Should I just reapply next year? Forum

[jbagelboy]

It's a tough cycle for someone with your numbers

Why? What's weird with the cycle? Isn't my GPA/LSAT combo supposed to be good for most of these schools? If anything the tepid response has been the most surprising part of all: based on what I'd read on sites like this prior to applying, I thought my numbers were a strong lock for most schools and only HYS was a question - seems to not be the case at all though.

Also, I applied late. Late January for Michigan, late Dec for NYU and early January for everyone else.

Definitely agree someone with your numbers should be close to a lock even at H and S based on past experience, this cycle is just freaky from what I have gathered, did the schools suddenly receive an influx of high performers amidst declining ls applications, I doubt it, but I have heard schools below HYS that traditionally did not practice YP are having the luxury to hold back/reject a noticeable portion of people with 173+/3.8+ numbers. Did USNWR suddenly decide to drop entering stats from their ranking criterions?

S is never a lock. They will reject a 180/4.0 if it doesn't mesh with the rest of the class.

[wons]

I don't agree with the CW here. I see no reason to reapply since nothing about your application can materially change in one year. The cost of losing a year of your life is substantial, and you're basically betting on nothing more than a different spin of the slots.

IMO, you hold tight, and then you push hard for the most money possible from the schools that admit you. And then you grumble at your bad luck and work doubly hard 1L year.

[Mal Reynolds]

I don't agree with the CW here. I see no reason to reapply since nothing about your application can materially change in one year. The cost of losing a year of your life is substantial, and you're basically betting on nothing more than a different spin of the slots.

IMO, you hold tight, and then you push hard for the most money possible from the schools that admit you. And then you grumble at your bad luck and work doubly hard 1L year.

Except applying early and doubling the number of schools he applied to is a huge material change. Not to mention an added year of work experience.

[wons]

I don't agree with the CW here. I see no reason to reapply since nothing about your application can materially change in one year. The cost of losing a year of your life is substantial, and you're basically betting on nothing more than a different spin of the slots.

IMO, you hold tight, and then you push hard for the most money possible from the schools that admit you. And then you grumble at your bad luck and work doubly hard 1L year.

Except applying early and doubling the number of schools he applied to is a huge material change. Not to mention an added year of work experience.

OK, so he gets into, what, U of C rather than Berkeley? For this he gives up a year of his life? And his additional work experience is not relevant because its not in anything remotely related to the practice of law. For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

[Mal Reynolds]

I don't agree with the CW here. I see no reason to reapply since nothing about your application can materially change in one year. The cost of losing a year of your life is substantial, and you're basically betting on nothing more than a different spin of the slots.

IMO, you hold tight, and then you push hard for the most money possible from the schools that admit you. And then you grumble at your bad luck and work doubly hard 1L year.

Except applying early and doubling the number of schools he applied to is a huge material change. Not to mention an added year of work experience.

OK, so he gets into, what, U of C rather than Berkeley? For this he gives up a year of his life? And his additional work experience is not relevant because its not in anything remotely related to the practice of law. For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

Duke, UVA, NU are all way more generous in scholarship dollars than Berkley. Dude didn't even give himself a chance by only applying to half the t14. And I would absolutely take U Chicago at equal or lower cost. So it sounds like you don't really know what you are talking about. Berkley is ludicrously expensive and stingy.

[aboutmydaylight]

I don't agree with the CW here. I see no reason to reapply since nothing about your application can materially change in one year. The cost of losing a year of your life is substantial, and you're basically betting on nothing more than a different spin of the slots.

IMO, you hold tight, and then you push hard for the most money possible from the schools that admit you. And then you grumble at your bad luck and work doubly hard 1L year.

Except applying early and doubling the number of schools he applied to is a huge material change. Not to mention an added year of work experience.

OK, so he gets into, what, U of C rather than Berkeley? For this he gives up a year of his life? And his additional work experience is not relevant because its not in anything remotely related to the practice of law. For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

Duke, UVA, NU are all way more generous in scholarship dollars than Berkley. Dude didn't even give himself a chance by only applying to half the t14. And I would absolutely take U Chicago at equal or lower cost. So it sounds like you don't really know what you are talking about. Berkley is ludicrously expensive and stingy.

Duke, UVA, and NU are all worse choices than Berkeley for Cali all else equal. Chicago, I have no idea. Plus I can't imagine Berkeley not matching Chicago 1:1 according to the people I've talked to.

[Tiago Splitter]

OK, so he gets into, what, U of C rather than Berkeley? For this he gives up a year of his life? And his additional work experience is not relevant because its not in anything remotely related to the practice of law. For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

You're operating as if Berkeley's tuition were 12k per year. But that's his scholarship. Tuition is more like 50k per year. If he waits until next year and gets anything close to a full ride at Cornell, NU, Duke, etc., which he should get with his numbers, waiting will have been well worth it.

[Mal Reynolds]

Duke, UVA, and NU are all worse choices than Berkeley for Cali all else equal. Chicago, I have no idea. Plus I can't imagine Berkeley not matching Chicago 1:1 according to the people I've talked to.

No. This is absolutely not true. Those are all great schools if you have California ties. Plus they are CHEAPER. These numbers make him competitive for a full ride at any of these schools. That should be well worth waiting another year. You should only take lower t14 for free or CCN for a steep discount with these stats. Maybe H/S but I wouldn't.

[aboutmydaylight]

Duke, UVA, and NU are all worse choices than Berkeley for Cali all else equal. Chicago, I have no idea. Plus I can't imagine Berkeley not matching Chicago 1:1 according to the people I've talked to.

No. This is absolutely not true. Those are all great schools if you have California ties. Plus they are CHEAPER.

OP has said nothing about Cali ties, and I said all else equal. There's gotta be a significant premium for Cali that Berkeley has over NU/Duke/UVA.

[Mal Reynolds]

Duke, UVA, and NU are all worse choices than Berkeley for Cali all else equal. Chicago, I have no idea. Plus I can't imagine Berkeley not matching Chicago 1:1 according to the people I've talked to.

No. This is absolutely not true. Those are all great schools if you have California ties. Plus they are CHEAPER.

OP has said nothing about Cali ties, and I said all else equal. There's gotta be a significant premium for Cali that Berkeley has over NU/Duke/UVA.

A $100-200k premium? Just lol

[aboutmydaylight]

Duke, UVA, and NU are all worse choices than Berkeley for Cali all else equal. Chicago, I have no idea. Plus I can't imagine Berkeley not matching Chicago 1:1 according to the people I've talked to.

No. This is absolutely not true. Those are all great schools if you have California ties. Plus they are CHEAPER.

OP has said nothing about Cali ties, and I said all else equal. There's gotta be a significant premium for Cali that Berkeley has over NU/Duke/UVA.

A $100-200k premium? Just lol

In what world would this ever be the case? Seriously, what is the profile of an applicant that would be choosing between Berkeley or NU/Duke/UVA $100-$200k cheaper? OP doesn't have this on the table, and if he did, he'd easily be able to negotiate Berkeley down.

[Mal Reynolds]

In what world would this ever be the case? Seriously, what is the profile of an applicant that would be choosing between Berkeley or NU/Duke/UVA $100-$200k cheaper?

It's the OP's case if he chooses to attend Berkley this year.

[Tiago Splitter]

In what world would this ever be the case? Seriously, what is the profile of an applicant that would be choosing between Berkeley or NU/Duke/UVA $100-$200k cheaper?

OP going to law school in 2014 at Berkeley vs. OP going to law school in 2015 at one of those other places. There is absolutely no way a 4.04/174 should be paying 200k for Berkeley.

[aboutmydaylight]

In what world would this ever be the case? Seriously, what is the profile of an applicant that would be choosing between Berkeley or NU/Duke/UVA $100-$200k cheaper?

It's the OP's case if he chooses to attend Berkley this year.

OP stated, no scholarship money from Berkeley yet. I assume the 12k is financial. Any potential offer from NYU/Michigan can be used to negotiate with Berkeley. Its way too early to tell OP to wait until next cycle.

[aboutmydaylight]

In what world would this ever be the case? Seriously, what is the profile of an applicant that would be choosing between Berkeley or NU/Duke/UVA $100-$200k cheaper?

OP going to law school in 2014 at Berkeley vs. OP going to law school in 2015 at one of those other places. There is absolutely no way a 4.04/174 should be paying 200k for Berkeley.

Again, did you guys miss this?:

Berkeley-Accepted, $12,000 a year grant, no scholarship money yet

The fact that its listed per year tells me the 12k is financial. OP still has potential merit scholarship up for negotiation, and it would really surprise me if his cycle didn't improve. I'm not advocating he go to Berkeley with those stats on only a 12k financial aid discount...

[Tiago Splitter]

In what world would this ever be the case? Seriously, what is the profile of an applicant that would be choosing between Berkeley or NU/Duke/UVA $100-$200k cheaper?

It's the OP's case if he chooses to attend Berkley this year.

OP stated, no scholarship money from Berkeley yet. I assume the 12k is financial. Any potential offer from NYU/Michigan can be used to negotiate with Berkeley. Its way too early to tell OP to wait until next cycle.

No one is saying OP absolutely should reapply next year. What we are saying is that you should not go if the current offers don't change.

I'm not advocating he go to Berkeley with those stats on only a 12k financial aid discount...

Well then we agree. We're arguing with this guy:

For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

[Wiggly]

...

[Wiggly]

...

[wons]

I'm not advocating he go to Berkeley with those stats on only a 12k financial aid discount...

Well then we agree. We're arguing with this guy:

For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

I'm coming at this from a different perspective than you - I'm 5 years out of LS. I'd kill to be a year younger - a year sooner knowing if you're going to make partner, a year longer earning at your full income potential. I get why folks are terrified of incurring debt, but at some point a fear becomes pathological. A guy with these stats who goes to Berkeley is very likely to get a permanent position in BigLaw, and each extra year is a ton of earning power when you're on the other side.

[Tiago Splitter]

I'm not advocating he go to Berkeley with those stats on only a 12k financial aid discount...

Well then we agree. We're arguing with this guy:

For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

I'm coming at this from a different perspective than you - I'm 5 years out of LS. I'd kill to be a year younger - a year sooner knowing if you're going to make partner, a year longer earning at your full income potential. I get why folks are terrified of incurring debt, but at some point a fear becomes pathological. A guy with these stats who goes to Berkeley is very likely to get a permanent position in BigLaw, and each extra year is a ton of earning power when you're on the other side.

And I'm coming at this from the perspective of someone who understands just how expensive tuition is these days. Going right now at current prices will cost OP well over 100k before factoring in the additional interest payments he'll be making over the years. If his best option ends up being Berkeley with 36k in total aid, he'd be crazy to go this year, because he's effectively getting paid six figures to wait.

[wons]

No - you assume he will be paid six figures to wait. There's uncertainty in how much better he'll do next year.

You're also ignoring just how much money you make as an attorney. Tuition wasn't all that cheaper in 2009, chief, so I get your point, but I think your concerns are better aired in the "BU or BC" threads.

I'm not advocating he go to Berkeley with those stats on only a 12k financial aid discount...

Well then we agree. We're arguing with this guy:

For someone who proclaims an interest in practicing in CA, I don't see you don't just take Berkeley and make the best of it.

I'm coming at this from a different perspective than you - I'm 5 years out of LS. I'd kill to be a year younger - a year sooner knowing if you're going to make partner, a year longer earning at your full income potential. I get why folks are terrified of incurring debt, but at some point a fear becomes pathological. A guy with these stats who goes to Berkeley is very likely to get a permanent position in BigLaw, and each extra year is a ton of earning power when you're on the other side.

And I'm coming at this from the perspective of someone who understands just how expensive tuition is these days. Going right now at current prices will cost OP well over 100k before factoring in the additional interest payments he'll be making over the years. If his best option ends up being Berkeley with 36k in total aid, he'd be crazy to go this year, because he's effectively getting paid six figures to wait.

[Mal Reynolds]

Boomer alert.

[jbagelboy]

Boomer alert.

New prof pic bro?

[Mal Reynolds]

Boomer alert.

New prof pic bro?

Baird IS contracts.

[Tiago Splitter]

No - you assume he will be paid six figures to wait. There's uncertainty in how much better he'll do next year.

You're also ignoring just how much money you make as an attorney. Tuition wasn't all that cheaper in 2009, chief, so I get your point, but I think your concerns are better aired in the "BU or BC" threads.

Meanwhile you assume someone going to a school with a 55% Biglaw+Fed Clerk score is guaranteed biglaw and incredible career success. We're both just assuming what is likely, and I don't see why someone would jump right in when the typical outcome for someone with these numbers is a near full ride at the T14. And I'm saying this as someone who didn't start law school until 28 and wishes he had got the ball rolling sooner.