UT $$ (Out of State) vs. WUSTL $$ Forum

[mte84]

I have equal money from both schools. I am originally from the midwest and am currently one of the eons riding the GULC (top choice) waitlist rollercoaster.

Needing to come to grips with reality, I am trying to decide between UT and WUSTL.
Some specifics:
*from the midwest (STL actually) and open to living in the midwest after law school (although really undecided and would hate for school to dictate where I live)
*considering applying for a joint JD/MBA following 1L year
*as of now considering BigLaw if at all possible post school
*worried about out-of-state issues at UT, but not so much of a concern to turn me away from deeply considering going there

suggestions?

[Esc]

I'm not sure what "out-of-state" issues you might be referring to. UT is a much better school than WUSTL, and will give you much better opportunities overall. You got $$ at both. This is easy. Go to UT.

[Grizz]

UT for same price and moar jobs.

[Informative]

UT for Texas, WUSTL for Missouri, etc.

These are fairly regional schools but they place very well in their markets. I personally think Texas has more attractive markets (Dallas, Houston, etc.) than Missouri (Mennonite law?).

[Esc]

UT for Texas, WUSTL for Missouri, etc.

These are fairly regional schools but they place very well in their markets. I personally think Texas has more attractive markets (Dallas, Houston, etc.) than Missouri (Mennonite law?).

It is inaccurate to call UT "fairly regional." Like GULC, UCLA, and Vandy, UT predominately places in its home market, but also does quite well elsewhere. UT's national prospects aren't on a level with the t10 schools, obviously, but they are substantially better than schools outside of the T17.

[Informative]

I agree that UT is great in the state of texas. It pretty much owns two of the largest markets in the country. But you are not going to get NYC biglaw coming from UT unless you are in the top 25% of the class, which makes it a very good regional school, but not national. I would put it in the same category of schools in which it is generally classified: Vandy, UCLA/USC, BC, ND, GW. These schools are all amazingly good in their markets but tend to decrease in prestige the further you get away from their state of residence.

Notice, I don't include WUSTL in that category. It places very well in St. Louis, but it does pretty miserably in biglaw placement on a national scale that I think it should not be mentioned with these schools.

[Esc]

I agree that UT is great in the state of texas. It pretty much owns two of the largest markets in the country. But you are not going to get NYC biglaw coming from UT unless you are in the top 25% of the class, which makes it a very good regional school, but not national. I would put it in the same category of schools in which it is generally classified: Vandy, UCLA/USC, BC, ND, GW. These schools are all amazingly good in their markets but tend to decrease in prestige the further you get away from their state of residence.

Notice, I don't include WUSTL in that category. It places very well in St. Louis, but it does pretty miserably in biglaw placement on a national scale that I think it should not be mentioned with these schools.

UT is never generally classified with USC, BC, ND, or GW. And ITE, I doubt anyone under top 25% at GULC is getting NYC Biglaw either.

[romothesavior]

Texas (unless you really want to stay in STL or the midwest). But since you say mobility is an important factor, I'd say Texas all the way.

[romothesavior]

I agree that UT is great in the state of texas. It pretty much owns two of the largest markets in the country. But you are not going to get NYC biglaw coming from UT unless you are in the top 25% of the class, which makes it a very good regional school, but not national. I would put it in the same category of schools in which it is generally classified: Vandy, UCLA/USC, BC, ND, GW. These schools are all amazingly good in their markets but tend to decrease in prestige the further you get away from their state of residence.

Notice, I don't include WUSTL in that category. It places very well in St. Louis, but it does pretty miserably in biglaw placement on a national scale that I think it should not be mentioned with these schools.

UT is never generally classified with USC, BC, ND, or GW. And ITE, I doubt anyone under top 25% at GULC is getting NYC Biglaw either.

+1. Texas with BC, ND, or GW? Definitely not. They could maybe be lumped in with USC, but even that is questionable.

[Grizz]

I would put it in the same category of schools in which it is generally classified: Vandy, UCLA/USC, BC, ND, GW. These schools are all amazingly good in their markets but tend to decrease in prestige the further you get away from their state of residence.

Disagree. Texas is classified with Vandy and UCLA, schools that have tremendous influence in wide regional swathes (Texas and surrounding environs, the South, and Socal/more Cali) plus limited but considerable national appeal. There is a marked difference between these schools and BC, ND, and GW, which are good, but appeal to much smaller home regions and have much less national appeal.

[NayBoer]

UT for Texas. WUSTL for Midwest.

Texas places ~2/3 in the home region. WUSTL places only just over a quarter in home region, and a fifth in Chicago's region, the rest spread around. WUSTL statistically has more spread.

If living in Texas is a viable option, I'd probably do that. Their biglaw placement is not hugely different, historically. Texas gets the edge though. Basically tied for c/o 2005:
http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/20080414 ... trends.pdf
Texas was ahead in c/o 2007 and c/o 2009.