Top Law Schools

---

Doesn't matter, it's the same school it was before, the school won't get any worse

"Retake."

After 14 the rankings don't matter.

- Someone not attending a T14.

.

TLSers don't tell people to "retake" because they have a superiority complex. They advise prospective law students to retake because it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options. You have to be at the very top of your class to even be considered by a large firm, let alone be guaranteed a position.

I'm going to use the same level(or lack of) of reasoning you've used:
Many people DO tell ppl to "retake" because they are emotionally insecure and/or have superiority complex. They like to offer this "advise" over and over again (w/o consideration of any other relative/individual factors) because it allows them to feel better about themselves. An example would be: "it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options." Classic example of being presumptuous, with a hint of idiocy.

Thanks for the responses from other posters btw!

Popcorn is in the microwave guys gimme a minute here.

etfc737 wrote:

TLSers don't tell people to "retake" because they have a superiority complex. They advise prospective law students to retake because it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options. You have to be at the very top of your class to even be considered by a large firm, let alone be guaranteed a position.

I'm going to use the same level(or lack of) of reasoning you've used:
Many people DO tell ppl to "retake" because they are emotionally insecure and/or have superiority complex. They like to offer this "advise" over and over again (w/o consideration of any other relative/individual factors) because it allows them to feel better about themselves. An example would be: "it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options." Classic example of being presumptuous, with a hint of idiocy.

I'm just curious as to what options you think you will get from BLS. I know some people who go there have a family firm or other job lined up.

.

etfc737 wrote:

TLSers don't tell people to "retake" because they have a superiority complex. They advise prospective law students to retake because it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options. You have to be at the very top of your class to even be considered by a large firm, let alone be guaranteed a position.

I'm going to use the same level(or lack of) of reasoning you've used:
Many people DO tell ppl to "retake" because they are emotionally insecure and/or have superiority complex. They like to offer this "advise" over and over again (w/o consideration of any other relative/individual factors) because it allows them to feel better about themselves. An example would be: "it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options." Classic example of being presumptuous, with a hint of idiocy.

I read a lot of TLS and have done so for years and I can't think of a single poster who fits this description. You said you know of many, can you link to a single post that embodies this mentality? biglaw1990's post certainly doesn't.

.

I went to an unranked school.

OP, just knowing TLS, I think you're going to have trouble getting a BLS person to come in to answer questions. So, because you've asked for help, it looks like I and other posters are stepping in to at least help you. TLS is many things, but in the on-topics, it is at its core a place where folks try to help other folks.

Now that I've tried to show I come in peace:

BigZuck wrote:Doesn't matter, it's the same school it was before, the school won't get any worse

This is right. Rankings are meaningless, really. Even the t-14, outside of HYS, is more regional than folks would like to admit. So, its all about how BLS operates in its region and you shouldn't have any reason to fear that BLS has departed its peer group in its region.

I don't know your goals or your situation, so I can't give you any advice beyond that about the wisdom of going there in general. You asked if you should be concerned about the drop specifically, and the answer is no.

i dont know if this is cute or if this is sad.

Ugh. Buffalo, I guess.

Assuming you're instate.

It's a fucking crime that it costs over $223,000 to go to Brooklyn Law School. And that is after the tuition cut.
Someone should actually go to jail for this.
About half their grads get jobs and no salary info is given.
http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/ ... osts/2014/

I don't know how the LST guys don't walk around in a constant state of rage.

etfc737 wrote:This is to all current students and all 0L that are seriously considering BLS. This is not for anyone who has a superiority complex or anyone with low self-esteem that likes to talk negatively about lower ranked schools - we've heard your "informative warnings," and please shut up, troll. We are informed.

(I'm asking for subjective input from ppl who are admitted/current BLS students.)

what do you think about this?
http://abovethelaw.com/2016/03/the-2017 ... top-100/2/

From the leaked 2017 US N rankings, BLS has dropped to #97. That's a drop of -19 spots!
This is scary - and not purely because of the ranking - and it may be indicative of where the leadership of the school will take it going forward.

I have already submitted the first seat deposit, but now I'm reconsidering.
They offered ~ $23K; however, I have a comparable offer (already accounting for the stipulation difference) from St. John's -- I'm now on the fence btwn SJU, BLS, and Cardozo (have to pay ~10K more)

How do you guys (ppl who are admitted and are planning to attend BLS) feel about all of this?
BLS is where I want to go, but it seems like the administration is performing sub par in comparison to the other law schools that are on their lvl (Cardozo, SJU, (even SUNY Buffalo now?) etc)

BigZuck wrote:
Doesn't matter, it's the same school it was before, the school won't get any worse

fliptrip wrote:
This is right. Rankings are meaningless, really. Even the t-14, outside of HYS, is more regional than folks would like to admit. So, its all about how BLS operates in its region and you shouldn't have any reason to fear that BLS has departed its peer group in its region.

Thank you for answering my question, FT and BZ!
And to the trolls: thanks anyway

Completely anecdotal, but I have a close friend at BLS. I've hung out at the law school for winter/spring breaks. Run as fast as you can. Seriously. There are exceptions, but the rule for those who attend is sadness. The program is a mess, in my opinion.

etfc737 wrote: From the leaked 2017 US N rankings, BLS has dropped to #97. That's a drop of -19 spots!
This is scary - and not purely because of the ranking - and it may be indicative of where the leadership of the school will take it going forward.

How have you read enough of TLS to know that the posters have superiority complexes (which I'm not saying isn't true) but you haven't yet figured out that rankings are meaningless?

Also, have you completely chosen to ignore all of the empirical evidence that tells you its unwise to attend a school like BLS? For a moment just ignore the character flaws of the posters giving you the advice and try and look at it closely and rationally (hopefully something you can do if you plan on attending law school). If like half the graduates dont even find any legal job, yet they still pay about the same amount of COA as a t14 grad, why would you think its a good move to attend that school?

That is a genuine question. I'm not trying to be smug. Do you think people here are lying? Are the schools self reported numbers incorrect? Do you plan to beat the overwhelming odds that say you are bound for failure (even tho you couldn't score high enough on the LSAT to be accepted into a halfway decent legal program)? Again, I'm not actually trying to be hostile or difficult or whatever, I want to know what sort of thought process led to you deciding to attend a school that will put you into 6 figure debt while giving you only slightly more of a chance at landing a legal job as not attending law school would.

https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/numbers
Brooklyn claims 90% of grads are employed after 10 months but doesn't break out the school funded jobs that last just long enough to count as employed at 10 months or the non legal jobs. Also no mention of full time or long term or JD required jobs.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/
LST shows a 9.7% employed by school and all of these jobs last less than a year.
52.4%are employed in long term, full time JD required jobs.

I'm not sure why I'm surprised schools are still doing this stuff.

Edit:
31 grads of the class of 2015 went to NLJ 350 (not a typo) firms. They are promoting themselves as a desirable school because of some NLJ article that counted Partners At Law firms.
https://www.brooklaw.edu/newsandevents/ ... 3-07-2016b

270 out of 400 students enter with conditional scholarships and 45 lost them.16.6%

It took me a while but I found the mandated ABA disclosures: it's linked at the very bottom of the first page and on the employment page. But they describe their employment as follows:

ABA Required Disclosures

Helping students secure meaningful jobs is our purpose. For the class of 2014, ten months out, 335 of the 382 graduates – 88% - are employed. However, four of the 382 graduates are not seeking employment, and another four started full time employment in the days following the cut off for data collection, which means that 90% of the class who are seeking jobs are employed. As per ABA standards, these numbers includes graduates employed in positions for which the bar is required, for which a J.D. degree is considered advantageous and other professional positions.
To see all ABA Required Disclosures, click here.

I wonder how many students read the actual data.

Us news and world report doesn't matter at all for a school like BLS

It doesnMt really matter for any other school either outside of very broad ranges

BigZuck wrote:

etfc737 wrote:

TLSers don't tell people to "retake" because they have a superiority complex. They advise prospective law students to retake because it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options. You have to be at the very top of your class to even be considered by a large firm, let alone be guaranteed a position.

I'm going to use the same level(or lack of) of reasoning you've used:
Many people DO tell ppl to "retake" because they are emotionally insecure and/or have superiority complex. They like to offer this "advise" over and over again (w/o consideration of any other relative/individual factors) because it allows them to feel better about themselves. An example would be: "it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options." Classic example of being presumptuous, with a hint of idiocy.

I read a lot of TLS and have done so for years and I can't think of a single poster who fits this description. You said you know of many, can you link to a single post that embodies this mentality? biglaw1990's post certainly doesn't.

The fact that you were the first person to respond to this post that explicitly asked for BLS students demonstrates a superiority complex. This post wasn't for you, yet you jumped on it to chime in to grace everyone with your wisdom.

seashell.economy wrote:

BigZuck wrote:

etfc737 wrote:

TLSers don't tell people to "retake" because they have a superiority complex. They advise prospective law students to retake because it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options. You have to be at the very top of your class to even be considered by a large firm, let alone be guaranteed a position.

I'm going to use the same level(or lack of) of reasoning you've used:
Many people DO tell ppl to "retake" because they are emotionally insecure and/or have superiority complex. They like to offer this "advise" over and over again (w/o consideration of any other relative/individual factors) because it allows them to feel better about themselves. An example would be: "it gives them better options. Going to any of the schools you are considering will not give you great options." Classic example of being presumptuous, with a hint of idiocy.

I read a lot of TLS and have done so for years and I can't think of a single poster who fits this description. You said you know of many, can you link to a single post that embodies this mentality? biglaw1990's post certainly doesn't.

The fact that you were the first person to respond to this post that explicitly asked for BLS students demonstrates a superiority complex. This post wasn't for you, yet you jumped on it to chime in to grace everyone with your wisdom.

Do you think it might be possible that people want to have a conversation? People respond to questions not asked to get other facts all the time.
I asked OP what options he thought he was getting, but he ignored me, so I looked at the job data myself.

As a lawyer it is beyond essential that you do that with a client because there are likely important facts they inadvertently neglected to tell you.

As a human being, we like to warn people of danger if we can. OP has a 16.7% chance of losing his scholarship if it's conditional and about 50% chance of getting a job anywhere as a lawyer at an unknown salary.

BLS has terrible employment statistics and they present them in a very misleading way. (They also manage to have almost exactly the same number of conditional scholarships lost every year which suggests they know that around 16.7% of the ~ 400 people they bring into the school will lose their scholarship.)

Maybe OP hasn't seen all the data hidden on the website We can't know unless we ask.

How many lawyers from BLS are practicing at firms of 2-10 lawyers? (43) How many aren't working in law at all? (26.7%) How many did they give low paying nine month jobs to? (36) How many did they give a year long job to?(1)
How much are anyone of them making? We don't know because they don't provide the data.

I don't understand why it is arrogant or elitist to ask questions or give more information.

As for the original question: I agree something is wrong for them to drop so many spots. Looking at the data, I can't figure out why.