Top Law Schools

Mild ties to California (born but not raised, family all over Southern California)

Notre Dame:
$25 a year no stips
Cool school, South Bend looked like a shithole
More well known
No ties to Midwest

University of Southern California:
$20,000 a year no stips
Cool school, South Central looks like a shithole
More expensive tuition (50k vs 45k) and more expensive cost of living
Would rather end up in LA than Midwest.
Total bro school

Which is better for Seattle? Yes, I got into UW, but since I went there for undergrad I want to expand my horizons.
Stats: (167, 3.65) non-URM, Straight out of undergrad

Lay it on me. (No I don't wanna retake, my lsat was higher than my averages)

Unfortunately, UW looks to be the best choice for Seattle & it's probably also the cheapest.

Honestly, I don't actually want to end up in Seattle, but its nice to have a familiar city as a back up plan if all else fails. Dream city would be San Fran but I am not Berekely or Stanford material.

USC

It's the better school, and has pretty good placement rates relative to its rank. Last year it had, what? 32% in the NLJ250? That's pretty damn good for a T18 ITE. They also have a strong alumni network, from what I understand. Probably as a result of the school's being so damn fratty. I personally would not want to be associated with the whole USC culture thang, but if it doesn't bother you--or if you actually dig it--then you should go to USC. ND simply isn't giving you enough money to make it worthwhile over USC.

Also lay prestige doesn't mean anything if you can't get a job, hth.

.

Damn so is USC that much better? Is it worth like 50 grand more?

If you're after purely lay prestige, go to ND. As long as there are baby boomers around, ND will be considered more prestigious than SC.

As a West Coaster, you should probably go to USC. It's a better school and you have a plausible reason for going there. It will be recognized in Seattle, but also open up So Cal as a market.

Lovely Ludwig Van wrote:If you're after purely lay prestige, go to ND. As long as there are baby boomers around, ND will be considered more prestigious than SC.

Sure, but no one should pick a law school for lay preftige. USC all the way.

ND hiked their tuition by some stupid high amount this year like 8 or 10%. If they keep that up they will surpass USC's tuition and more by the time you graduate.

USC clear choice.

So you guys think USC is worth say roughly 60k more debt than ND?

I am just worried that since I am not a "gunner" or all that super motivated that from either school I am gonna end up with the same 60k gig and thus limiting debt is important.

Is USC still worth it if I probably won't make it into biglaw?

lawschool?s wrote:Is USC still worth it if I probably won't make it into biglaw?

Neither's worth it if you don't make it into biglaw. And you got a 50/50 chance of a decent jerb out of USC at best, so think hard especially if you

lawschool?s wrote:[are] not a "gunner" or all that super motivated

because some of your classmates will be. In fact, if

lawschool?s wrote:limiting debt is important

then I'd go to UW.

1) Both places you mentioned wanting to work are West Coast. USC has the lay prestige of Harvard in SoCal and will be more prestigious to the average person in the bay than ND. In Cali ND rep is basically, "didn't they have a good football team in the seventies or something?"

2) USC is an all around better law school. The weight of the "Trojan Network" drops off severely outside of Cali, from what I understand, but I wouldn't underestimate its reach. ND couldn't give me a definitive picture of their own Alumni network. Look, some networks are heavily vested in their undergrad programs--they may even view grad-only degree students as interlopers of a sort--and ND seems to be that kind of school.

Fark-o-vision wrote:1) Both places you mentioned wanting to work are West Coast.

Yes.

Fark-o-vision wrote:USC has the lay prestige of Harvard in SoCal

No.

Fark-o-vision wrote:and will be more prestigious to the average person in the bay than ND.

Yes, but only relative to ND.

Fark-o-vision wrote:In Cali ND rep is basically, "didn't they have a good football team in the seventies or something?"

Outside of SoCal, USC rep is basically, "don't they have a good football team or something?" Either that, or it's "Fuck their football team anyways."

UW barely saves me anymore than USC would. UW would be like 26k for tuition a year versus 25k for ND or 30k for USC.

Everyone keeps suggesting UW, but I would rather branch out and try some place new. Esspecially for some place new at a more affordable cost with a better name.

lawschool?s wrote:UW barely saves me anymore than USC would. UW would be like 26k for tuition a year versus 25k for ND or 30k for USC.

Everyone keeps suggesting UW, but I would rather branch out and try some place new. Esspecially for some place new at a more affordable cost with a better name.

Have you tried getting UW to match? The thing is that its not really about total cost, its about the fact that UW is the only top whatever law school in Washington, and Seattle's not a market that tons of T14ers are trying to get in on. Big fish/small pond & all that.

I hear you on wanting the Bay, but the Bay market is SPS unless you are IPSECURE. LA is a much larger market esp. for non IPers, but it sounds like you want SF or north.

ETA: I am surprised that UW in-state costs as much as ND. If you're willing to consider SoCal long term, USC is prolly worth the extra 12K.

lawschool?s wrote:So you guys think USC is worth say roughly 60k more debt than ND?

I am just worried that since I am not a "gunner" or all that super motivated that from either school I am gonna end up with the same 60k gig and thus limiting debt is important.

Is USC still worth it if I probably won't make it into biglaw?

A gunner is someone who says annoying shit in class. You don't have to be a gunner to do well in law school. You probably should be motivated though. Is the threat of facing unemployment with massive debt not enough?

Also "trying something new" is a horrible reason to choose a law school. Go to uw if you want pnw go to usc if you want LA. Don't go to nd.

lawschool?s wrote:Honestly, I don't actually want to end up in Seattle, but its nice to have a familiar city as a back up plan if all else fails. Dream city would be San Fran but I am not Berekely or Stanford material.

Based on this, don't go to UW.

Go to USC man.

thelawyler wrote:

lawschool?s wrote:Honestly, I don't actually want to end up in Seattle, but its nice to have a familiar city as a back up plan if all else fails. Dream city would be San Fran but I am not Berekely or Stanford material.

Based on this, don't go to UW.

Go to USC man.

Yeah the more I think about this the more I agree w/USC. But you should get motivated, and don't bank on SF/SV.

sundance95 wrote:

Fark-o-vision wrote:1) Both places you mentioned wanting to work are West Coast.

Yes.

Fark-o-vision wrote:USC has the lay prestige of Harvard in SoCal

No.

Fark-o-vision wrote:and will be more prestigious to the average person in the bay than ND.

Yes, but only relative to ND.

Fark-o-vision wrote:In Cali ND rep is basically, "didn't they have a good football team in the seventies or something?"

Outside of SoCal, USC rep is basically, "don't they have a good football team or something?" Either that, or it's "Fuck their football team anyways."

Not to discount any of your points, but when I said "Harvard=USC" I was talking about "lay" prestige in the simplest way. In LA the regard for the school is almost mythic, to the point that most people I talk to can't wrap their heads around why I would choose UCLA over it. It isn't much different in San Diego, and I've found that the reputation travels extremely well up to NorCal. Can I ask where you're from that you didn't find this? Of course, the rep isn't nearly as exaggerated up there as it is down here. They have their own (really) elite private to carry a torch for.

I wasn't arguing that lay prestige was valuable. Anyone looking to hire a JD for anything would obviously be in a position to understand the massive difference between Harvard and USC.

Also, I have no doubt that outside of California the rep is "football, football, SEC rules!"

sundance95 wrote:

thelawyler wrote:

lawschool?s wrote:Honestly, I don't actually want to end up in Seattle, but its nice to have a familiar city as a back up plan if all else fails. Dream city would be San Fran but I am not Berekely or Stanford material.

Based on this, don't go to UW.

Go to USC man.

Yeah the more I think about this the more I agree w/USC. But you should get motivated, and don't bank on SF/SV.

TITCR. If you're not motivated to do well in law school, you're going to be miserable...

Lovely Ludwig Van wrote:If you're after purely lay prestige, go to ND. As long as there are baby boomers around, ND will be considered more prestigious than SC.

TITCR.