Temple Law or Villanova Law Forum

[seriously????]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

[beach_terror]

another point that proves my comment. you guys that are trying to diss me are doing a horrible job at it. my arguments are clear and make sense, and yours are just "that's stupid". If I posed the same comment in a T14 thread, they would make me look silly, you guys are actually proving my point.

No, you're comment is "silly" because you're clearly a 0L who has no idea what the fuck he's talking about. There are at least a handful of 1Ls in here who are more knowledgeable on the subject than you are (because you know, we have LSAT scores and 1L grades). Stop speculating. Whether your argument makes "sense" is irrelevant.

[HeavenWood]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce,
but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

If you were truly smart, you could have skipped classes and gotten something higher than, oh, I don't know, a 2.7? Stop bragging. It's a dick move--especially from someone who is in no position to do so.

I took two liberal arts majors, and while I won't pretend they were hard, I still had to put a fair amount of work in to get good results. I don't care if you're an art history or a biochem major. You still have to take your work seriously.

Good luck getting off the Temple waitlist, Mr. 170.

[bjsesq]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

I also got a 170. I was also at a shit UG. I'm not all that smart.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: Please, I would consider it a personal favor if you never communicated with any of the users on TLS again. You don't owe me anything, but it would be a class move on your part. 170's are classy.

[r6_philly]

Wait 170's getting a bum rap now???

[Lawlskool]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

The kid that ended up with a 2.7 UGPA at a 'dumbed down money farce' is smarter than me? Sounds like you're claiming that your UGPA is not indicative of your anticipated LS success (or lack thereof in your case, IMO) and as such should be disregarded, but your LSAT is, and should be credited? This is your basis for claiming you would 'dust' all the 161 scorers in law school (who, btw, probably have much, much higher GPAs then you)? Your arguments are neither clear nor do they make sense, as you claim. Just to reiterate: you're a 0L who has no fucking clue what you're talking about. You do not know how, if at all, your UGPA and LSAT will translate into your LS grades. You stoopid mang.

[HeavenWood]

Wait 170's getting a bum rap now???

Clearly, he's the exception to the rule.

[classix]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

You're a little embarrassing...

[HeavenWood]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

You're a little embarrassing...

Are you trying to tell me that LSAT scores don't positively correlate with social skills?

[r6_philly]

Wait 170's getting a bum rap now???

Clearly, he's the exception to the rule.

Why, I am also planning on dusting everyone!

[HeavenWood]

Wait 170's getting a bum rap now???

Clearly, he's the exception to the rule.

Why, I am also planning on dusting everyone!

?

[classix]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

You're a little embarrassing...

Are you trying to tell me that LSAT scores don't positively correlate with social skills?

There's gotta a bell curve to it. People are retarded at the low 150s then people start getting weird at 170ish.

[Justathought]

and again, I'm sorry I let that comment about dusting majority of 160's slip. But for the large majority that took joke majors and are trying to front like UG is hard, yeah right. And if you were a liberal arts major, or communications major, and actually thought it was difficult, do not go to LS. For me at least, the LSAT was the hardest test I ever took. And most of you went to shit UG's, so I am sure you are aware of a certain kid who didn't bother going to class or taking tests, because higher education became such a dumbed down money making farce, but you knew that kid was smarter than you. Guess what, that was me.

You're a little embarrassing...

Are you trying to tell me that LSAT scores don't positively correlate with social skills?

There's gotta a bell curve to it. People are retarded at the low 150s then people start getting weird at 170ish.

This wins the award for my favorite post of the day.

[arvcondor]

Fucking thread.

OP, if you like city life, choose Temple. If you like the clean serenity of the Main Line, choose Nova. Both are comparable job-wise, both have connections to the city. Neither offers a thrilling chance of a top job; both are equally respected in Philly. One mayor came from Nova, the next from Temple. The last DA was from Temple, the City Solicitor from Nova. It goes on.

edit: That said, my vote is for Temple, solely for personal reasons.

[PennStateBoy]

Fucking thread.

OP, if you like city life, choose Temple. If you like the clean serenity of the Main Line, choose Nova. Both are comparable job-wise, both have connections to the city. Neither offers a thrilling chance of a top job; both are equally respected in Philly. One mayor came from Nova, the next from Temple. The last DA was from Temple, the City Solicitor from Nova. It goes on.

edit: That said, my vote is for Temple, solely for personal reasons.

Arvcondor, where are you headed to next year, we have really similar schools that we applied to. I also got into Tulane, Maryland, and Washington and Lee. I liked all three of the schools, but I want to work in Philly so it makes sense to go to a Philly school.

[Cosmo Kramer]

Current 1L at Temple here, and I'd say it depends whether you want to live in the city or not. I don't know much about Nova, but I will say that employers do say they like Temple grads because they tend to be more level-headed and are better prepared for actual practice (through the integrated programs offered and whatnot).

No connection to Villanova (and a connection to Temple in fact), but I would bet that just as many employers say to Nova 1Ls that they like Villanova grads because they tend to be more [insert meaningless platitude here] (through the [insert random Villanova program here]).

I wasn't saying that in comparison to Nova, that's how employers feel, just in general. And sure, that's probably true and so you can't believe anything any lawyer says to you about a school. But I do think the amount of Temple attorneys in Philly and employment numbers (also taken with a grain of salt) show that if you want to work in Philly it's as good of an option as you can get. Again, not trying to do the whole Temple>Nova just passing the only available info down the grape vine.

Oh, and keep up the wonderful discussion on the LSAT. It's certainly a conversation that is sure to bring out novel ideas on its merit.

[arvcondor]

Fucking thread.

OP, if you like city life, choose Temple. If you like the clean serenity of the Main Line, choose Nova. Both are comparable job-wise, both have connections to the city. Neither offers a thrilling chance of a top job; both are equally respected in Philly. One mayor came from Nova, the next from Temple. The last DA was from Temple, the City Solicitor from Nova. It goes on.

edit: That said, my vote is for Temple, solely for personal reasons.

Arvcondor, where are you headed to next year, we have really similar schools that we applied to. I also got into Tulane, Maryland, and Washington and Lee. I liked all three of the schools, but I want to work in Philly so it makes sense to go to a Philly school.

Congrats on W&L; I got WL'd and decided to withdraw after a couple of weeks. I also withdrew from Maryland because of the unconscionable CoA/employment-prospects ratio.

I'm leaning towards Temple right now and have an application letter in for a full scholarship, which I will know about by the end of next week. The startling thing about Tulane is how insular that market sounds, down the point of one having to essentially be from LA to get a job post-grad. That, and after schollies/in-state stuff is accounted for, Temple comes out around $30,000 less. Still, Tulane is still a major consideration. Let me know what you personally end up deciding.

[JakeG3636]

Temple, without any doubt.

Villanova's reputation has been hurt by their US News scandal, Temple is cheaper and it is a better school.

I am about to graduate from Temple, and they do things that Nova doesn't for us. For example, I interned with Nova students both summers in public sector internships. Temple provided us with work study grants, so we could get Federal work study- only $10 per hour, but its something, whereas Nova students didn't, so they were all working for free. Temple also sends out clerkship apps for us, and living in the city is more fun than the suburbs.

Safety really isn't an issue. The school is 20 feet from the subway, and no one does anything on Campus except go to class and study. Nova is a fine school, but Temple has more to offer, and it is cheaper and higher ranked (although I don't put much weight into US News Rankings, it is at least something to consider).

And about career prospects: Temple people are getting jobs. Its slower than it was 3 years ago, but that is nationwide. A lot of people got clerkships, both state and federal ,a lot of people are working public sector (DA/public defender), and a lot of people will be working at smaller/mid-size firms. That being said, not very many people are working at big firms. If you want to work at a big firm in Philly, finish in the top 10% of Nova or Temple, or go to Penn.

[HeavenWood]

Temple, without any doubt.

Villanova's reputation has been hurt by their US News scandal, Temple is cheaper and it is a better school.

This Temple-Villanova pissing contest is just ridiculous. For the umpteenth time, both schools will give you near-identical access to the Philadelphia legal market. And once again, the scandal means next to nothing when it comes to local hiring. This is definitely true for the immediate future, and almost certainly true in the long-term as well.

Temple usually is cheaper. I agree; paying a substantial amount more for one school over the other is just silly, but for the OP, the projected costs are nearly equal. Why not pick the school he likes more?

As for Temple being a "better" school, I can't think of a more ridiculously unsubstantiated statement. For every pro-Temple anecdote you can come up, I'm sure a Villanova student has a story to match.

[Lawlskool]

I am about to graduate from Temple, and they do things that Nova doesn't for us. For example, I interned with Nova students both summers in public sector internships. Temple provided us with work study grants, so we could get Federal work study- only $10 per hour, but its something, whereas Nova students didn't, so they were all working for free.

Don't think this is true. Nova provides work-study as well, at the rate of $11, $12, and $13 /hr (1L, 2L, 3L) I believe. So we are making $1-3 more per hour than you....BALLIN'!

OP: the schools are virtually identical with respect to job prospects. If they will end up costing the same, visit both and go to whichever you like more.

[beach_terror]

I like how it's mostly Temple kids ITT claiming one is better than the other. Really makes me wonder about that Philly water they've all been drinking.

[keg411]

NALP data for number of firms (w/offices in parenthesis) that did OCI at the Philly area schools:
This was based on last summer's OCI and from the (very) recent update.

Penn 117 (385)**
Temple 26 (53)
'Nova 28 (64)*
Rutgers-Camden 23 (44)
Drexel 11 (27)
Widener 8 (9)

And for comparison with the rest of the NJ Schools
Rutgers-Newark 31 (54)
Seton Hall 23 (46)

*of all of the T2's/TTT's listed, only 'Nova would allow you to enjoy dla piper
** confirms that I should be outlining right now .

[LSATclincher]

This question is very easy to answer. Go to the cheapest school out of these two only if you want to practice in Philly. Both schools have a very good, local reputation. Also, both have large alumni bases. If money is no option and you are from an affluent, white family, then I'd say Villanova is the clear choice. Other than that, both will provide equal opportunities, which is why cost is the ultimate factor.

Of course, since I'm likely attending Temple in the Fall, I'll cite Nova's recent unethical practices as one reason Temple trumps Nova (at least currently). In a year or two, the scandal will be meaningless.

[beach_terror]

Of course, since I'm likely attending Temple in the Fall, I'll cite Nova's recent unethical practices as one reason Temple trumps Nova (at least currently). In a year or two, the scandal will be meaningless.

If you change the above to "the scandal is currently meaningless" then I'll agree with your statement.

[HeavenWood]

Of course, since I'm likely attending Temple in the Fall, I'll cite Nova's recent unethical practices as one reason Temple trumps Nova (at least currently). In a year or two, the scandal will be meaningless.

If you change the above to "the scandal is currently meaningless" then I'll agree with your statement.

ITT Temple trolls pretend that local firms actually give two shits about the "scandal."