Michigan vs UCLA vs Cornell vs UVA Forum

[180kickflip]

Hopefully, you end up with better final options, but umich with 90k is the way I'd go from the options given (and 125k debt at graduation sounds about right to me)

I know we have to judge based on the data we have, but people calling Mich a TTT in decline because they've been out of the T10 for one year and the most recent BL numbers aren't soooo great are pretty shortsighted IMO. Schools bounce around a bit over time, and Michigan recently cut their class size significantly. I don't think the BL+FC #s being reported now are really representative of the current situation. It's maybe the best data we have, but it's still not great to just take it at face value without thinking about what's happened since the data was collected.

[Otunga]

Hopefully, you end up with better final options, but umich with 90k is the way I'd go from the options given (and 125k debt at graduation sounds about right to me)

I know we have to judge based on the data we have, but people calling Mich a TTT in decline because they've been out of the T10 for one year and the most recent BL numbers aren't soooo great are pretty shortsighted IMO. Schools bounce around a bit over time, and Michigan recently cut their class size significantly. I don't think the BL+FC #s being reported now are really representative of the current situation. It's maybe the best data we have, but it's still not great to just take it at face value without thinking about what's happened since the data was collected.

Yeah, Michigan's a fine choice but I'm of the view that for 100k+ debt, only HYS are worthwhile. Even if we stipulate that one has on average a 65% chance at biglaw at the other t14 (or other highly desirable outcome), that's a 35% chance of being fucked.

[tsujimoto74]

Hopefully, you end up with better final options, but umich with 90k is the way I'd go from the options given (and 125k debt at graduation sounds about right to me)

I know we have to judge based on the data we have, but people calling Mich a TTT in decline because they've been out of the T10 for one year and the most recent BL numbers aren't soooo great are pretty shortsighted IMO. Schools bounce around a bit over time, and Michigan recently cut their class size significantly. I don't think the BL+FC #s being reported now are really representative of the current situation. It's maybe the best data we have, but it's still not great to just take it at face value without thinking about what's happened since the data was collected.

Yeah, Michigan's a fine choice but I'm of the view that for 100k+ debt, only HYS are worthwhile. Even if we stipulate that one has on average a 65% chance at biglaw at the other t14 (or other highly desirable outcome), that's a 35% chance of being fucked.

Because it's obviously a fair assumption that 100% of graduates want biglaw jobs, and therefor everyone who doesn't get one is screwed.

[Tls2016]

90k total isn't enough. Even if we throw out the sports agent aspiration and just change that to "generic biglaw", it's still way too much debt for a non-trivial chance at a bad outcome.

This is absolutely absurd. According to the most recent T-14 rankings on this cite, about 7% of the class at Michigan receives a scholarship of half tuition or greater (90k total surely fits into this category). Do you really mean to suggest that going to a top 10 school is not worth it for over 90% of the class? Your point that a bad outcome is possible is certainly true, but if Michigan with 2/3 tuition scholarship is not worth it, then what is?

Surely, if this is too risky of a proposition, how could you ever suggest that someone pay sticker even at HYS (which is acknowledged as one of the best outcomes possible for an applicant on TLS)? A bad outcome is always possible, and depending on your definition of non-trivial, the decision to attend any law school runs the student a non-trivial risk of a bad outcome.

OP, I would strongly urge you to ignore this advice. It is totally off-base. TLS is a great resource when it comes to dissuading people from attending a TTT school without a massive scholarship, but please, please do not let neurotic, oblivious, and pathologically debt-averse people on this forum talk you out of a fantastic outcome. Not all risks are created equal, but there really is truth in the saying "Nothing ventured, nothing gained." Going to law school is a risk - period. And Michigan with a 2/3 scholarship is a risk worth taking.

I do think going to law school makes sense for less than 10% of people generally, yes...not just at Michigan. And no, I wouldn't suggest somebody go to HYS at sticker, even if their family's wealthy (the money could be invested in a career with a better market).

I urge the OP to NOT ignore advice stating that 120k+ debt could easily leave them in a horrible situation. Hell, even if we stipulate that they obtain biglaw, one only has to cite the poor retention rates and (in broad terms) terrible lives of biglaw associates to still make it a bad outcome.

OP - if you at all think you could make a viable accountant, software engineer...or any other solid career that requires much less debt, then go for that option UNLESS you can manage to go to a top 14 law school free or close to it.

Again, the set of major financial decisions that could lead to a horrible situation includes almost all major financial decisions. You have to take risks to be successful - period. In fact, often the most successful people are those that take risks often. It is incumbent on us as law school applicants to be reasonable risk-takers, and the standard for being “reasonable” is the real idea at issue here.
I may agree with the idea that going to law school is not a great decision for up to 90% of prospective students, but to suggest that this figure extends even to those who are attending top-10 Law Schools with enormous scholarships? Again, the outcome that Otunga is suggesting as a sort of bare-minimum to justify the decision to attend law school is achieved by less than 1% of applicants. I, for one, think it is a goal to aspire to, but it is just out-of-touch to reality to suggest that anything less is an irresponsible option to take.
At a school like Michigan, you have a very solid chance of landing Big Law, and an even better chance at landing a PI job if that is your choice. There are also smaller firms, especially in and around the Midwest, that relish the chance to hire Michigan grads - even those that finish below the median. I would submit that you have a very small chance of landing in a situation in which you are unable to repay your debt, and even if you do happen to land in a very difficult situation, Michigan has a wonderful LRAP that is designed for just such a situation.
The flip side is that you land BigLaw (in my time as a paralegal at a V5 firm, I have seen that the legends about the horrible lives of associates are true at times, but, on the whole, are very overblown as are the drawbacks of any other career that you hear about.) and make a ton of money or land a job in the career of your dreams using the credentials you’ve obtained by attending a top-notch law school, you repay your loans very quickly, and the world is, quite franky, your oyster.
Very, very few people are able to swing a full ride at a Top 14 school, and a far greater number than that - even those that go at sticker - enjoy great financial and personal success as a result of attending such a school. You need to understand that the outcome that you have already achieved is unquestionably worth taking. You can hide your head in the sand on this one because it’s all true. It is possible that this decision could lead to financial ruin, but again almost ANY major financial decision has the potential to lead to financial ruin, and so I, for one, don’t think that pointing out the possibility of a bad outcome is QED for the decision being a bad one.
You alone, in the end, can properly weigh the factors, but it is objectively incorrect to say that this is an irresponsible financial decision. Every decision calculated in order to achieve a good outcome has the potential to instead result in a bad one, but as these decisions come, this one has limited risk and a potentially very high reward.

Student loan debt is a special risk because it is not dischargable in bankruptcy. You are literally mortgaging your future for possibly the next twenty years for a diploma and a chance at a job and a career that school has not trained you to perform. Your career security is low and the job market is saturated.
Don't equate law school financial risk with any other type of debt. I wouldn't take the advice of an 0L about the value or risk of law school debt.
I also wouldn't take the view of a paralegal as to the life of a biglaw associate instead of reports of actual biglaw associates.

Michigan has the difficult problem of no home market as Detroit doesn't employ in large numbers. In every market Michigan grads compete with other T14s and local schools.

If you want to be a sports agent,law school is not the way forward. You need to go find an agency and get a job and make connections.

[Otunga]

Hopefully, you end up with better final options, but umich with 90k is the way I'd go from the options given (and 125k debt at graduation sounds about right to me)

I know we have to judge based on the data we have, but people calling Mich a TTT in decline because they've been out of the T10 for one year and the most recent BL numbers aren't soooo great are pretty shortsighted IMO. Schools bounce around a bit over time, and Michigan recently cut their class size significantly. I don't think the BL+FC #s being reported now are really representative of the current situation. It's maybe the best data we have, but it's still not great to just take it at face value without thinking about what's happened since the data was collected.

Yeah, Michigan's a fine choice but I'm of the view that for 100k+ debt, only HYS are worthwhile. Even if we stipulate that one has on average a 65% chance at biglaw at the other t14 (or other highly desirable outcome), that's a 35% chance of being fucked.

Because it's obviously a fair assumption that 100% of graduates want biglaw jobs, and therefor everyone who doesn't get one is screwed.

It's somewhat built-into the 65% assumption that every student doesn't want biglaw. Otherwise, I would've quoted whatever the average biglaw % is across the non-HYS t14, which I know isn't that high.

[180kickflip]

Hopefully, you end up with better final options, but umich with 90k is the way I'd go from the options given (and 125k debt at graduation sounds about right to me)

I know we have to judge based on the data we have, but people calling Mich a TTT in decline because they've been out of the T10 for one year and the most recent BL numbers aren't soooo great are pretty shortsighted IMO. Schools bounce around a bit over time, and Michigan recently cut their class size significantly. I don't think the BL+FC #s being reported now are really representative of the current situation. It's maybe the best data we have, but it's still not great to just take it at face value without thinking about what's happened since the data was collected.

Yeah, Michigan's a fine choice but I'm of the view that for 100k+ debt, only HYS are worthwhile. Even if we stipulate that one has on average a 65% chance at biglaw at the other t14 (or other highly desirable outcome), that's a 35% chance of being fucked.

I'm pretty close to agreeing with you in terms of how few schools are worth significant debt, but I'll also admit that I'm unusually debt averse and would rather not be an attorney than have lasting debt. If Op is more strongly pulled to law, then the math has to change some.

I mean...I know you drew the line at 100k, but if you had said 90k, I'd say that's a level that students with full scholarahips to NYU and Columbia sometimes leave with. So if only HYS were worth that, we'd be telling people with Hamiltons and vanderbilts that their award level isn't big enough. If that's how you feel, that's fine, but Op should consider that context when reading the advice. In the end, if he/she really wants to be a lawyer, the only options I see are UMich and retake.

[Otunga]

Hopefully, you end up with better final options, but umich with 90k is the way I'd go from the options given (and 125k debt at graduation sounds about right to me)

I know we have to judge based on the data we have, but people calling Mich a TTT in decline because they've been out of the T10 for one year and the most recent BL numbers aren't soooo great are pretty shortsighted IMO. Schools bounce around a bit over time, and Michigan recently cut their class size significantly. I don't think the BL+FC #s being reported now are really representative of the current situation. It's maybe the best data we have, but it's still not great to just take it at face value without thinking about what's happened since the data was collected.

Yeah, Michigan's a fine choice but I'm of the view that for 100k+ debt, only HYS are worthwhile. Even if we stipulate that one has on average a 65% chance at biglaw at the other t14 (or other highly desirable outcome), that's a 35% chance of being fucked.

I'm pretty close to agreeing with you in terms of how few schools are worth significant debt, but I'll also admit that I'm unusually debt averse and would rather not be an attorney than have lasting debt. If Op is more strongly pulled to law, then the math has to change some.

I mean...I know you drew the line at 100k, but if you had said 90k, I'd say that's a level that students with full scholarahips to NYU and Columbia sometimes leave with. So if only HYS were worth that, we'd be telling people with Hamiltons and vanderbilts that their award level isn't big enough. If that's how you feel, that's fine, but Op should consider that context when reading the advice. In the end, if he/she really wants to be a lawyer, the only options I see are UMich and retake.

Good point. Yeah, the 100k line is fairly arbitrary, and if one is passionate about becoming a lawyer and has worked in a law firm before (thus making an informed choice), then 100k+ can be justifiable at a non-HYS t14 school, ESPECIALLY if we're talking somewhere like Columbia.

[Paul Campos]

Some of the cost figures being tossed around in this thread are very unrealistic. A 90K discount on tuition over the next three years at Michigan is only going to be 50% off sticker, not two-thirds as somebody said (this is assuming 3% annual tuition increases, which is conservative, and out of state tuition, which is slightly higher than in-state).

Michigan tries to low-ball the COA by using an eight-month rather than a nine-month budget. They also leave out the cost of health insurance. Part of the cost of law school is that you have to pay 36 months' worth of living expenses between the time you start and the time you take the bar. I know AA pretty well, and a very conservative estimate of COL means that somebody who gets a $90K discount to to to UM is going to end up paying $150K in tuition and COL by the time they take the bar. That's $170K plus if loan financed, with interest and origination fees. Again, that's conservative.

[Iwanttolawschool]

Listening to 0L's talk about %'s of BL and FC is really funny. I was in the same position, so I understand. As a 0L, I assumed that like 90% of people must want biglaw, because thats what I want. Its really, really....really... not the case.

[mabes]

Listening to 0L's talk about %'s of BL and FC is really funny. I was in the same position, so I understand. As a 0L, I assumed that like 90% of people must want biglaw, because thats what I want. Its really, really....really... not the case.

Thank you. Statements like saying the student body of Michigan is 65% big law and 35% "fucked" is 3rd grade level thinking

[Biglaw1990]

.

[Iwanttolawschool]

Listening to 0L's talk about %'s of BL and FC is really funny. I was in the same position, so I understand. As a 0L, I assumed that like 90% of people must want biglaw, because thats what I want. Its really, really....really... not the case.

I'm curious about this (I'm being completely genuine and serious). Around what percentage of students at your school actually want/wanted Biglaw, if you had to guess? TIA

When students come in - I would say it's pretty close to 50/50 wanting biglaw and wanting public interest. What happens is some people defect from the public interest side once OCI approaches. By the time OCI happens, I'd guess about 60-70% take part.

[Otunga]

Listening to 0L's talk about %'s of BL and FC is really funny. I was in the same position, so I understand. As a 0L, I assumed that like 90% of people must want biglaw, because thats what I want. Its really, really....really... not the case.

Thank you. Statements like saying the student body of Michigan is 65% big law and 35% "fucked" is 3rd grade level thinking

It's not 3rd grade level at all - I think it's more a function of preference. Some would rather not go in the hole 100k+ to enter a poor legal market. At some point, though, the choice isn't so subjective when you approach debt figures that exceed 150k+ and beyond.

Also, thanks Paul Campos for the post about the debt total. A 90k scholarship is nothing to scoff at, sure, but it's also nothing to write home about.

[Tls2016]

Some of the cost figures being tossed around in this thread are very unrealistic. A 90K discount on tuition over the next three years at Michigan is only going to be 50% off sticker, not two-thirds as somebody said (this is assuming 3% annual tuition increases, which is conservative, and out of state tuition, which is slightly higher than in-state).

Michigan tries to low-ball the COA by using an eight-month rather than a nine-month budget. They also leave out the cost of health insurance. Part of the cost of law school is that you have to pay 36 months' worth of living expenses between the time you start and the time you take the bar. I know AA pretty well, and a very conservative estimate of COL means that somebody who gets a $90K discount to to to UM is going to end up paying $150K in tuition and COL by the time they take the bar. That's $170K plus if loan financed, with interest and origination fees. Again, that's conservative.

Yes I was wondering at the $125k figure when the tuition alone is close to 60,000 a year if you include fees. The amount was also assuming living on an SA income which is far from certain and shouldn't be assumed.
I didn't know Michigan fudged the numbers by only using 8 months of living expenses instead of nine. It's really indicative of their mindset.

[Otunga]

Some of the cost figures being tossed around in this thread are very unrealistic. A 90K discount on tuition over the next three years at Michigan is only going to be 50% off sticker, not two-thirds as somebody said (this is assuming 3% annual tuition increases, which is conservative, and out of state tuition, which is slightly higher than in-state).

Michigan tries to low-ball the COA by using an eight-month rather than a nine-month budget. They also leave out the cost of health insurance. Part of the cost of law school is that you have to pay 36 months' worth of living expenses between the time you start and the time you take the bar. I know AA pretty well, and a very conservative estimate of COL means that somebody who gets a $90K discount to to to UM is going to end up paying $150K in tuition and COL by the time they take the bar. That's $170K plus if loan financed, with interest and origination fees. Again, that's conservative.

Yes I was wondering at the $125k figure when the tuition alone is close to 60,000 a year if you include fees. The amount was also assuming living on an SA income which is far from certain and shouldn't be assumed.
I didn't know Michigan fudged the numbers by only using 8 months of living expenses instead of nine. It's really indicative of their mindset.

Additionally, if you're not from the midwest, you have to consider the extra travel expenses too. That can get significant over the course of 3 years.

[fliptrip]

First, I think it's funny that OP has disappeared from this thread, yet it keeps on firing. Also, thank you to IWTLS for giving a % of folks who are actually pursuing BigLaw. Knowing that % allows us to get an objective analysis. If we use the rule of thumb that you should not borrow more than your first year's salary, we can use a weighted average to give an acceptable borrowing level.

70% of students at UM pursuing biglaw with a 54% overall success rate in the population equates to a 77% overall success rate. Then, if we use that in a weighted average, we get a number (I used $60k for non-biglaw salary and applied the class wide 10% school funded (40k* not sure) 4% unemployed figure):

77%(160k)+9%(60k)+10%(40k)+4%(0) = $132,000.

This also assumes that OP is entering a market that pays $160k. Secondary markets like Atlanta pay more like $135k, but maybe that just washes out with lower cost of living.

So, by this analysis, OP is not making the best bet by taking on at least $170k in debt for Mich. If he can get an extra $10k/year out of them, that would leave him with $131,805 and with an objectively good bet.

[Leonardo DiCaprio]

michigan being the bottom of the t14 in placement isnt a "recent trend." search all the rayiner threads and look at the data from past 5 years. im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say "bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!" all jokes aside, michigan is a fine school but it is at the bottom of t14 (along with GULC) in terms of placement power and thats a fact.

[SCOTUSorBust]

michigan being the bottom of the t14 in placement isnt a "recent trend." search all the rayiner threads and look at the data from past 5 years. im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say "bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!" all jokes aside, michigan is a fine school but it is at the bottom of t14 (along with GULC) in terms of placement power and thats a fact.

Don't you go to UCI or something? Lol.

[Leonardo DiCaprio]

michigan being the bottom of the t14 in placement isnt a "recent trend." search all the rayiner threads and look at the data from past 5 years. im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say "bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!" all jokes aside, michigan is a fine school but it is at the bottom of t14 (along with GULC) in terms of placement power and thats a fact.

Don't you go to UCI or something? Lol.

a) no.

b) even if so, how is that in anyway relevant to what i said above?

[Emperor of Ice-Cream]

Michigan is NOT a T10 and the employment prospects at Mich are nearly as bad as Georgetown. Please don't buy into the notion that M and V are peer schools because they aren't. I'm not advising you to leave money on the table and pay sticker, but you need to understand that your chance of landing Biglaw is not the same. I would go to Cornell if you want NYC Biglaw, and UVA if you want to go to a different market, since UVA will provide you with more mobility. Best of luck!

The above is silly hyperbole. Michigan puts as many students into as many markets as any school outside HYSCN, and it's class size is nearly half of GULC's. It has an objectively strong alumni base and reputation, and is in every other respect UVA's peer. Hiring partners and judges don't really distinguish between 7-14 anyway, as anyone who's been through OCI or the clerkship process knows, and assertions of 0Ls to the contrary don't change this.

If you know you only want NYC BL, then C might be your best bet. But if you want to keep PI/Gov jobs open, and you're not sure where you want to practice, then M is as good a choice as V (probably better if you want CA). V's a great school. M's a great school. C's a great school. The best thing you can do as a prospective law student is to choose the best school for your needs at the lowest price. Work on your interviewing, networking, and storytelling; don't get caught up in rankings and trying to determine your odds as a percentage at peer schools.

Respectfully, I have to disagree with this response. Firstly, law students who go through OCI do not necessarily know whether hiring partners and judges distinguish between the top schools. In fact, a lot of law students do not even know many partners and associates in Biglaw and regurgitate what they read on TLS (e.g. MVP are peers, Cornell and Duke are not in the same league as MVP, etc). It is well-known in NYC Biglaw that certain schools are viewed more favorably, such as HYSCCNPC. There is a reason why Cornell is ranked #13, but its Biglaw placement is among the best in the T14. SCOTUS hires a lot more UVA grads than Michigan, and UVA has a stronger connection to DC. I'm not advocating for the OP to go to a different school at a much higher cost. All I'm saying is that there is a difference between the schools.
Biglaw+ Federal Clerkship %
Michigan 54%
UVA 68%
Cornell 74%

Of course I know better than a 0L. I interviewed at the exact same firms and was offered the exact same jobs as HYSCCNMVPCDNG students. If you think hiring partners rank MDCVPBNG students by school (apart from alum/regional preferences and grades), you have no idea how legal hiring works and ought not to be offering advice to anyone. The reason C and P's BL numbers are especially good is because those schools attract and seek out NYC BL-focused students. My resume screamed PI: in at HCCNMB, waitlisted at P and C. Michigan's not Yale, but it's a public school that admits more PI/Gov/Secondary-focused students than C and P combined. When you subtract school hiring, I think UVA and M's numbers have been almost identical over the past few years.

Most students at Michigan could have gone to Penn or Cornell or Duke, and vice versa. If you know that you only want NYC BL, of course you should go to P or C (at equal price). If you want the South and to keep NYC BL open, you should go to D or UVA. If you want DC or gov, then UVA's probably the best choice. M does well in NYC, is better than DVCP for Chicago and CA, and is better than DCP for PI/Gov. This isn't complicated, but it's something NYC BL-focused 0Ls really have trouble with.

[Emperor of Ice-Cream]

michigan being the bottom of the t14 in placement isnt a "recent trend." search all the rayiner threads and look at the data from past 5 years. im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say "bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!" all jokes aside, michigan is a fine school but it is at the bottom of t14 (along with GULC) in terms of placement power and thats a fact.

Don't you go to UCI or something? Lol.

a) no.

b) even if so, how is that in anyway relevant to what i said above?

It's relevant because rejection is almost always the catalyst for bitter, emotional, and exaggerated denigration. Either that or you are an MSU/OSU fan.

[Trippel]

M does well in NYC, is better than DVCP for Chicago and CA, and is better than DCP for PI/Gov. This isn't complicated, but it's something NYC BL-focused 0Ls really have trouble with.

[/quote][/quote][/quote]

It's hard for me to imagine what PI/Gov jobs Michigan students have a greater chance of landing in comparison to their DCP cohort. Can you fill us in?

[stretchedtoothin]

michigan being the bottom of the t14 in placement isnt a "recent trend." search all the rayiner threads and look at the data from past 5 years. im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say "bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!" all jokes aside, michigan is a fine school but it is at the bottom of t14 (along with GULC) in terms of placement power and thats a fact.

Don't you go to UCI or something? Lol.

a) no.

b) even if so, how is that in anyway relevant to what i said above?

It's relevant because rejection is almost always the catalyst for bitter, emotional, and exaggerated denigration. Either that or you are an MSU/OSU fan.

Considering Michigan as being near the bottom of an elite (though TLS seems to forget this often) group of schools in terms of placement power can hardly be classified as an opinion based on "bitter, emotion, and exaggerated denigration," especially when literally half of TLS feels this way. It's definitely a controversial opinion--the discussion that's occurred even after OP left the thread clearly demonstrates this. However, reasonable minds can differ on whether it's a valid assessment of UM.

[Emperor of Ice-Cream]

michigan being the bottom of the t14 in placement isnt a "recent trend." search all the rayiner threads and look at the data from past 5 years. im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say "bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!" all jokes aside, michigan is a fine school but it is at the bottom of t14 (along with GULC) in terms of placement power and thats a fact.

Don't you go to UCI or something? Lol.

a) no.

b) even if so, how is that in anyway relevant to what i said above?

It's relevant because rejection is almost always the catalyst for bitter, emotional, and exaggerated denigration. Either that or you are an MSU/OSU fan.

Considering Michigan as being near the bottom of an elite (though TLS seems to forget this often) group of schools in terms of placement power can hardly be classified as an opinion based on "bitter, emotion, and exaggerated denigration," especially when literally half of TLS feels this way. It's definitely a controversial opinion--the discussion that's occurred even after OP left the thread clearly demonstrates this. However, reasonable minds can differ on whether it's a valid assessment of UM.

"im sure the michigan kids would chime in to say 'bu... bu... but... PI! self-selection! bad advice from CSO!'"

+

"dont go to michigan. michigan is a t14 in name only. it's a huge TTT in decline . . ."

=

Bitter, emotional, and exaggerated denigration.

[fliptrip]

Well at the very least we have to conclude that the struggle at UM was real because they made substantive structural changes to address them. They reduced class size and adjusted their grading policies.