UGA at 10k a yr or Bama at 6k a yr tuition Forum

[transferror]

If you want to be in the South and are shooting for Biglaw, go to bama. Target Baker Donelson, Burr Foreman, Maynard Cooper, Brantley Arant, Balch & Bingham, Car Allison, Lightfoot, Sirote, and play up ties. Alabama and Cumberland dominate the Birmingham market, and basically all "firms" in Al are in Birmingham, even though there are limited options. The summer programs are pretty much reserved for Bama and Cumberland students. Your shot at getting one of these spots from UA is much higher than UGA. The fact that you'll have a shot at both ATL and Bham from UGA is credited, but your shot in Bham will be marginally (if not significantly) lower from UGA, and the added potential for ATL probably isn't worth it (and assumes you'll be top 20% at UGA to even be competitive). Above median at UA or median with a "connection" gives you a shot these firms.

As a city, Bham is in the toilet. As far as legal jobs, Jefferson County accounts for almost 50% of JD employment in the state.

I'd take my chances at UA.

If you want big law, go to the University of Alabama?

No.

Don't be a dick. The comment was specific to the thread.

Obviously not in general, but b/t these two schools. UA placed 27 in firms of 101+ and 17 in Fed Clerkships for 2013 grads (out of 166). UGA placed 40 in firms of 101+ and 20 in Fed Clerkships for 2012 grads (out of 220), but those numbers significantly out-performed past years. Class of 2011 was 20 for firms of 101+ and 17 for Fed Clerk (out of 227). Class of 2010 was 24 for firms 101+ and 19 for Fed Clerk (out of 219).

So UA = 26.5% for 2013, 18% for 2012, 18% for 2011
UGA = 27% for 2013, 16% for 2012, 19.5% for 2010

Those numbers are for combined placement in Fed Clerk and firms of 101+. The difference is that (by all TLS accounts) ATL is extremely grade sensitive, while Birmingham is not. The numbers are basically even, but b/c Birmingham is less picky about grades and not targeted so much by out-of-state schools, I imagine it would be easier to get a firm in Bham. Especially since OP has ties in Bham.

Not being a dick. I think saying "If you want big law, go to (insert state flagship here)" is really dangerous/terrible advice to give. If someone wants big law, they need to be thinking about a different class of schools. 20ish percent chance is not good enough.

I don't disagree, but OP is clearly wanting to make a decision based on these two schools. I tried to provide info that might help. Although biglaw is not an advisable route from either school, it is one of OP's goals. Aside from saying "go to a different class of schools," listing numbers and making suggestions is the most helpful advice I can give. If all you can add is "don't do it" or "that's not good enough," feel free to not comment. Under the circumstances, I think UA is the best choice and have provided support for my position. If you want to respond, it would be helpful to counter with statistics or advice. Otherwise, you are of no help to OP.

EDIT:

If a state flagship is cheap and you're banking on not getting a job at a large firm and have much more modest career goals but think "Meh, it would be cool if I did well enough to snag a big law job but no biggie if I don't" then I think that's defensible. But considering a school like UA for its big law chances is kind of absurd, IMO.

This makes sense.

[thevuch]

But yeah making decisions based on biglaw from UGA or bama is silly

as in choosing based on which one will give me a better shot at big law?

If a state flagship is cheap and you're banking on not getting a job at a large firm and have much more modest career goals but think "Meh, it would be cool if I did well enough to snag a big law job but no biggie if I don't" then I think that's defensible. But considering a school like UA for its big law chances is kind of absurd, IMO.

yeah id say this is accurate. i would like a shot at big law, but id be happy with a full time lawyer bar passage required type of legal job where i was doing alright and wasnt miserable.

and like deadpanic said

if i dont make top 15 or 20 at bama will i be scrapping with the rest of the dogs for 45-50k bama shit law? only in bama id have ties?

[BigZuck]

But yeah making decisions based on biglaw from UGA or bama is silly

as in choosing based on which one will give me a better shot at big law?

If a state flagship is cheap and you're banking on not getting a job at a large firm and have much more modest career goals but think "Meh, it would be cool if I did well enough to snag a big law job but no biggie if I don't" then I think that's defensible. But considering a school like UA for its big law chances is kind of absurd, IMO.

yeah id say this is accurate. i would like a shot at big law, but id be happy with a full time lawyer bar passage required type of legal job where i was doing alright and wasnt miserable.

and like deadpanic said

if i dont make top 15 or 20 at bama will i be scrapping with the rest of the dogs for 45-50k bama shit law? only in bama id have ties?

It's kind of sort of a false binary but law salaries are pretty damn bimodal so if you don't snag something big its probably going to be shit. I'd imagine if you miss the big law boat from a school like Alabama (paying what, like, 100k maybe?) and you get a legal job it's probably going to pay like 40K. I don't really know much about the legal market in Birmingham but I trust Rad's assessment and it sounds pretty decent so maybe there are firms that do pay somewhere in between those two extremes.

What are you envisioning landing that would pay decent that isn't big law? Do you know if those jobs exist in that area for freshly minted JDs? Honest questions, I'm not suggesting you're wrong.

[thevuch]

But yeah making decisions based on biglaw from UGA or bama is silly

as in choosing based on which one will give me a better shot at big law?

If a state flagship is cheap and you're banking on not getting a job at a large firm and have much more modest career goals but think "Meh, it would be cool if I did well enough to snag a big law job but no biggie if I don't" then I think that's defensible. But considering a school like UA for its big law chances is kind of absurd, IMO.

yeah id say this is accurate. i would like a shot at big law, but id be happy with a full time lawyer bar passage required type of legal job where i was doing alright and wasnt miserable.

and like deadpanic said

if i dont make top 15 or 20 at bama will i be scrapping with the rest of the dogs for 45-50k bama shit law? only in bama id have ties?

It's kind of sort of a false binary but law salaries are pretty damn bimodal so if you don't snag something big its probably going to be shit. I'd imagine if you miss the big law boat from a school like Alabama (paying what, like, 100k maybe?) and you get a legal job it's probably going to pay like 40K. I don't really know much about the legal market in Birmingham but I trust Rad's assessment and it sounds pretty decent so maybe there are firms that do pay somewhere in between those two extremes.

What are you envisioning landing that would pay decent that isn't big law? Do you know if those jobs exist in that area for freshly minted JDs? Honest questions, I'm not suggesting you're wrong.

i honestly dont know bro.

and i dont know if any firms in bham are 500+ attorneys even bradley, maynard, or burr.

they are all 100+ i think

and lightfoot is around 50

so maybe some midlaw firms? but im not sure man.

what do you think about what splittinghairs said? the hypotehtical top 15 at UGA and bama, and UGA offering more for someone like me who already has ties to bama

[BigZuck]

I don't know man. I think assuming your grades will be that high is foolhardy. I get the reasoning (one market is better than two so might as well try to open yourself to a new one) but I wouldn't mess with a parochial-ass place like the south. Most places seem to really care about ties. Also I'm too lazy to bust out the google maps so maybe the cities are close but I think it might be kind of a pain to target multiple markets (Rad can speak to this better than I can). I know people do it though.

I go to UT. Good school, great for TX but supposed to have some national pull as well right? Maybe, sort of. But all you hear is Texas, Texas, Texas. I know Texans are kind of that way. But the school is super Texas-focused. LRW projects involve Texas state law. We learn about the idiosyncrasies of Texas state law in property and con law, etc. Law is a general degree and technically you can take the bar wherever but if you go to a regional school like UGA or UA its going to be hyper-focused on that state. It would take a lot of effort on your part to get a job somewhere else (but of course it can be done). If it were me I would choose a market and go all in with it (and it would probably be the market I had the strongest ties to). Hedging can lead to unemployment IMO, but again a lot of that has to do with the effort you put in to hustle, etc.

Just IMO, Rad and deadpanic can correct me where I'm wrong. They know way more than me, listen to them.

[splittinghairs]

I don't know man. I think assuming your grades will be that high is foolhardy. I get the reasoning (one market is better than two so might as well try to open yourself to a new one) but I wouldn't mess with a parochial-ass place like the south. Most places seem to really care about ties. Also I'm too lazy to bust out the google maps so maybe the cities are close but I think it might be kind of a pain to target multiple markets (Rad can speak to this better than I can). I know people do it though.

I go to UT. Good school, great for TX but supposed to have some national pull as well right? Maybe, sort of. But all you hear is Texas, Texas, Texas. I know Texans are kind of that way. But the school is super Texas-focused. LRW projects involve Texas state law. We learn about the idiosyncrasies of Texas state law in property and con law, etc. Law is a general degree and technically you can take the bar wherever but if you go to a regional school like UGA or UA its going to be hyper-focused on that state. It would take a lot of effort on your part to get a job somewhere else (but of course it can be done). If it were me I would choose a market and go all in with it (and it would probably be the market I had the strongest ties to). Hedging can lead to unemployment IMO, but again a lot of that has to do with the effort you put in to hustle, etc.

Just IMO, Rad and deadpanic can correct me where I'm wrong. They know way more than me, listen to them.

I agree hedging wouldn't be a great idea in most circumstances. For example, if a native California student picked Boston College over UC Hastings just to hedge and try to open up more opportunites because Cali firms will wonder why that student went all the way across the country for law school. However, Alabama is close enough to GA that this could workout in OP's particular circumstances. Let me be clear that this only matters because OP has stated that both schools have equal COA and he has no particular preference for either working in Alabama or Georgia (whether it be biglaw or small law). Furthermore, this would only matter in the extremely limited circumstances of ending up between top 15-20%. As a student with top 15-20% credentials you would have good enough ties to both Bama and GA by attending UGA and having your bama ties.

Obviously not in general, but b/t these two schools. UA placed 27 in firms of 101+ and 17 in Fed Clerkships for 2013 grads (out of 166). UGA placed 40 in firms of 101+ and 20 in Fed Clerkships for 2012 grads (out of 220), but those numbers significantly out-performed past years. Class of 2011 was 20 for firms of 101+ and 17 for Fed Clerk (out of 227). Class of 2010 was 24 for firms 101+ and 19 for Fed Clerk (out of 219).

So UA = 26.5% for 2013, 18% for 2012, 18% for 2011
UGA = 27% for 2013, 16% for 2012, 19.5% for 2010

Those numbers are for combined placement in Fed Clerk and firms of 101+. The difference is that (by all TLS accounts) ATL is extremely grade sensitive, while Birmingham is not. The numbers are basically even, but b/c Birmingham is less picky about grades and not targeted so much by out-of-state schools, I imagine it would be easier to get a firm in Bham. Especially since OP has ties in Bham.

I disagree with some of transferror's assertions here. First, let's note that basically these two schools show approximately equal placement power with respect to 100+ firms + Fed clerkships but since UGA feeds primarily into ATL biglaw (yes its a small percentage just like UA's percentage is small for placement into Birmingham) UGA will place more into 250+ and 500+ firms that pay a higher market and generally bigger firms than birmingham firms. Yes there is greater competition from top 14 schools into Atl, but despite the extra competition LST employment stats show that an equal percentage of UGA students get into ATL firms compared with UA students into bama firms. Second, although it is true that according to TLS sentiment ATL firms are grade concious/grade snobs that observation stems primarily from median or top 1/3 Vandy/UVA/Duke students who have had trouble targeting ATL than it speaks to the relative difficulty of top 15% UGA targeting ATL versus top 15% UA students targeting bama firms. For UGA kids to have a good shot at ATL they already had to have really high grades anyways, so the grade selectivity is really not a relevant consideration because employment stats show both schools have equal placement (or lack of placement) power into their respective markets.

Just remember that most of what the posters have said is true, if you want a realistic shot at biglaw you need to retake and get a 170 and go to Duke/UVA. However, you also need to realize that your low GPA means that you will likely be going to those two schools at sticker price instead of instead paying only 10K in tuition/year for UGA and UA right now. Graduating with 50-60k in debt from UGA and UA is managable even if you don't get biglaw. It is debatable whether going to UVA or Duke at a sticker (graduating with 200k debt) is worth it. It is if your goal is to maximize biglaw chances as much as possible.

[transferror]

Obviously not in general, but b/t these two schools. UA placed 27 in firms of 101+ and 17 in Fed Clerkships for 2013 grads (out of 166). UGA placed 40 in firms of 101+ and 20 in Fed Clerkships for 2012 grads (out of 220), but those numbers significantly out-performed past years. Class of 2011 was 20 for firms of 101+ and 17 for Fed Clerk (out of 227). Class of 2010 was 24 for firms 101+ and 19 for Fed Clerk (out of 219).

So UA = 26.5% for 2013, 18% for 2012, 18% for 2011
UGA = 27% for 2013, 16% for 2012, 19.5% for 2010

Those numbers are for combined placement in Fed Clerk and firms of 101+. The difference is that (by all TLS accounts) ATL is extremely grade sensitive, while Birmingham is not. The numbers are basically even, but b/c Birmingham is less picky about grades and not targeted so much by out-of-state schools, I imagine it would be easier to get a firm in Bham. Especially since OP has ties in Bham.

I disagree with some of transferror's assertions here. First, let's note that basically these two schools show approximately equal placement power with respect to 100+ firms + Fed clerkships but since UGA feeds primarily into ATL biglaw (yes its a small percentage just like UA's percentage is small for placement into Birmingham) UGA will place more into 250+ and 500+ firms that pay a higher market and generally bigger firms than birmingham firms. Yes there is greater competition from top 14 schools into Atl, but despite the extra competition LST employment stats show that an equal percentage of UGA students get into ATL law compared with UA students into bama firms. Second, although it is true that according to TLS sentiment ATL firms are grade concious/grade snobs that observation stems primarily from median or top 1/3 Vandy/UVA/Duke students who have had trouble targeting ATL than it speaks to the relative difficulty of top 15% UGA targetting ATL versus top 15% UA students targetting bama firms. For UGA kids to have a good shot at ATL they already had to have really high grades anyways, so the grade selectivity is really not a relevant consideration because employment stats show both schools have equal placement (or lack of placement) power into their respective markets.

What don't you agree with? I acknowledge the numbers are even, but contend Atlanta might be tougher because of outside competition and a high grade requirement. You seem to think that only the top 15% of either UGA or UA has a shot at these firms in their respective markets. I basically agree as far as ATL (although this is based on TLS wisdom), but I'm willing to bet that Bama students have more latitude with grades when placing in Birmingham firms. Admittedly, those firms are smaller and pay less than average ATL firms, but that was never at issue. I think top 30-40% at UA with connections to Birmingham (OP has family in the market) will fare better than the same rank at UGA w/o any connections in ATL. I don't really have any evidence to support this, but the insular nature of the Bham market coupled with the fact that Bama employs ≈ 20% of grads there has to mean the top 30% or better are at least competitive since they are the only people feeding the market (aside from Cumberland, but bleh). Obviously, if OP is top 10% at either school he will be equally competitive in their respective markets. I think he will have more room for error at UA, even if placement will be at a smaller firm with smaller pay.

Although, like BZ noted, the minor difference in placement and even the goal of firm placement in choosing between the schools is probably negligible. I'm entertaining the idea because OP asked and I don't feel like writing a brief.

[splittinghairs]

Obviously not in general, but b/t these two schools. UA placed 27 in firms of 101+ and 17 in Fed Clerkships for 2013 grads (out of 166). UGA placed 40 in firms of 101+ and 20 in Fed Clerkships for 2012 grads (out of 220), but those numbers significantly out-performed past years. Class of 2011 was 20 for firms of 101+ and 17 for Fed Clerk (out of 227). Class of 2010 was 24 for firms 101+ and 19 for Fed Clerk (out of 219).

So UA = 26.5% for 2013, 18% for 2012, 18% for 2011
UGA = 27% for 2013, 16% for 2012, 19.5% for 2010

Those numbers are for combined placement in Fed Clerk and firms of 101+. The difference is that (by all TLS accounts) ATL is extremely grade sensitive, while Birmingham is not. The numbers are basically even, but b/c Birmingham is less picky about grades and not targeted so much by out-of-state schools, I imagine it would be easier to get a firm in Bham. Especially since OP has ties in Bham.

I disagree with some of transferror's assertions here. First, let's note that basically these two schools show approximately equal placement power with respect to 100+ firms + Fed clerkships but since UGA feeds primarily into ATL biglaw (yes its a small percentage just like UA's percentage is small for placement into Birmingham) UGA will place more into 250+ and 500+ firms that pay a higher market and generally bigger firms than birmingham firms. Yes there is greater competition from top 14 schools into Atl, but despite the extra competition LST employment stats show that an equal percentage of UGA students get into ATL law compared with UA students into bama firms. Second, although it is true that according to TLS sentiment ATL firms are grade concious/grade snobs that observation stems primarily from median or top 1/3 Vandy/UVA/Duke students who have had trouble targeting ATL than it speaks to the relative difficulty of top 15% UGA targetting ATL versus top 15% UA students targetting bama firms. For UGA kids to have a good shot at ATL they already had to have really high grades anyways, so the grade selectivity is really not a relevant consideration because employment stats show both schools have equal placement (or lack of placement) power into their respective markets.

What don't you agree with? I acknowledge the numbers are even, but contend Atlanta might be tougher because of outside competition and a high grade requirement. You seem to think that only the top 15% of either UGA or UA has a shot at these firms in their respective markets. I basically agree as far as ATL (although this is based on TLS wisdom), but I'm willing to bet that Bama students have more latitude with grades when placing in Birmingham firms. Admittedly, those firms are smaller and pay less than average ATL firms, but that was never at issue. I think top 30-40% at UA with connections to Birmingham (OP has family in the market) will fare better than the same rank at UGA w/o any connections in ATL. I don't really have any evidence to support this, but the insular nature of the Bham market coupled with the fact that Bama employs ≈ 20% of grads there has to mean the top 30% or better are at least competitive since they are the only people feeding the market (aside from Cumberland, but bleh). Obviously, if OP is top 10% at either school he will be equally competitive in their respective markets. I think he will have more room for error at UA, even if placement will be at a smaller firm with smaller pay.

Although, like BZ noted, the minor difference in placement and even the goal of firm placement in choosing between the schools is probably negligible. I'm entertaining the idea because OP asked and I don't feel like writing a brief.

What don't I agree with? See bolded HTH.