looking for some opinions on Brooklyn LS and St. John's LS Forum

[mlulow]

Brief background: ex-minor league baseball player, absolutely no interest in BigLaw, more interested in the study and practice than the name on the degree, 3.46 UGPA, cold 157 LSAT (1 month self-study prior), currently interning at Excel Sports Management in NYC.

Goals after LS: pro athlete representation, union/labor negotiations/relations.

Details: - born, raised and live in NYC, currently working full time.
- applied to Columbia, Fordham (part time), Brooklyn (part time), St. John's (part time)
- accepted to St. John's + 100k, accepted to BLS + 40k, denied Fordham, haven't heard from Columbia (definitely denied)

I'm not basing the rest of my life on going to law school. I'd love to go more for the personal and intellectual challenge and stimulation than to get a job that pays a ton of money. Debt is not something anyone wants, but is also something that can be overcome in time with hard work and proper planning. Just curious what/if anyone would do about St.J or BLS given my position.

Thanks in advance for polite, mature discussion.

[Kimikho]

Do you want to be a lawyer?

Law school is professional school. From what I've heard, it'll be even more so at schools like Brooklyn and St. John's

[Manteca]

I think it would be very difficult to go into sports law from either one of these schools

[rinkrat19]

If you have a black book full of your old baseball buddies who have promised that they'll jump ship from Boras and Octagon to you as soon as you have a JD, despite the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then all you need is a JD and it doesn't matter that Brooklyn and St. John's are absolute dumpster fires where like 20% of the graduates get actual jobs as lawyers (not just biglaw--ANY lawyering jobs that pay actual money).

If you don't have your stable of absolutely guaranteed paying clients lined up...well, let's just say that Brooklyn or St. John's would be really, really bad decisions.

[mlulow]

Do you want to be a lawyer?

Law school is professional school. From what I've heard, it'll be even more so at schools like Brooklyn and St. John's

I do, and (as blasphemous as this next bit may sounds -- judging by the threads I've read) one of the things that interests me about going to law school is the possibility that I may discover some other field of law that interests me even more.
So I suppose the raised level of professional school-ism doesn't bother me all that much.

[mlulow]

If you have a black book full of your old baseball buddies who have promised that they'll jump ship from Boras and Octagon to you as soon as you have a JD, despite the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then all you need is a JD and it doesn't matter that Brooklyn and St. John's are absolute dumpster fires where like 20% of the graduates get actual jobs as lawyers (not just biglaw--ANY lawyering jobs that pay actual money).

If you don't have your stable of absolutely guaranteed paying clients lined up...well, let's just say that Brooklyn or St. John's would be really, really bad decisions.

I'm curious as to why these would be such horrible decisions. Is there anything besides the debt? If it's the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then unfortunately, there's no way around that.
This is a very common reply in many of these threads, and I'm very curious as to the basis for the seemingly general consensus that no matter what the other factors are, if you don't get a full ride to a T14 it makes no sense whatsoever to attend law school in any capacity.

[A. Nony Mouse]

People here generally want to get a job, so they tend to favor schools that give you a good chance at getting a job. That's their problem with schools like Brooklyn and St. John's. Depends on how you define "good chance at getting a job," of course.

[rinkrat19]

If you have a black book full of your old baseball buddies who have promised that they'll jump ship from Boras and Octagon to you as soon as you have a JD, despite the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then all you need is a JD and it doesn't matter that Brooklyn and St. John's are absolute dumpster fires where like 20% of the graduates get actual jobs as lawyers (not just biglaw--ANY lawyering jobs that pay actual money).

If you don't have your stable of absolutely guaranteed paying clients lined up...well, let's just say that Brooklyn or St. John's would be really, really bad decisions.

I'm curious as to why these would be such horrible decisions. Is there anything besides the debt? If it's the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then unfortunately, there's no way around that.
This is a very common reply in many of these threads, and I'm very curious as to the basis for the seemingly general consensus that no matter what the other factors are, if you don't get a full ride to a T14 it makes no sense whatsoever to attend law school in any capacity.

1. To be an actual lawyer in the real world, you need to get a job that pays some reasonable amount of money and allows you to service your loans. That doesn't have to be $160k in biglaw. But $30k doing document review part-time without medical insurance with six figures in loans is not an ideal outcome.

2. To get a decent legal job, you have to get that job pretty much right out of law school or you never will. That's just the way legal hiring works.

3. It's nearly impossible to be successful as a solo startup. You need a first job that gives you practical training in the legal field you've settled in before setting you loose on clients. Without the backing of an established firm/company/agency/organization's training, you won't know what you're doing and you won't be able to convince anyone to pay you money to do it.

4. Schools are required to report their employment stats.
St. John's had 309 graduates in 2013. 43 were unemployed 9 months after grad. 14 were employed by the school to boost their employment stats. 65 were employed in firms <10 lawyers, which are largely small firms formed by groups of desperate grads, which will fail. 56 were employed in "business & industry" which--coming from a non-top school--is much more likely to be slinging lattes at Starbucks than in-house council at Exxon or Apple. 12% of the class is making over $80k. Fully 38% of the class wouldn't even report a salary when asked (which means they're not making $160k at Wachtell).
Brooklyn's numbers are similar.

[mlulow]

If you have a black book full of your old baseball buddies who have promised that they'll jump ship from Boras and Octagon to you as soon as you have a JD, despite the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then all you need is a JD and it doesn't matter that Brooklyn and St. John's are absolute dumpster fires where like 20% of the graduates get actual jobs as lawyers (not just biglaw--ANY lawyering jobs that pay actual money).

If you don't have your stable of absolutely guaranteed paying clients lined up...well, let's just say that Brooklyn or St. John's would be really, really bad decisions.

I'm curious as to why these would be such horrible decisions. Is there anything besides the debt? If it's the fact that law school teaches you absolutely nothing useful about actually practicing law in the real world, then unfortunately, there's no way around that.
This is a very common reply in many of these threads, and I'm very curious as to the basis for the seemingly general consensus that no matter what the other factors are, if you don't get a full ride to a T14 it makes no sense whatsoever to attend law school in any capacity.

1. To be an actual lawyer in the real world, you need to get a job that pays some reasonable amount of money and allows you to service your loans. That doesn't have to be $160k in biglaw. But $30k doing document review part-time without medical insurance with six figures in loans is not an ideal outcome.

2. To get a decent legal job, you have to get that job pretty much right out of law school or you never will. That's just the way legal hiring works.

3. It's nearly impossible to be successful as a solo startup. You need a first job that gives you practical training in the legal field you've settled in before setting you loose on clients. Without the backing of an established firm/company/agency/organization's training, you won't know what you're doing and you won't be able to convince anyone to pay you money to do it.

4. Schools are required to report their employment stats.
St. John's had 309 graduates in 2013. 43 were unemployed 9 months after grad. 14 were employed by the school to boost their employment stats. 65 were employed in firms <10 lawyers, which are largely small firms formed by groups of desperate grads, which will fail. 56 were employed in "business & industry" which--coming from a non-top school--is much more likely to be slinging lattes at Starbucks than in-house council at Exxon or Apple. 12% of the class is making over $80k. Fully 38% of the class wouldn't even report a salary when asked (which means they're not making $160k at Wachtell).
Brooklyn's numbers are similar.

thank you for the explanation, very much appreciated.

[TheSpanishMain]

Debt is not something anyone wants, but is also something that can be overcome in time with hard work and proper planning.

This is absolutely true. Hard work and proper planning on the LSAT can absolutely mitigate debt.

It's much easier to do this on the front end rather than the back end. You get one shot at law school, and if you blow it, you're basically hosed. If you crap the bed on the LSAT you can just retake it.

[romothesavior]

My opinion is that both are terrible if you want a good legal job.

[mlulow]

My opinion is that both are terrible if you want a good legal job.

"Terrible" because?
"Good legal job" meaning?

[romothesavior]

My opinion is that both are terrible if you want a good legal job.

"Terrible" because?
"Good legal job" meaning?

This explanation was pretty much spot on:

1. To be an actual lawyer in the real world, you need to get a job that pays some reasonable amount of money and allows you to service your loans. That doesn't have to be $160k in biglaw. But $30k doing document review part-time without medical insurance with six figures in loans is not an ideal outcome.

2. To get a decent legal job, you have to get that job pretty much right out of law school or you never will. That's just the way legal hiring works.

3. It's nearly impossible to be successful as a solo startup. You need a first job that gives you practical training in the legal field you've settled in before setting you loose on clients. Without the backing of an established firm/company/agency/organization's training, you won't know what you're doing and you won't be able to convince anyone to pay you money to do it.

4. Schools are required to report their employment stats.
St. John's had 309 graduates in 2013. 43 were unemployed 9 months after grad. 14 were employed by the school to boost their employment stats. 65 were employed in firms <10 lawyers, which are largely small firms formed by groups of desperate grads, which will fail. 56 were employed in "business & industry" which--coming from a non-top school--is much more likely to be slinging lattes at Starbucks than in-house council at Exxon or Apple. 12% of the class is making over $80k. Fully 38% of the class wouldn't even report a salary when asked (which means they're not making $160k at Wachtell).
Brooklyn's numbers are similar.

The job prospects are terrible (go look at the LST data).

[thebobs1987]

You need to retake the LSAT no matter what. But if you really want to be in sports representation, you're better off trying to get a job where you're interning at now and if a JD is necessary, get one at night while working and making more connections.