BC BU difference? Forum

[Blindmelon]

The people who I know (not people from Boston obviously) think Bu is the better school. Maybe that is what is pushing me to think Bu is better. But to be honest, I'm happy with my BC acceptance, but if Bu threw me a bone I think I'd rather go there. Maybe I'm a numbers whore, but I'd rather go to the school that has all the rankings on its side, rather than BC students on toplawschools telling me that BC has a better reputation. Maybe I'm just stupid, but i think that's logical. Also, i'm sure that if it were the other way around (BC being higher-ranked than BU in most categories), BC peeps would probably be throwing around the ranking and numbers card. it just seems to me that the objective ranking by professionals > toplawschools' opinions. Unless someone can prove that BC has a better reputation and that beats out BU's objectively better stats and ranking?

Here is the thing--the people that will be hiring you out of LS are considerably older than we are (no shit). They aren't frantic TLSers who check rankings everyday and speculate about what the new ones will be, etc. They are under the impression that BC is much better because when they were of the age to care about these sorts of things, it was. And it's not only that it "was better." It was much better and it remained the case for quite some time. And the two senators we have elected aren't doing much to change that.

So to conclude if you want to go on some small numbers difference fine but do you really think that hiring partners give a crap about .2gpa here or holistic admissions there? No absolutely not. They have it in their heads what are the t10's/t14's and then they have some sort of mental list of the good non t14's and I can guarantee that for the ones over 30 years old, BC is on that list and I don't think that the same can be said for BU (especially not for as many of these hiring partners).

And I'm not trolling. I'm in at both I don't care where you go but I'm trying to give advice and bring up a point that you might not have previously thought of.

The employment stats DON'T back up your claim at all. Employment stats swing towards BU. Thats all that matters. Older people may say they prefer BC, but at least in New England, BU gets into more elite firms. So what they say and do may be different... so I'd follow the statistics rather than what you think some old people think.

[Blindmelon]

Maybe BC has more prestige in state gov. and small and mid-size firms? Cause for big firms, BU wins - so says Leiter.

[sissyclark]

The people who I know (not people from Boston obviously) think Bu is the better school. Maybe that is what is pushing me to think Bu is better. But to be honest, I'm happy with my BC acceptance, but if Bu threw me a bone I think I'd rather go there. Maybe I'm a numbers whore, but I'd rather go to the school that has all the rankings on its side, rather than BC students on toplawschools telling me that BC has a better reputation. Maybe I'm just stupid, but i think that's logical. Also, i'm sure that if it were the other way around (BC being higher-ranked than BU in most categories), BC peeps would probably be throwing around the ranking and numbers card. it just seems to me that the objective ranking by professionals > toplawschools' opinions. Unless someone can prove that BC has a better reputation and that beats out BU's objectively better stats and ranking?

Here is the thing--the people that will be hiring you out of LS are considerably older than we are (no shit). They aren't frantic TLSers who check rankings everyday and speculate about what the new ones will be, etc. They are under the impression that BC is much better because when they were of the age to care about these sorts of things, it was. And it's not only that it "was better." It was much better and it remained the case for quite some time. And the two senators we have elected aren't doing much to change that.

So to conclude if you want to go on some small numbers difference fine but do you really think that hiring partners give a crap about .2gpa here or holistic admissions there? No absolutely not. They have it in their heads what are the t10's/t14's and then they have some sort of mental list of the good non t14's and I can guarantee that for the ones over 30 years old, BC is on that list and I don't think that the same can be said for BU (especially not for as many of these hiring partners).

And I'm not trolling. I'm in at both I don't care where you go but I'm trying to give advice and bring up a point that you might not have previously thought of.

I understand that, and I would agree. But do you have proof of this? that's what the base of this thread is. It seems like BU has all of the objective edge. But BC seems to have intangibles of people's speculation. All I have heard though is people say that it's true, whereas BU has the critical data in its favor. seems to me that BU still has the edge in my opinion. Make sense?

[tram988]

The people who I know (not people from Boston obviously) think Bu is the better school. Maybe that is what is pushing me to think Bu is better. But to be honest, I'm happy with my BC acceptance, but if Bu threw me a bone I think I'd rather go there. Maybe I'm a numbers whore, but I'd rather go to the school that has all the rankings on its side, rather than BC students on toplawschools telling me that BC has a better reputation. Maybe I'm just stupid, but i think that's logical. Also, i'm sure that if it were the other way around (BC being higher-ranked than BU in most categories), BC peeps would probably be throwing around the ranking and numbers card. it just seems to me that the objective ranking by professionals > toplawschools' opinions. Unless someone can prove that BC has a better reputation and that beats out BU's objectively better stats and ranking?

Here is the thing--the people that will be hiring you out of LS are considerably older than we are (no shit). They aren't frantic TLSers who check rankings everyday and speculate about what the new ones will be, etc. They are under the impression that BC is much better because when they were of the age to care about these sorts of things, it was. And it's not only that it "was better." It was much better and it remained the case for quite some time. And the two senators we have elected aren't doing much to change that.

So to conclude if you want to go on some small numbers difference fine but do you really think that hiring partners give a crap about .2gpa here or holistic admissions there? No absolutely not. They have it in their heads what are the t10's/t14's and then they have some sort of mental list of the good non t14's and I can guarantee that for the ones over 30 years old, BC is on that list and I don't think that the same can be said for BU (especially not for as many of these hiring partners).

And I'm not trolling. I'm in at both I don't care where you go but I'm trying to give advice and bring up a point that you might not have previously thought of.

I understand that, and I would agree. But do you have proof of this? that's what the base of this thread is. It seems like BU has all of the objective edge. But BC seems to have intangibles of people's speculation. All I have heard though is people say that it's true, whereas BU has the critical data in its favor. seems to me that BU still has the edge in my opinion. Make sense?

I think according the Brian Leitner's data, BU may place a bit better in firms. However, at least in Boston where most graduates work, the placement is equivalent. BU does appear more national, as I've stated before. This stuff switches s often it's hard to keep track lol. NLJ250 placement in 2005 and 2008 favored BC.

When it comes to prestige though, I'm sorry, BC all the way. BC has been a top 30 school much longer than BU and has an especially strong reputation in Boston.

[tram988]

I just checked-- BC was ranked #20 in 1987 lol. BU wasnt even ranked until 1994 and was number 38. This is why BC has more lay prestige.


http://prelawhandbook.com/law_school_ra ... _1987_1999

[Blindmelon]

I just checked-- BC was ranked #20 in 1987 lol. BU wasnt even ranked until 1994 and was number 38. This is why BC has more lay prestige.


http://prelawhandbook.com/law_school_ra ... _1987_1999

US News is terribly flawed. BU as a law school has been around well before BC, and US News didn't take them into account. In fact, for UG, US News didn't rank Vassar until recently when its clearly one of the best schools in the country.

[sissyclark]

I understand, but is there proof that BU's rank 15 years ago really matters? Is it just me that finds it weird to rely simply on speculation?

BC Student: People tell me that BU isn't as good as BC! oh, and BC used to be ranked much better. Believe me, it's better!

BU Student: Just look at employment statistics and rank.

[Blindmelon]

I understand, but is there proof that BU's rank 15 years ago really matters? Is it just me that finds it weird to rely simply on speculation?

BC Student: People tell me that BU isn't as good as BC! oh, and BC used to be ranked much better. Believe me, it's better!

BU Student: Just look at employment statistics and rank.

Neither school will open or close doors. I'm just emphasizing that choosing a law school based on lay prestige is not a smart decision. There are a lot of reasons to take BC over BU and vice versa. One of them is NOT that BC has more lay prestige - unless you're really into name dropping... which, in reality, neither will get you very far name dropping-wise.

[kams]

Dude, whatever. Whenever I drop the name BU Law I get laid up the ying yang.

[ls10]

BU is definitely more numbers driven and more predictable. BC is more selective, 20% acceptance rate and really is unpredictable. BC tends to let some people in with stellar softs and lower numbers than in comparison with BU

Just had to clarify that BC isn't that much more selective than BU. Last year, BU accepted 23% of its applicants...not far from BC's 20%

http://www.top-law-schools.com/boston-u ... f-law.html

[imisscollege]

The people who I know (not people from Boston obviously) think Bu is the better school. Maybe that is what is pushing me to think Bu is better. But to be honest, I'm happy with my BC acceptance, but if Bu threw me a bone I think I'd rather go there. Maybe I'm a numbers whore, but I'd rather go to the school that has all the rankings on its side, rather than BC students on toplawschools telling me that BC has a better reputation. Maybe I'm just stupid, but i think that's logical. Also, i'm sure that if it were the other way around (BC being higher-ranked than BU in most categories), BC peeps would probably be throwing around the ranking and numbers card. it just seems to me that the objective ranking by professionals > toplawschools' opinions. Unless someone can prove that BC has a better reputation and that beats out BU's objectively better stats and ranking?

Here is the thing--the people that will be hiring you out of LS are considerably older than we are (no shit). They aren't frantic TLSers who check rankings everyday and speculate about what the new ones will be, etc. They are under the impression that BC is much better because when they were of the age to care about these sorts of things, it was. And it's not only that it "was better." It was much better and it remained the case for quite some time. And the two senators we have elected aren't doing much to change that.

So to conclude if you want to go on some small numbers difference fine but do you really think that hiring partners give a crap about .2gpa here or holistic admissions there? No absolutely not. They have it in their heads what are the t10's/t14's and then they have some sort of mental list of the good non t14's and I can guarantee that for the ones over 30 years old, BC is on that list and I don't think that the same can be said for BU (especially not for as many of these hiring partners).

And I'm not trolling. I'm in at both I don't care where you go but I'm trying to give advice and bring up a point that you might not have previously thought of.

I understand that, and I would agree. But do you have proof of this? that's what the base of this thread is. It seems like BU has all of the objective edge. But BC seems to have intangibles of people's speculation. All I have heard though is people say that it's true, whereas BU has the critical data in its favor. seems to me that BU still has the edge in my opinion. Make sense?

I mean the proof requires the logical path that I took earlier leading to the people who could potentially hire you thinking it's better. That's all I was saying.

[tram988]

I understand, but is there proof that BU's rank 15 years ago really matters? Is it just me that finds it weird to rely simply on speculation?

BC Student: People tell me that BU isn't as good as BC! oh, and BC used to be ranked much better. Believe me, it's better!

BU Student: Just look at employment statistics and rank.

The point of me providing that link was to establish BC's long tradition of being a top 30 school. Since 1987, 23 years, BC has been a top 30 school. BU wasn't even considered until 1994 and at that time it was a top 40 law school. My point is that this is why BC has more lay prestige. BC has simply been a top law school much longer than BU (sorry, its true) and has that reputation in Boston. I'm not saying that BU isn't a great school-- it is and it has great employment opportunities.

Both schools have great placement in Boston and you can't go wrong with either (assuming you pick for the right reasons.)

[tram988]

I just checked-- BC was ranked #20 in 1987 lol. BU wasnt even ranked until 1994 and was number 38. This is why BC has more lay prestige.


http://prelawhandbook.com/law_school_ra ... _1987_1999

US News is terribly flawed. BU as a law school has been around well before BC, and US News didn't take them into account. In fact, for UG, US News didn't rank Vassar until recently when its clearly one of the best schools in the country.

Around? Yes, but not around as a higher ranked school.

[kams]

it doesn't really matter, BU or BC or both fine, although I do think BU holds a slight edge. But that's just me.

It all really boils down to BU students will point to the current stats and rankings and say that BU is better, and they have the edge. BC students will, necessarily, have to combat that with saying that BC used to have better stats, because that's their only argument. I'd probably do the same.

But in the end, I'd go with the Occam's razor approach: the simplest explanation is the best:

Look at the rankings and employment stats that matter, and BU holds a slender, but noticeable lead. Therefore, it's more likely than not the better pick.

Or we can make a roundabout argument saying that BC is better because 15 years ago it was better, and therefore it had the better name 15 years ago, and therefore because it was better back then, that same reputation still remains better than BU's (assuming that BU's reputation has not grown whatsoever in 15 years), and therefore the "old partners" who do the hiring (assuming no people who graduated within the last 15 years since BU have ascended the rankings do any hiring whatsoever, or have any influence in hiring whatsoever) will always go with BC because BC was better to them, and therefore, BC is the better pick.


I"m being an ass, but you get my drift. But I do think they're pretty much the same schools.

[tram988]

Anyone check out the 2009 NLJ250 under "The Go To Schools"?

BC wins again


http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2443758843
BC: 34.6
BU: 29.8

I also found the partner's promotions interesting: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2443757022

[Blindmelon]

Yup, BC is slightly ahead again. 7 more people get biglaw than BU. Thats clearly a sign.

[tram988]

Yup, BC is slightly ahead again. 7 more people get biglaw than BU. Thats clearly a sign.

Welll Mr. Melon it needs to be proportional. BU, as can be seen from this site, has a larger graduating class;.

Proportionally: BC: 34.9; BU: 29.8

If we broke it down numerically it wouldn't be an accurate comparison.

[tram988]

Also, I'm not saying this means BC is automatically greater-- but I do think it makes your case harder arguing BU is the more prestigious and the school with more of an edge.

[Blindmelon]

Yup, BC is slightly ahead again. 7 more people get biglaw than BU. Thats clearly a sign.

Welll Mr. Melon it needs to be proportional. BU, as can be seen from this site, has a larger graduating class;.

Proportionally: BC: 34.9; BU: 29.8

If we broke it down numerically it wouldn't be an accurate comparison.

I agree its higher. But 5% could be self selection - who knows. This isn't really indicative of one beating the other. 35% is impressive though given its 2009. I wonder what 2010 is going to look like :/

[tram988]

Check out the difference in federal clerkships as well: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =1&t=75513

BC is the clear fed. clerk winner too.

In 2009, BC placed 9 into clerkships while BU only placed 3.

[Blindmelon]

Check out the difference in federal clerkships as well: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =1&t=75513

BC is the clear fed. clerk winner too.

In 2009, BC placed 9 into clerkships while BU only placed 3.

Ugh. Your 0L analysis fail is going a little overboard. I'm not even going to respond anymore.

[tram988]

Check out the difference in federal clerkships as well: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =1&t=75513

BC is the clear fed. clerk winner too.

In 2009, BC placed 9 into clerkships while BU only placed 3.

Ugh. Your 0L analysis fail is going a little overboard. I'm not even going to respond anymore.

i'm just posting some data There's another thread already talking about this!

You complained before that BC had no data to back up their claims-- now we have some fresh from 2009

Here's the thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=108528

[Blindmelon]

Check out the difference in federal clerkships as well: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =1&t=75513

BC is the clear fed. clerk winner too.

In 2009, BC placed 9 into clerkships while BU only placed 3.

Ugh. Your 0L analysis fail is going a little overboard. I'm not even going to respond anymore.

i'm just posting some data There's another thread already talking about this!

You complained before that BC had no data to back up their claims-- now we have some fresh from 2009

Here's the thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=108528

I will say though, this does show how dumb USNews really is. BC does not deserved to be ranked where it is - I mean this in the, it should be higher sense - clarification just so Tram doesn't kill me .

[tram988]

Haha I agree. That's nice to hear from you lol. BC and BU should share #20!

[JayTal]

Haha I agree. That's nice to hear from you lol. BC and BU should share #20!

Why not #1?