Top Law Schools

...other schools ranked 17-25?

Is it the private school tuition? REMINDER: they offer huge scholarships
St. Louis the city?

Help me out

It isn't worse than its peers. However, it is the first school that experiences a significant drop from the school above it in rankings (i.e. the difference between USC and WUSTL is fairly large whereas the difference between WUSTL and GW isn't). It also has a bit worse placement than other strong regional schools (BC/BU/GW/etc). Also WUSTL has some of the loosest admissions standards for splitters and reverse splitters.

bk187 wrote:It isn't worse than its peers. However, it is the first school that experiences a significant drop from the school above it in rankings (i.e. the difference between USC and WUSTL is fairly large whereas the difference between WUSTL and GW isn't). It also has a bit worse placement than other strong regional schools (BC/BU/GW/etc). Also WUSTL has some of the loosest admissions standards for splitters and reverse splitters.

While I agree with most of your remarks, I think you're giving USC a bit too much credit.

Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

FuManChusco wrote:While I agree with most of your remarks, I think you're giving USC a bit too much credit.

Eh, I dunno. The old data seems to show UCLA/UT/Vandy/USC being definitely above the regional schools below them.

Chicago, a major market for them, got fucked by the economy and aren't hiring as much from WUSTL. So it got hurt disproportionately hurt by the economy. Who knows when it will recover.

Honestly Chicago's probably never going to recover.

Desert Fox wrote:Chicago, a major market for them, got fucked by the economy and aren't hiring as much from WUSTL. So it got hurt disproportionately hurt by the economy. Who knows when it will recover.

I was wondering about this, because UIUC doesn't seem to get the same rap. Is the TLS article about UIUC right in that its placement has held up well despite Chicago's fuckedness?

beachbum wrote:Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

What does this even mean? They give out a lot of scholarship money, and that's a bad thing? I've never understood why that's a bad thing. I'd rather go to a school that makes financial aid a priority (and I know we do, because I heard it straight from the mouth of the dean that it is his top priority) than go to a stingy school like Fordham. And if by "game the rankings" you mean that they do the exact same thing every other school does, then sure. IMO, I hope they "game them" (whatever that means) as much as possible because it makes it cheaper for students to attend and it increases the value of my degree (if only slightly).

That said, OP I think the reason is that our NLJ 250 numbers lag behind our actual ranking (not by a lot, but they still do). I also think that because we're 19, people get the wrong impression that we are somehow "better" than schools like Emory, UIUC, UMN, etc. that are ranked in the 20s. In reality, WUSTL is a peer with most of the schools in the T20-30 range. And DF is right, WUSTL has gotten hit hard by the recession (as have most schools, especially schools in that range).

I wouldn't let the overrated/underrated thing affect your decision at all. In fact, I wouldn't even use the USNWR rankings at all in picking a school. Go somewhere at a reasonable price that can help you achieve your career goals. That's pretty much all there is to it.

beachbum wrote:Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

Doesn't hurt UVa which people seem to like for some reason

fatduck wrote:Honestly Chicago's probably never going to recover.

Honestly, the legal market in general is probably never going to recover, at least not to anything that remotely resembles the pre-ITE hiring model.

romothesavior wrote:

beachbum wrote:Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

What does this even mean? They give out a lot of scholarship money, and that's a bad thing? I've never understood why that's a bad thing. I'd rather go to a school that makes financial aid a priority (and I know we do, because I heard it straight from the mouth of the dean that it is his top priority) than go to a stingy school like Fordham. And if by "game the rankings" you mean that they do the exact same thing every other school does, then sure. IMO, I hope they "game them" (whatever that means) as much as possible because it makes it cheaper for students to attend and it increases the value of my degree (if only slightly).

I think what he means is that WUSTL is much more willing to take splitters and especially extremesplitters than peer schools.

romothesavior wrote:

beachbum wrote:Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

What does this even mean? They give out a lot of scholarship money, and that's a bad thing? I've never understood why that's a bad thing. I'd rather go to a school that makes financial aid a priority (and I know we do, because I heard it straight from the mouth of the dean that it is his top priority) than go to a stingy school like Fordham. And if by "game the rankings" you mean that they do the exact same thing every other school does, then sure. IMO, I hope they "game them" (whatever that means) as much as possible because it makes it cheaper for students to attend and it increases the value of my degree (if only slightly).

That said, OP I think the reason is that our NLJ 250 numbers lag behind our actual ranking (not by a lot, but they still do). I also think that because we're 19, people get the wrong impression that we are somehow "better" than schools like Emory, UIUC, UMN, etc. that are ranked in the 20s. In reality, WUSTL is a peer with most of the schools in the T20-30 range. And DF is right, WUSTL has gotten hit hard by the recession (as have most schools, especially schools in that range).

I wouldn't let the overrated/underrated thing affect your decision at all. In fact, I wouldn't even use the USNWR rankings at all in picking a school. Go somewhere at a reasonable price that can help you achieve your career goals. That's pretty much all there is to it.

Lets not get carried away...

bk187 wrote:

romothesavior wrote:

beachbum wrote:Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

What does this even mean? They give out a lot of scholarship money, and that's a bad thing? I've never understood why that's a bad thing. I'd rather go to a school that makes financial aid a priority (and I know we do, because I heard it straight from the mouth of the dean that it is his top priority) than go to a stingy school like Fordham. And if by "game the rankings" you mean that they do the exact same thing every other school does, then sure. IMO, I hope they "game them" (whatever that means) as much as possible because it makes it cheaper for students to attend and it increases the value of my degree (if only slightly).

I think what he means is that WUSTL is much more willing to take splitters and especially extremesplitters than peer schools.

It seems like splitters get admitted to most of the schools in the 19-25 range. Maybe more just attend WUSTL because of the generous scholarship $?

romothesavior wrote:

fatduck wrote:Honestly Chicago's probably never going to recover.

Honestly, the legal market in general is probably never going to recover, at least not to anything that remotely resembles the pre-ITE hiring model.

Don't be ridiculous the BigLaw hiring model has survived and emerged stronger from every economic downturn since the turn of the last century. Think it won't recover now? Go talk to an old person about the great depression.

fatduck wrote:It seems like splitters get admitted to most of the schools in the 19-25 range. Maybe more just attend WUSTL because of the generous scholarship $?

Fordham/BU/BC/UCD/UCH/etc all have less affinity towards splitters, not to mention I think WUSTL is definitely the most willing to take extremesplitters (e.g. something like a 2.5 GPA) compared to even other splitterfriendly schools like GW/Illinois. That being said, midwestern schools all seem to be in love with splitters.

romothesavior wrote:

fatduck wrote:Honestly Chicago's probably never going to recover.

Honestly, the legal market in general is probably never going to recover, at least not to anything that remotely resembles the pre-ITE hiring model.

Is there any reason people are saying this other than how shitty things are now? As an example, in a poll from 2010, 64% of people said the recession had changed their spending habits forever. This year the same poll was run, and it was down to 53%. And most people still consider us to be in a recession.

Hannibal wrote:

romothesavior wrote:

fatduck wrote:Honestly Chicago's probably never going to recover.

Honestly, the legal market in general is probably never going to recover, at least not to anything that remotely resembles the pre-ITE hiring model.

Is there any reason people are saying this other than how shitty things are now? As an example, in a poll from 2010, 64% of people said the recession had changed their spending habits forever. This year the same poll was run, and it was down to 53%. And most people still consider us to be in a recession.

I was just talking shit about Chicago.

blink wrote:Lets not get carried away...

I'm not. I'd say you should use USNWR as a rough guide when you're applying to schools, as it gives you (sort of) an idea of how schools do relative to one another and it can be helpful for scholarship negotiations. But once it comes down to picking a school, throw USNWR out the window. There are far, far better metrics and many factors (geographic placement, scholarship $$$, LRAP programs, "fit," etc.) that should be far more important than USNWR rankings.

Kswizzie wrote:Don't be ridiculous the BigLaw hiring model has survived and emerged stronger from every economic downturn since the turn of the last century. Think it won't recover now? Go talk to an old person about the great depression.

There are not enough facepalm .jpgs out there to respond to this. The fact that you think the biglaw hiring mode being used today was used in the 1930s shows that you don't understand the biglaw hiring model.

Go talk to hiring partners and ask them if they expect their class sizes to ever return to anything even comparable to what they were 5-6 years ago.

Yeah, I don't think we'll be on a sugar high like we were on real estate for a while. And if we do, we'll know the crash is about to come. "This investment can't lose!" = about to be overused.

I second romo's comments. I am accepted at WUSTL with a heavy scholly and my research into the school has given me great respect for it. But then I come to these boards and see a mostly anti-wustl sentiment and it bothers me. I think the school is entitled to accepting whoever they feel best fills their class and it is by far the most generous school that I've dealt with this cycle. We all know that the midwest is not a hotbed for biglaw but people still continue to criticize WUSTL for not placing well in NYC or LA or whatever.

I think if you are comfortable with midwest, medium sized firms, then WUSTL is a wonderful school. I sure as heck dont mind making less money but having about half the cost of living as NYC or LA

bk187 wrote:

romothesavior wrote:

beachbum wrote:Shamelessly gaming the rankings probably doesn't help.

What does this even mean? They give out a lot of scholarship money, and that's a bad thing? I've never understood why that's a bad thing. I'd rather go to a school that makes financial aid a priority (and I know we do, because I heard it straight from the mouth of the dean that it is his top priority) than go to a stingy school like Fordham. And if by "game the rankings" you mean that they do the exact same thing every other school does, then sure. IMO, I hope they "game them" (whatever that means) as much as possible because it makes it cheaper for students to attend and it increases the value of my degree (if only slightly).

I think what he means is that WUSTL is much more willing to take splitters and especially extremesplitters than peer schools.

Right, and they give them (relatively) huge scholarships as an incentive to matriculate. I'm not saying it's a bad thing; in fact, I love that the local school is taking such an aggressive approach in marketing/bettering itself, and in reducing the otherwise huge cost of law school for many of its students.

But I also understand why this contributes to the cynicism on a place like TLS. WUSTL effectively jumped its peers in the rankings (and into the T20) while maintaining very similar job prospects, and in a region that doesn't get much respect. It's also the first in line after the drop-off from USC. And when you combine this with its status as the default option for a lot of splitters, it makes sense why it doesn't get much respect on a somewhat elitist/east coast-biased forum.

ND is not that splitter friendly. At least not compared to WUSTL and UIUC. But our GPA median is still lower than those schools.

Hannibal wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:Chicago, a major market for them, got fucked by the economy and aren't hiring as much from WUSTL. So it got hurt disproportionately hurt by the economy. Who knows when it will recover.

I was wondering about this, because UIUC doesn't seem to get the same rap. Is the TLS article about UIUC right in that its placement has held up well despite Chicago's fuckedness?

UIUC got fucked as hard if not harder because it WUSTL still had StLouis.

I don't know about last OCI but two OCI's ago it was awful.