UCLA vs. Michigan Forum

[h2opolo]

I am deciding between UCLA and Michigan both at sticker.

I'm a CA resident so will pay in-state at UCLA.

Only as of late, I have been thinking of working in LA, but I am not too sure. I was also thinking about going in to entertainment law, but again, I'm not entirely set on that.

Here are my thoughts on choosing:

At Michigan, I forgo the opportunity to study entertainment law at the finest institution. I also will be stuck in Ann Arbor and the crappy weather therein. However, it has a beautiful campus, places well in both CA and NY, has a more prestigious name, and has better big law placement.

At UCLA, I will pigeonhole myself in the LA market which I may end up disliking. I essentially limit my opportunities to practice east coast big law. However, it has beautiful weather, a beautiful campus, great job placement in LA, and an incredible entertainment law program.

This is such a difficult choice because I'm not entirely set on what/where I want to practice. Any advice would be much appreciated, thanks!

[Rahviveh]

These are your only options?

[h2opolo]

These are your only options?

These are my best options; the only ones I really want to attend. I have scholarships to several t-30 schools, but have been waitlisted at almost every single t-14. It's been a frustrating cycle...

[Rahviveh]

I hate to be "that guy" but you have a 4.0. Have you maxed out your LSAT?

[Paul Campos]

Neither school is worth sticker, but if you insist Michigan is much the better choice, given that you're not sure where you want to work, entertainment law isn't really a thing, Westwood is far more expensive than AA, and you shouldn't rack up $250K in debt on the basis of weather preferences.

[Ti Malice]

OP, what do you think it is that "entertainment lawyers" do?

[JesusChrist]

OP, what do you think it is that "entertainment lawyers" do?

They juggle and dance.

[bizzybone1313]

OP, what do you think it is that "entertainment lawyers" do?

They juggle and dance.

What do they "juggle"? Is being female a necessary requirement?

[h2opolo]

I hate to be "that guy" but you have a 4.0. Have you maxed out your LSAT?

I have not, I PTd at about 176 (my nerves got to me), and though many may think foolish, I do not want to take a year off.

OP, what do you think it is that "entertainment lawyers" do?

Honestly, mostly contracts, but 'entertainment' such as film and tv is a subject that I find interesting. Particularly working with unions such as directors and actors guilds. I'm not a great dancer so I hope 'JesusChrist' is wrong... lol

[Rahviveh]

I hate to be "that guy" but you have a 4.0. Have you maxed out your LSAT?

I have not, I PTd at about 176 (my nerves got to me), and though many may think foolishly, I do not want to take a year off.

OP, what do you think it is that "entertainment lawyers" do?

Honestly, mostly contracts, but 'entertainment' such as film and tv is a subject that I find interesting. Particularly working with unions such as directors and actors guilds. I'm not a great dancer so I hope 'JesusChrist' is wrong... lol

Have you thought about re-taking it in June? At the very least, it will give you peace of mind and does not commit you to anything. Also, you can to use a higher score as leverage for other T14 WL's and scholarship negotiation.

The first time I took the LSAT I PT'ed in the 170s and nerves got me too - but I retook and made it right. There's countless other stories of this happening on TLS.

To be honest, its downright idiotic to even consider these options if you have a 4.0 and could hit 170+.

[ph14]

UCLA easily based on what you have posted.

[dr123]

TCR is to see who goes farther in the tourney and then go to that school.

[Micdiddy]

UCLA easily based on what you have posted.

Really? I would say the exact opposite. If OP simply cannot give up his dream of being an entertainment lawyer, then sure UCLA, but assuming he would rather actually find a job, try to make money and pay off debt, Mich seem easily the only actual choice that involved going to school this year.
With that said, waiting a year and retaking seems to be far and away the best option.

[bk1]

I have not, I PTd at about 176 (my nerves got to me), and though many may think foolish, I do not want to take a year off.

It is foolish. Don't be foolish.

[bowser]

You were consistently getting 176+? You'd be a lunatic not to retake. You're talking about like 200K+ here.

Michigan is the much better option for someone like you, who doesn't seem to have a solid grasp of what they want.

[BerkeleyBear]

UCLA easily based on what you have posted.

Really? I would say the exact opposite. If OP simply cannot give up his dream of being an entertainment lawyer, then sure UCLA, but assuming he would rather actually find a job, try to make money and pay off debt, Mich seem easily the only actual choice that involved going to school this year.
With that said, waiting a year and retaking seems to be far and away the best option.

[bruinfan10]

Neither school is worth sticker, but if you insist Michigan is much the better choice, given that you're not sure where you want to work, entertainment law isn't really a thing, Westwood is far more expensive than AA, and you shouldn't rack up $250K in debt on the basis of weather preferences.

1) Listen to the above, 2) print out ph14's post, piss on it, burn it, then 3) go retake the LSAT.

[ph14]

Neither school is worth sticker, but if you insist Michigan is much the better choice, given that you're not sure where you want to work, entertainment law isn't really a thing, Westwood is far more expensive than AA, and you shouldn't rack up $250K in debt on the basis of weather preferences.

1) Listen to the above, 2) print out ph14's post, piss on it, burn it, then 3) go retake the LSAT.

Very constructive advice.

[JollyGreenGiant]

As a 3L, I cannot advise you strongly enough to retake. Retaking allows you to go to a better school and/or go to one of these schools for free. $200k is no joke.


Also, entertainment law isn't a thing unless you quick run to UCLA and befriend Shabazz Muhammad and become his agent.

[Big Dog]

I PTd at about 176 (my nerves got to me), and though many may think foolish, I do not want to take a year off.

It's worse than foolish. It's downright stupid in this economy.

You are offering to assume $250k in debt, when you could take a year off and attend LS at a serious discount, perhaps even tuition-free.

Does that make any sense to you? Seriously?

[Lincoln]

I go to a school in this range, have loved it, have a jerb, whatever you would consider success. I took the LSAT three times (!), and the third time I scored close to the top of my PT range, so I basically got what I deserved in terms of school caliber and scholly. But honestly, if there was even a snowball's chance in hell I could be in the same situation but with, say, $100,000 less in debt, I'd retake, take a year off, run naked down Broadway, ANYTHING. All you need to do is take the damn test again and get over your nerves.

[jbagelboy]

I feel as though I am often taking this role against my better nature, and my own judgement, (since I retook to 172 and it changed everything) but lets assume the OP has actually thouht about this decision at length and decided he/she wants to attend law school next year and cant afford the time/stress/$$ to retake. Im opposed to the "dont waste your gpa" attitude anyway.

Michigan. You dont seem certain about the LA market. Do you know who is certain about LA? UCLA. Now, if you had some $ at UCLA, plus your in state, that might change things. But as another poster relayed, dont be scared off a better opportunity by the weather or friends back home. Michigan is a great national school and if you do well there you can pay off your debt.

Go to the ASW and see for yourself before deciding something like this. I agree 200K is not to be taken lightly

[Redamon1]

Retake. Yes, retaking the LSAT sucks. So what. It also sucks not to get what you want right away. Welcome to life. I hit my PT score on my third attempt. Retake, and come back later to thank TLS for this slap in the face.

[h2opolo]

I feel as though I am often taking this role against my better nature, and my own judgement, (since I retook to 172 and it changed everything) but lets assume the OP has actually thouht about this decision at length and decided he/she wants to attend law school next year and cant afford the time/stress/$$ to retake. Im opposed to the "dont waste your gpa" attitude anyway.

Michigan. You dont seem certain about the LA market. Do you know who is certain about LA? UCLA. Now, if you had some $ at UCLA, plus your in state, that might change things. But as another poster relayed, dont be scared off a better opportunity by the weather or friends back home. Michigan is a great national school and if you do well there you can pay off your debt.

Go to the ASW and see for yourself before deciding something like this. I agree 200K is not to be taken lightly

Best advice, thank you. I plan on attending their next ASW.

I certainly wasn't asking for advice on whether or not to retake the LSAT, so to peanut gallery who failed to read my question, I also appreciate your volunteered annoyance. $250k is a big deal. Fortunately, my parents are generous enough to support me through my schooling. Excelling at a T-10 school and acquiring a good job will provide me a great opportunity to pay back this debt. Taking a year off of school will not guarantee an increase in score. It will not guarantee my motivation to attend law school (or school in general) remain as strong as it currently does. But it does guarantee I start my career/life a year later and forgo a years salary.

That being said, it seems that Michigan is an overall better choice for someone who is not quite sure what type of law/what market I want to work in. Thank you all for the advice!

[rad lulz]

I feel as though I am often taking this role against my better nature, and my own judgement, (since I retook to 172 and it changed everything) but lets assume the OP has actually thouht about this decision at length and decided he/she wants to attend law school next year and cant afford the time/stress/$$ to retake. Im opposed to the "dont waste your gpa" attitude anyway.

Michigan. You dont seem certain about the LA market. Do you know who is certain about LA? UCLA. Now, if you had some $ at UCLA, plus your in state, that might change things. But as another poster relayed, dont be scared off a better opportunity by the weather or friends back home. Michigan is a great national school and if you do well there you can pay off your debt.

Go to the ASW and see for yourself before deciding something like this. I agree 200K is not to be taken lightly

Best advice, thank you. I plan on attending their next ASW.

I certainly wasn't asking for advice on whether or not to retake the LSAT, so to peanut gallery who failed to read my question, I also appreciate your volunteered annoyance. $250k is a big deal. Fortunately, my parents are generous enough to support me through my schooling. Excelling at a T-10 school and acquiring a good job will provide me a great opportunity to pay back this debt. Taking a year off of school will not guarantee an increase in score. It will not guarantee my motivation to attend law school (or school in general) remain as strong as it currently does. But it does guarantee I start my career/life a year later and forgo a years salary.

Going to law school doesn't guarantee a salary