to the bay. Also, USC is definitely worth the extra 40k especially if you want big law.

[hyffe]

Roughly 60k vs 100k

Is that including your UG debt? What about COL?

Is UCLA really that much better? I'm WL there but after visiting I liked SC a lot more..

No, it's not. Actually, I think USC might outplace UCLA for biglaw (both will give you similar SoCal prospects)

Ok good that's what I thought. That includes COL, and I have like 30k debt from my masters

[moneybagsphd]

Roughly 60k vs 100k

Is that including your UG debt? What about COL?

Is UCLA really that much better? I'm WL there but after visiting I liked SC a lot more..

No, it's not. Actually, I think USC might outplace UCLA for biglaw (both will give you similar SoCal prospects)

Ok good that's what I thought. That includes COL, and I have like 30k debt from my masters

USC.

[SaintsTheMetal]

Just wondering.. to everyone that says how great USC's employment is... is there any particular reason their published employment statistics do not reflect this, basically AT ALL.

Per LST, USC and UCD have almost the same employment rate, and both significantly behind UCLA. Does this have something to do with USC not publishing as much info, or are they just trying to cover up that they aren't placing too well overall or what? By placing welll overall I mean USC has solid biglaw numbers (for CA,) but at least according to the figures it seems once out of the BigLaw range their students are not placing very well.

Is UCLA really that much better? I'm WL there but after visiting I liked SC a lot more..

well the published employment figures DO have a large discrepancy between the schools. Although their biglaw placement is very similar, at/below median kids seem to do better at LA than SC

[splitbrain]

Just wondering.. to everyone that says how great USC's employment is... is there any particular reason their published employment statistics do not reflect this, basically AT ALL.

Per LST, USC and UCD have almost the same employment rate, and both significantly behind UCLA. Does this have something to do with USC not publishing as much info, or are they just trying to cover up that they aren't placing too well overall or what? By placing welll overall I mean USC has solid biglaw numbers (for CA,) but at least according to the figures it seems once out of the BigLaw range their students are not placing very well.

Is UCLA really that much better? I'm WL there but after visiting I liked SC a lot more..

well the published employment figures DO have a large discrepancy between the schools. Although their biglaw placement is very similar, at/below median kids seem to do better at LA than SC

wat

[SaintsTheMetal]

well the published employment figures DO have a large discrepancy between the schools. Although their biglaw placement is very similar, at/below median kids seem to do better at LA than SC

wat

USC Full time BAR required employment = 68%, UCLA = 81%
NLJ250 placement: USC 29%, UCLA 35%

NLJ250 placement is pretty close, but a 13% FT Legal difference is not insignificant.

Sources: --LinkRemoved--
--LinkRemoved--
http://lawweb.usc.edu/careers/statistics/
http://www.law.ucla.edu/career-services ... stics.aspx

[moneybagsphd]

NLJ250 placement: USC 29%, UCLA 35%

Huh? Looks like USC's NLJ250 placement is stronger (of course that might have something to do with the smaller class size).

[bk1]

USC Full time BAR required employment = 68%, UCLA = 81%
NLJ250 placement: USC 29%, UCLA 35%

NLJ250 placement is pretty close, but a 13% FT Legal difference is not insignificant.

Are you smoking crack?

UCLA's c/o 2010 ft+bpr percentage was 69%.
USC's c/o 2010 ft+bpr percentage was unknown because they don't list ft/pt (granted UCLA did better for bpr for c/o 2010).

[SaintsTheMetal]

USC Full time BAR required employment = 68%, UCLA = 81%
NLJ250 placement: USC 29%, UCLA 35%

NLJ250 placement is pretty close, but a 13% FT Legal difference is not insignificant.

Are you smoking crack?

UCLA's c/o 2010 ft+bpr percentage was 69%.
USC's c/o 2010 ft+bpr percentage was unknown because they don't list ft/pt (granted UCLA did better for bpr for c/o 2010).

Sorry, didn't mean 13% FT Legal, but 13% difference in Bar Required. All I did was quote the sources I linked.

Obviously you can't compare FT Legal when USC doesn't report it. Still 13% difference is 13% difference

[hyffe]

Yea I think LST may have assumed the worst about their unknown data. USC's site says 88.8 % bar admission required

[Lasers]

bottom line (not accounting for year to year fluctuations): ucla and usc are pretty equal.

davis is not on that level.

[bk1]

Sorry, didn't mean 13% FT Legal, but 13% difference in Bar Required. All I did was quote the sources I linked.

Obviously you can't compare FT Legal when USC doesn't report it. Still 13% difference is 13% difference

A 13% difference is not actually a 13% difference. For c/o 2009 UCLA had a 1.7% advantage for bar required jobs. For c/o 2008 USC had a 3.8% advantage for bar required jobs.

Were they peers in 2008 and 2009 yet in 2010 UCLA was drastically better? Obviously that doesn't make any sense. The answer is that they are peers but there are still fluctuations in the data. USC with its smaller class size will be prone to larger swings than UCLA with its larger class size. Just because one year there is a decent sized difference does not mean that they are not peers.

[hyffe]

Thanks for the input, all. I'm going to USC