Emory with 108K or Re-Apply Forum

[viscous-biscuits]

Thanks everyone.

[Mab2013]

What's one more year. Wait and apply to Stanford , Boalt and UCLA.

[shifty_eyed]

Reapply x a gazillion

[Ti Malice]

I have great softs to compensate for my white male handicap, including consistent leadership and service positions throughout my undergrad career.

Do you have any other softs more notable than those? Because those softs are fine, but they're not "great." They're very average for applicants to elite schools. "Great" softs are things like Rhodes/Marshall, PhD with important publications, and so on. Undergrad leadership and service stuff is good to have, but it won't move the admissions needle at all.

SLS and Berkeley are both very unlikely with your stats. You should definitely be very open to working elsewhere, because the Bay Area will be extremely tough to crack if you're not at YHS or B, and it's still competitive even then. You have a shot at NYU. You have good to very good chances at MDCNG and should pick up a little money from one or two of them. You're almost certainly in at UCLA/USC, probably with good money, but definitely don't count on either of these schools to get you to the Bay Area.

[Typhoon24]

Reapply, the top 7-14 schools are in reach

[viscous-biscuits]

Lol ok great was a bit of an overstatement for sure, and Stanford is definitely a pipe dream, but how am I very unlikely to make it into Berkeley with my numbers? My GPA is above median and my LSAT is right below its 75th percentile.

I know SF is as tough as it gets for legal markets and I listen to Adam Carolla bitch about LA too much to want to go anywhere near that mess. I have ties to Cali, about a dozen relatives on my dad's side live out there.

Ideally I'd like to get into either Penn or Berkeley if I reapply, and looking at their numbers I don't see any reason why I don't have a decent chance of getting into either one.

[Ti Malice]

Lol ok great was a bit of an overstatement for sure, and Stanford is definitely a pipe dream, but how am I very unlikely to make it into Berkeley with my numbers? My GPA is above median and my LSAT is right below its 75th percentile.

I know SF is as tough as it gets for legal markets and I listen to Adam Carolla bitch about LA too much to want to go anywhere near that mess. I have ties to Cali, about a dozen relatives on my dad's side live out there.

Ideally I'd like to get into either Penn or Berkeley if I reapply, and looking at their numbers I don't see any reason why I don't have a decent chance of getting into either one.

Berkeley is one of the three most unpredictable T14 schools (along with YLS and SLS). Merely being above their medians is no guarantee of anything. They even reject a comparatively high percentage of applicants above both 75th percentiles. You don't start having a strong shot at Berkeley until you have an LSAT into the 170s and a GPA that's at least above median. Here's how people with a 169 and a GPA from 3.83 to 3.89 have fared in recent years at Berkeley:



As for Penn, you might have a chance with an early ED app, but you're below both medians, which is generally fatal. You'll have to hope that their GPA median comes back down (possible) or that their LSAT median falls to 169 (very unlikely). If you had either a 3.88 or higher or a 170, your odds would be very different.

[twenty]

Even if you don't get Berkeley/Stanford (which is pretty likely, considering), even Cornell with a scholarship is a significantly better choice than Emory with less than a full ride and an SO to mooch off of. And even without upping the LSAT, I think you'll do better than Cornell with money.

[Ti Malice]

Even if you don't get Berkeley/Stanford (which is pretty likely, considering), even Cornell with a scholarship is a significantly better choice than Emory with less than a full ride and an SO to mooch off of. And even without upping the LSAT, I think you'll do better than Cornell with money.

Yep. Even if you were to sneak into Penn with an ED app, there's a pretty decent chance that you'll have better offers than Penn at sticker from one of MDCN (not G).

[sinfiery]

Lol at going to Emory but wanting to work in CA. Possible but it woulda been hard. Goodluck next cycle.

[viscous-biscuits]

Thanks everyone, helpful as always. I guess I should start looking for a job in Gainesville.

I'm actually working on getting my score bumped up to 170, since the only question it registered as a non-response was one I bubbled light enough to make the scanner think it was empty but dark enough that the grader should realize I chose it. 87-88 is the raw score for 169, I got 88, and 89 is the raw for 170 so I'm mailing my request for a handscore out today.

Happy 4th of July everyone!

[BigZuck]

"White male handicap?" Ugh. I don't think the OP and I could hang.

OP, Emory is incessantly bugging you for a reason. It's a trap, don't play into their games. Reapply. Also retake again if you can. You probably won't get in to Berkeley as is and you almost certainly won't get a job in CA due to lack of ties unless you can find a way into Berkeley.

[Younger Abstention]

Tell Emory you demand a full ride. If they aren't amenable, reapply.

[radar714]

definitely reapply and if you get that up to a 170 even better. if you reapplied next year they would 100% give you a full-ride and if you took their current offer they'd be fleecing you. You have great stats, reapply in an even worse cycle next year and profit.

Go take a look at the applicants threads for the t14 and look at how insane the waitlist activity is. Cornell STILL hasn't filled their class and made their summer waitlist as they are still going through applications off reserve to fill their class (last year they had finished this June 21st). You're going to get into great schools and probably be able to snag some dope schollys from any school ranked 13 or below. Taking another year in this case is simply the right decision. btw, unless you 100% wanna work in ATL, I wouldn't take a full-ride at Emory. The schools you'll get into and the schollys youll get should give you some very good options that can help maximize career prospects and minimize your debt esp since parents are covering CoL.

BTW, congrats on the 8 point improvement! that's a very significant bump and you should be proud of yourself and excited for the new posibilities those 3 lil digits have opened up for you.

GL with your choice

[viscous-biscuits]

Thanks so much for the thoughtful and encouraging response, radar. I really appreciate the info. I'm reapplying for sure.

BigZuck, if you're going to take the time out of your night to make yourself look like a pair of clown shoes on my thread, you should at least read the whole thing. I do have ties to CA, and I'm not retaking. I wouldn't want to hang with you since you're clearly an inconsiderate, passably literate narcissist. I hate to spew this vitriol since this site has enough of it, but seriously gtfo.

[sinfiery]

Thanks so much for the thoughtful and encouraging response, radar. I really appreciate the info. I'm reapplying for sure.

BigZuck, if you're going to take the time out of your night to make yourself look like a pair of clown shoes on my thread, you should at least read the whole thing. I do have ties to CA, and I'm not retaking. I wouldn't want to hang with you since you're clearly an inconsiderate, passably literate narcissist. I hate to spew this vitriol since this site has enough of it, but seriously gtfo.

You really should retake tho, 4 hours and $160 is the immediate cost for a lot of potential gain


And "white male handicap" was overlooked at first but seriously, you seem ridiculously ignorant or stupid

[laotze]

Even if you don't get Berkeley/Stanford (which is pretty likely, considering), even Cornell with a scholarship is a significantly better choice than Emory with less than a full ride and an SO to mooch off of. And even without upping the LSAT, I think you'll do better than Cornell with money.

^This. Don't take less than T14 without a full ride, especially not with your numbers.

EDIT:

I have great softs to compensate for my white male handicap, including consistent leadership and service positions throughout my undergrad career. Retaking is not an option.

Wow, nevermind, you probably won't get into your target schools if this attitude is reflected in your PS.

[viscous-biscuits]

Only an ignorant or stupid person would think I made that comment seriously, but I'm truly sorry if I offended anybody.

But you're also stupid if you think retaking the LSAT only entails 4 hours of time commitment. Maybe I have extenuating personal circumstances that prohibit a retake, and maybe I might even retake later, but telling me to retake when I say I'm not retaking is about as futile as trying to keep a positive attitude on these threads.

[laotze]

Only an ignorant or stupid person would think I made that comment seriously, but I'm truly sorry if I offended anybody.

Clearly you haven't spent much time on the internet, where such comments are made seriously roughly 10,000,000,000 times per day.

But you're also stupid if you think retaking the LSAT only entails 4 hours of time commitment. Maybe I have extenuating personal circumstances that prohibit a retake, and maybe I might even retake later, but telling me to retake when I say I'm not retaking is about as futile as trying to keep a positive attitude on these threads.

Chill. Half the point of TLS is to convince people to change their minds about things they say they are going to do. Plus you had a massive gain from your first LSAT to the second, so it's pretty reasonable to argue that it's worth your time to boost that a little bit higher if you can. If you absolutely can't, then you can't, but don't rage just because you asked for advice were given some you didn't like.

Anyway, very few people here are going to advise you to accept a sub-T14 offer with anything less than a full scholarship, especially not with a GPA as good as yours. And even if you don't retake, a 3.86/169 should get you into much better schools than Emory. Reapply.

[sinfiery]

"Immediate cost"



We are just telling you, based on what you've told us, that you should retake. And we don't accept "I'm not retaking" as a proper rebuttal.


If you have your reasons then don't, but we will tell you to until you convince us otherwise

[laotze]

Only an ignorant or stupid person would think I made that comment seriously, but I'm truly sorry if I offended anybody.

Also, you've given some highly identifiable information about yourself on this forum (UF undergrad, poli sci major, 3.8/161, gender, race, interests, life circumstances, etc.), if accurate, and considering how many adcoms browse this board I would be much more concerned about how your off-the-cuff comments might be perceived. Just some friendly cautionary advice, take it as you will.

[utlaw2007]

Only an ignorant or stupid person would think I made that comment seriously, but I'm truly sorry if I offended anybody.

Also, you've given some highly identifiable information about yourself on this forum (UF undergrad, poli sci major, 3.8/161, gender, race, interests, life circumstances, etc.), if accurate, and considering how many adcoms browse this board I would be much more concerned about how your off-the-cuff comments might be perceived. Just some friendly cautionary advice, take it as you will.

Truer words were never spoken.

OP, you're not law school yet. You need to chill a bit with your comments

[timbs4339]

Some advice for the OP, from a lawyer.

1) It would be silly not to retake/reapply and go to a T14, especially if you want "transactions, civil litigation, tax, and healthcare."

2) In this profession, people assume words mean what they say. I'm not sure what purpose the phrase "white male handicap" served except to incite controversy or make an obvious demonstration of your position on some tangentially relevant social policy. Therefore, you're getting some deserved questions about why you'd make a point of including that phrase when something like "I have great softs including consistent leadership and service positions throughout my undergrad career" could express the same idea in fewer words without causing controversy.

[twenty]

telling me to retake when I say I'm not retaking is about as futile as trying to keep a positive attitude on these threads.

On these boards, I'm used to seeing folks with 158s going I CAN'T RETAKE OMG SERIOUSLY, but rarely a 169 -- especially with as big of a jump as you've had. You clearly saw the advantage to retaking a 161. 2-3 more correct bubbles, and you're looking at serious money from T14 schools.

Maybe I have extenuating personal circumstances that prohibit a retake

There was a guy on the forums not too long ago that was going to have to live out of his car for a year if he had to retake. And there was serious debate over whether or not he should.

Long story short, unless you are literally starving to death and the only escape for you is going to law school in the fall, you have no business not retaking. Especially when you're already probably going to sit it out for the year.

[BigZuck]

Only an ignorant or stupid person would think I made that comment seriously, but I'm truly sorry if I offended anybody.

But you're also stupid if you think retaking the LSAT only entails 4 hours of time commitment. Maybe I have extenuating personal circumstances that prohibit a retake, and maybe I might even retake later, but telling me to retake when I say I'm not retaking is about as futile as trying to keep a positive attitude on these threads.

I'm a clown because I don't think we could hang out in light of your anti- URM boost joke and overly pompous attitude?

Anyway, everything I said was completely on point. You don't have ties to CA (no, an uncle and some second cousins living there don't count) and you probably won't get in to Berkeley because your numbers are too low. Retake if you want a shot at CA schools. Or just live it up at Duke or Cornell with a large scholarship (and really those would be better options than Cal most likely because Cal tends to be stingy).