Top Law Schools

I've narrowed my choices to these two schools and am curious responses. I am positive I want to practice in the northeast, and likely want to work in Boston. I am not a huge fan of LA, though I don't mind northern California. I would be non-resident in Cali so lets assume costs are the same at both schools. Which would you choose and why?

************************************
Stats: 166/3.8
Acceptances: BC, BU, GW, Fordham, UCLA, UConn
WL: GULC
Denied: Cornell, Chicago

BC

Informative wrote:Which would you choose and why?

because

Informative wrote:I am positive I want to practice in the northeast, and likely want to work in Boston.

.

I bet this is a classic example of putting way too much stock in USNWR rankings (even though I hate LA and don't want to practice there, it is ranked 5 slots higher . . .)

amputatedbrain wrote:I bet this is a classic example of putting way too much stock in USNWR rankings (even though I hate LA and don't want to practice there, it is ranked 5 slots higher . . .)

+1

Definitely go to BC or BU. You dislike LA, you don't want to practice there, and you'll be paying out-of-state tuition at UCLA...

I presume the only thing that could possibly make you consider UCLA over the east-coast schools is US News... Don't make that mistake.

BC or BU and don't look back!

I said BC. Hope to see you there in the fall!

UCLA is WAAAAAY better. BC is not as, or even close to, as good as UCLA...its about the same as a school like Villanova in terms of career prospects in this economy.

GradPath2011 wrote:UCLA is WAAAAAY better. BC is not as, or even close to, as good as UCLA...its about the same as a school like Villanova in terms of career prospects in this economy.

lolwut?

From the latest NLJ placement chart...

UCLA: 35.9%

BC: 34.6%

Villanova: 16.7%

I hope you were joking.

the NLJ 250 is biased towards NE firms. UCLA is gonna be T-14 this year. Nova has the same rep as BC.

Cmon dude, if you want Boston, why the heck would you not pick what might be its very best regional school? BC has an amazing alumni network in Boston, since so many of their grads stay in that area. This is most certainly a case of the rankings having a negative effect. if you want Boston, UCLA shouldn't even be part of the debate.

GradPath2011 wrote:the NLJ 250 is biased towards NE firms. UCLA is gonna be T-14 this year. Nova has the same rep as BC.

The kid is asking for advice. Please dispense with the stupidities.

Are you kidding me? Nova is the same as BC for the most part. Nova is a top 40 school equivalent. Look at the NLJ 250 for example and the rep scores.

GradPath2011 wrote:Are you kidding me? Nova is the same as BC for the most part. Nova is a top 40 school equivalent. Look at the NLJ 250 for example and the rep scores.

What?

BC rep score: 3.4

Villanova rep score: 2.7

Where are you getting this nonsense from? And why is Villanova even in the debate?

OP: BC is the obvious choice here. Disregard GradPath - he's probably a flame.

doomed123 wrote:

GradPath2011 wrote:Are you kidding me? Nova is the same as BC for the most part. Nova is a top 40 school equivalent. Look at the NLJ 250 for example and the rep scores.

What?

BC rep score: 3.4

Villanova rep score: 2.7

Where are you getting this nonsense from? And why is Villanova even in the debate?

OP: BC is the obvious choice here. Disregard GradPath - he's probably a flame.

He's definitely a flame haha.

dakatz wrote:

GradPath2011 wrote:the NLJ 250 is biased towards NE firms. UCLA is gonna be T-14 this year. Nova has the same rep as BC.

The kid is asking for advice. Please dispense with the stupidities.

++++++1000

GradPath2011 wrote:UCLA is WAAAAAY better. BC is not as, or even close to, as good as UCLA...its about the same as a school like Villanova in terms of career prospects in this economy.

Maybe in CA...

As long as your fine with Boston, BC will be fine for you. Plus, UCLA is getting destroyed by the budget, it's going to be more than $40,000 in-state next year (heard this straight from the interim Dean) and the financial situation isn't getting much better. Remember when the UCs were a bargain? Oh wait, that was only 2-3 years ago...

I am leaning towards BC. USNews is really the only reason I am thinking about UCLA. To be clear, I don't mind LA, its just that I would like to practice in the north east (Boston and NY are my top choices for post-graduation employment).

I wasn't even looking at Villanova. I don't really consider their law school to be on par with any of the top 20 law schools.

BC isn't top 20..BU is however

klussy wrote:BC isn't top 20..BU is however

The top 20-25 law schools are all seperated by only minor differences, so I don't really differentiate. One year GW is 20 and the next its 29. One year BC is 22, and the next it is 26. Same for BU, Fordham, ND, etc. These schools fluctuate so much I don't really think of their rankings as set in stone. I more think of them as a group of schools that could be ranked in any order in the 18-25 range in any given year.

Informative wrote:I am leaning towards BC. USNews is really the only reason I am thinking about UCLA. To be clear, I don't mind LA, its just that I would like to practice in the north east (Boston and NY are my top choices for post-graduation employment).

I wasn't even looking at Villanova. I don't really consider their law school to be on par with any of the top 20 law schools.

Trust me... Employers in the Northeast (especially Boston, of course) are not going to know or care about a couple of spots on the US News rankings.

You'd be shocked at how little the world outside TLS knows or cares about specific rankings (e.g. the list and order from 15-30 or so). BC has a very strong history, reputation, and network in Boston. You think employers out there (many, many of whom graduated from BC) will think UCLA is a better school than BC? Let alone for Boston/Northeast employment...

Also, it would be equally silly to choose BU over BC simply due to rankings... Throw rankings out the door. You have great options, but you have to think of the future.

ViP wrote:

Informative wrote:I am leaning towards BC. USNews is really the only reason I am thinking about UCLA. To be clear, I don't mind LA, its just that I would like to practice in the north east (Boston and NY are my top choices for post-graduation employment).

I wasn't even looking at Villanova. I don't really consider their law school to be on par with any of the top 20 law schools.

Trust me... Employers in the Northeast (especially Boston, of course) are not going to know or care about a couple of spots on the US News rankings.

You'd be shocked at how little the world outside TLS knows or cares about specific rankings (e.g. the list and order from 15-30 or so). BC has a very strong history, reputation, and network in Boston. You think employers out there (many, many of whom graduated from BC) will think UCLA is a better school than BC? Let alone for Boston/Northeast employment...

Also, it would be equally silly to choose BU over BC simply due to rankings... Throw rankings out the door. You have great options, but you have to think of the future.

Yeah there is little difference between BC and BU. Their NLJ250 (which is more important in my opinion than the rankings) are IDENTICAL. However, in terms of federal clerkships, BC seems to have a little advantage. Any difference between a school ranked 20-30 is marginal. For what its worth BC has been ranked anywhere from 19-29 since 1987. Rankings fluctuate.

Slightly dated: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandr ... iii_clerks

More recent: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =1&t=75513

Yeah, that was what I meant. I just don't see a school like GW any worse than it was last year just because it dropped nine spots this year. Next year, it could jump up another nine spots. It is odd how the schools in the 18-25 range all jump around so much.