What should I do? Waitlist (ND) v. sure-thing (Rutgers) Forum

[dcoppo01]

First (before someone suggests it): I cannot re-take the LSAT. I took it 3 times, 10/13, 12/13, and 2/14.
Second: I color-coded the law schools mentioned in this post, just because.

Today I was waitlisted to Notre Dame, which was one of my top choices. My numbers are low for Notre Dame, so I was ecstatic to be waitlisted (strong softs and LORS). I have not yet filled out the waitlist consideration form and am wondering if I should pursue it. I hope you can help me!

Prior to receiving the letter I was planning to attend Rutgers Camden (at least for a year). I live in southern New Jersey and I received an excellent scholarship. The initial $300.00 deposit is due tomorrow. I may receive a $200 refund if I withdraw by 7/1 and a $100 refund if I withdraw by 8/1.

I am not exactly sure where I would like to go in terms of my career path. I would like to work big law in new york or Philadelphia but ultimately I would like to enter the judiciary.

I do not know whether or not Notre Dame would be in a position to give me a merit scholarship. Upon graduating from Notre Dame I would have a ton of debt as opposed to very little debt (or possibly none) if I graduate from Rutgers. However, it certainly seems that Notre Dame affords greater opportunities to students. LST reports rates Notre Dame with a 71.2% employment score and 11.4% underemployment score. Rutgers has a 62.7% employment score and 25.4% underemployment score. Median starting private sector salary at Notre Dame is $145,000.00 and public sector is $53,000.00. The median starting private sector salary at Rutgersis $67,000.00.


I would really appreciate any feedback and suggestions. My brain is telling me to go to Rutgers, at least for a year. I could attempt to transfer to Notre Dame (or elsewhere) after my first year, thus avoiding very large tuition. My heart is telling me to press for Notre Dame.

thank you!

[Clearly]

What would you like to do career wise?

[dcoppo01]

What would you like to do career wise?

I would like to pursue big law in Philadelphia and New York but ultimately I am interested in a judgeship, which I obviously will not be able to obtain upon graduation from law school. Notre Dame would put me in a better position for big law. Rutgers graduates have a difficult time securing big law jobs in philadelphia (I was specifically told as such on my tour). 5% of Rutgers graduates gain employment at firms with 251+ lawyers, while 23.4% of ND graduates gain employment at such firms (both figures according to LST). Neither figure is really impressive but clearly ND offers an advantage.

[transferror]

Trust me, I know RU-C biglaw prospects are bleak, but you absolutely should not attend ND at sticker. You're better off with the lowest-debt option here. I realize that a 1/4 chance at biglaw from ND is better than the 1/20 from RU-C, but 3/4 (at ND) times you will ruin your life with that debt. RU-C offers a feasible fallback, which is basically any kind of employment.

Neither is a great option considering your goals, but do NOT even think about sticker unless you're CCN or better. The worst case scenario, which is actually probable at these schools. is far better at RU-C. You shouldn't attend law school right now, but if you do, this is RU-C without question.

[Clearly]

If you want to get biglaw, you absolutely 100% should not take either of these options.

[BigZuck]

Retake the LSAT or don't go to law school

[dcoppo01]

Trust me, I know RU-C biglaw prospects are bleak, but you absolutely should not attend ND at sticker. You're better off with the lowest-debt option here. I realize that a 1/4 chance at biglaw from ND is better than the 1/20 from RU-C, but 3/4 (at ND) times you will ruin your life with that debt. RU-C offers a feasible fallback, which is basically any kind of employment.

Neither is a great option considering your goals, but do NOT even think about sticker unless you're CCN or better. The worst case scenario, which is actually probable at these schools. is far better at RU-C. You shouldn't attend law school right now, but if you do, this is RU-C without question.

Thank you. I have informed RU-C that I am accepting the scholarship.

After reading through the ND thread here, it seems that there is a history of applicants getting off the wait list and receiving scholarships. If I were to be accepted and if I were to receive scholarship, at what price would one chose ND over RU?

[thebobs1987]

COA shouldn't be above 100k for ND. I personally would even go less cause I am debt averse.

If you want big law, RU-Camden doesn't make sense. You should retake in June and try to get into a t14. Otherwise you'll most likely be working small law in South Jersey. If you are ok with that then go to RU

[ndirish2010]

ND sticker is crazy. Wait until you're allowed to retake and do so. Neither of these options are good.

[transferror]

If you want big law, RU-Camden doesn't make sense. You should retake in June and try to get into a t14. Otherwise you'll most likely be working small law in South Jersey. If you are ok with that then go to RU

Yeah, the best option is sit out, go work for a few years, and then retake if you still want to go.

My advice should have been taken in that context, as I pushed RU-C because the risk is low with no debt, but it's still a terrible choice for your goals. I'm an RU-C student and can assure you that you will need to be top 15% to even be competitive for biglaw in Philly, and NYC is a pipe dream. Only about 5% of the class makes it into biglaw, and that includes ppl whose mommys and daddys are connected. Like the above poster said, if you end up employed (about 35% don't), the most likely outcome will be a mom and pop law firm or ID mill in South Jersey. You better be ok with that result if you attend.

[Danger Zone]

[goldeneye]

Don't go to law school.

Having the goal of becoming a judge is lofty and honorable, but extremely unlikely. You are more likely to not have a job at all from Rutgers than get biglaw.

[mx23250]

For clarification, your statement regarding median private sector salaries is outdated. The $145,000 stat on TLS is a few years out of date. It's currently around $105,000 according to the latest US News & World Report profile for ND. (ND doesn't post their grad's salaries, so this is the only source I'm aware of for seeing it). $105,000 is actually up considerably from last year in which USNWR had it at around $87,000. I just wanted to throw this out there so you're aware of it when making this very important decision.

[DportIA]

Don't go to law school.

[timbs4339]

Rutgers will not get you biglaw, corporate law, or anything where you'll be making a high-five figure or greater salary within the first few years of practice. It may get you the state judiciary in 25 years if you actually turn out to be a good lawyer, work your ass off to build a practice, and you make yourself known in the right circles. Who knows if that'll happen, the point is you won't be crushed by debt while you are doing it.

It's a much better option at those prices than ND at sticker.

These are the stats you need to be considering:

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/ ... mden/2013/
http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/notredame/2013/

[dcoppo01]

Trust me, I know RU-C biglaw prospects are bleak, but you absolutely should not attend ND at sticker. You're better off with the lowest-debt option here. I realize that a 1/4 chance at biglaw from ND is better than the 1/20 from RU-C, but 3/4 (at ND) times you will ruin your life with that debt. RU-C offers a feasible fallback, which is basically any kind of employment.

Neither is a great option considering your goals, but do NOT even think about sticker unless you're CCN or better. The worst case scenario, which is actually probable at these schools. is far better at RU-C. You shouldn't attend law school right now, but if you do, this is RU-C without question.

Thank you. I have informed RU-C that I am accepting the scholarship.

After reading through the ND thread here, it seems that there is a history of applicants getting off the wait list and receiving scholarships. If I were to be accepted and if I were to receive scholarship, at what price would one chose ND over RU?

If you accepted at RU-C, please remove all delusions that you will obtain biglaw or ever be a judge before entering the doors. TYIA.

Delusions? These are goals. I am aware that both are unlikely but of course I am going to aim high. As for my goal of becoming a judge: I currently work for a judge who is a graduate of Rutgers Camden as well as many other graduates of Rutgers Camden within the NJ judiciary. I have been made fully aware of the hard work required to get through law school, let alone the hard work to become a judge.

[goldeneye]

Do not use boomer alums as evidence you can succeed.

You will not become a judge from Rutgers, or even a lawyer, really.

Also, you said in the OP that you would be at Rutgers (for at least a year), just assume you'll be there 3.

[Clearly]

Trust me, I know RU-C biglaw prospects are bleak, but you absolutely should not attend ND at sticker. You're better off with the lowest-debt option here. I realize that a 1/4 chance at biglaw from ND is better than the 1/20 from RU-C, but 3/4 (at ND) times you will ruin your life with that debt. RU-C offers a feasible fallback, which is basically any kind of employment.

Neither is a great option considering your goals, but do NOT even think about sticker unless you're CCN or better. The worst case scenario, which is actually probable at these schools. is far better at RU-C. You shouldn't attend law school right now, but if you do, this is RU-C without question.

Thank you. I have informed RU-C that I am accepting the scholarship.

After reading through the ND thread here, it seems that there is a history of applicants getting off the wait list and receiving scholarships. If I were to be accepted and if I were to receive scholarship, at what price would one chose ND over RU?

If you accepted at RU-C, please remove all delusions that you will obtain biglaw or ever be a judge before entering the doors. TYIA.

Delusions? These are goals. I am aware that both are unlikely but of course I am going to aim high. As for my goal of becoming a judge: I currently work for a judge who is a graduate of Rutgers Camden as well as many other graduates of Rutgers Camden within the NJ judiciary. I have been made fully aware of the hard work required to get through law school, let alone the hard work to become a judge.

One outdated anecdote is not good reasoning. Legal hiring isn't the same as it was when these people graduated law school

[Danger Zone]

[Nomo]

Please spend some time on Law School Transparency. There is very good data about both schools at the LST website.

I think you'll find that your best choice is not to attend law school. But, obviously its your call.

[LafayetteJeff]

dcoppo01, I do not think you're crazy or even making a poor decision. This thread is a good example of what a defeatist place TLS is. In one sense I join the defeatists in the positive role they play-- emphasizing that there are a limited number of doors opened by these (and most) institutions. That consideration-- ones baseline odds of getting desirable employment-- is something every applicant must consider. Statements that you simply won't succeed if you attend a certain school (particularly as applied to any top 100 school) are beyond the pale and, most importantly, not rooted in any factual foundation. You have to understand that the goal of many people on here is not encourage people to take a shot, but to shut people down so that they do not become attorneys, even in the face of evidence that the person is focused, hard-working, diligent, and thus likely to succeed. They dismiss those folks, and the success they will ultimately enjoy even with their degree from a school ranked in the 70s or 80s, as outliers and boomers, as opposed to people who simply applied themselves in a diligent manner at a good institution. To them, it seems, you should receive your J.D., million bucks, and brass ring at the moment you choose your institution, and all those not worthy of certain institutions need not enter this noble profession. You see, when it comes to this noble profession, they most likely believe that there should be half as many attorneys and half as many laws schools, and that no rational person should ever be content with a school ranked outside the top 20.

There is an ounce of truth within their bombastic views: there should, in my view, be fewer applicants to law school, or at least different ones. I am sick of people who apply just because they can, or who apply with no real goals other than money and prestige. But anyone with proper intentions and drive, such as yourself, ought to be encouraged. Moreover, it is people like yourself that a more likely to get those excellent opportunities and walk through those limited open doors, whether it's one of the doors that the average TLS former would covet, or not. I think some of the folks we hear from often on this forum are folks who shouldn't have ever applied to law school.

[HRomanus]

dcoppo01, I do not think you're crazy or even making a poor decision. This thread is a good example of what a defeatist place TLS is. In one sense I join the defeatists in the positive role they play-- emphasizing that there are a limited number of doors opened by these (and most) institutions. That consideration-- ones baseline odds of getting desirable employment-- is something every applicant must consider. Statements that you simply won't succeed if you attend a certain school (particularly as applied to any top 100 school) are beyond the pale and, most importantly, not rooted in any factual foundation. You have to understand that the goal of many people on here is not encourage people to take a shot, but to shut people down so that they do not become attorneys, even in the face of evidence that the person is focused, hard-working, diligent, and thus likely to succeed. They dismiss those folks, and the success they will ultimately enjoy even with their degree from a school ranked in the 70s or 80s, as outliers and boomers, as opposed to people who simply applied themselves in a diligent manner at a good institution. To them, it seems, you should receive your J.D., million bucks, and brass ring at the moment you choose your institution, and all those not worthy of certain institutions need not enter this noble profession. You see, when it comes to this noble profession, they most likely believe that there should be half as many attorneys and half as many laws schools, and that no rational person should ever be content with a school ranked outside the top 20.

There is an ounce of truth within their bombastic views: there should, in my view, be fewer applicants to law school, or at least different ones. I am sick of people who apply just because they can, or who apply with no real goals other than money and prestige. But anyone with proper intentions and drive, such as yourself, ought to be encouraged. Moreover, it is people like yourself that a more likely to get those excellent opportunities and walk through those limited open doors, whether it's one of the doors that the average TLS former would covet, or not. I think some of the folks we hear from often on this forum are folks who shouldn't have ever applied to law school.

Even as a 0L I know this is pretty stupid.

The law school process is a set of risks. The best example is employment, and thanks to LST we have those risks quantified. The message of TLS seems to be reduce your risks and raise your worst case scenario floor. Hard work, diligence, connections, school choice, and especially luck all play factors in reducing risk. Of these, only school choice is quantified and predictable.

[californiauser]

dcoppo01, I do not think you're crazy or even making a poor decision. This thread is a good example of what a defeatist place TLS is. In one sense I join the defeatists in the positive role they play-- emphasizing that there are a limited number of doors opened by these (and most) institutions. That consideration-- ones baseline odds of getting desirable employment-- is something every applicant must consider. Statements that you simply won't succeed if you attend a certain school (particularly as applied to any top 100 school) are beyond the pale and, most importantly, not rooted in any factual foundation. You have to understand that the goal of many people on here is not encourage people to take a shot, but to shut people down so that they do not become attorneys, even in the face of evidence that the person is focused, hard-working, diligent, and thus likely to succeed. They dismiss those folks, and the success they will ultimately enjoy even with their degree from a school ranked in the 70s or 80s, as outliers and boomers, as opposed to people who simply applied themselves in a diligent manner at a good institution. To them, it seems, you should receive your J.D., million bucks, and brass ring at the moment you choose your institution, and all those not worthy of certain institutions need not enter this noble profession. You see, when it comes to this noble profession, they most likely believe that there should be half as many attorneys and half as many laws schools, and that no rational person should ever be content with a school ranked outside the top 20.

This is wrong. No one is saying you're guaranteed not to succeed. It's just unlikely. Based on FACTS (not boomer anecdotes):

We know that at least 38.6% of this school's graduates made $44,306 or more. (from LST)

any rational consumer realizes wasting 3 years of your life for marginal job prospects and bleak salary outcomes is not a sound financial decision

And to the OP, the salary information in your original post is way off. You need to consider the % of students reporting salaries, too.

TLS discounts people who say they'll work hard and attend TTTs because many of us worked really hard to retake the LSAT. If you're willing to work so hard in law school as to guarantee success in your career, why not work hard to retake the LSAT?