GW vs Rutgers Forum

[Tier2-5Scum]

Hello cynics of TLS.

I refused to join into discussions on this forum on account of the volume of advice being something like "If you don't get into HYS with significant scholarship, then your legal career is already doomed and also you're stupid for not getting into HYS with significant scholarship."

But, now I want as much perspective as I can cram into these two days I have to decide:

Rutgers : COA $10k per year. Can commute for first semester until I find a good roomate.

GW Law: Full sticker babeeeeee.

Aspirations: JAG or Corporate Law

How many of you would go into 300k+ worth of debt for GW over Rutgers? Who would take the discount option? And finally, please don't hold back in telling me the scum I am for not securing a T14 offer with significant scholarship.

Thank you in advance.

[nealric]

Put a gun to my head: GW. But I would defer a year and retake if I were in your shoes. The risks of not getting what you want out of either are enormous.

[cavalier1138]

Well, with such a charmingly inaccurate and hostile introduction, how could anyone not want to see you torch $300k and fail to achieve your dreams in the process?

You failed to provide your current numbers. My guess is that you know full well that an improved LSAT would make GW affordable. I'm also assuming that you know full well that you're extremely unlikely to get the jobs you want out of Rutgers (and only somewhat likely to get them from GW in the first place). So since literally no one here equates T13 degrees with social worth, you're actually saying, "I want to do something that is maybe achievable at A for roughly $200-300k and incredibly unlikely at B for $30k. Who's going to validate me?"

Law school isn't going anywhere. If you want to do JAG or biglaw, you need to retake for better options (or at the very least to get GW down to a reasonable price). If you're ok with not getting either of those, might as well do Rutgers, because your failure to achieve those goals won't be accompanied by a debt you can't pay off.

[Lawman1865]

Hello cynics of TLS.

I refused to join into discussions on this forum on account of the volume of advice being something like "If you don't get into HYS with significant scholarship, then your legal career is already doomed and also you're stupid for not getting into HYS with significant scholarship."

But, now I want as much perspective as I can cram into these two days I have to decide:

Rutgers : COA $10k per year. Can commute for first semester until I find a good roomate.

GW Law: Full sticker babeeeeee.

Aspirations: JAG or Corporate Law

How many of you would go into 300k+ worth of debt for GW over Rutgers? Who would take the discount option? And finally, please don't hold back in telling me the scum I am for not securing a T14 offer with significant scholarship.

Thank you in advance.

I agree that people sometimes go a bit far with the retake advice, and there are certainly some characters on this forum, but you might be going a bit strong in anticipating such scathing responses. People are trying to help you achieve something good and not watch you make mistakes, and I don't think you should be essentially insulting those who you are voluntarily seeking advice from.

As Cav mentioned, I suspect you didn't post your lsat/gpa because you don't want "retake" advice and that's fine (although I think a retake suggestion is absolutely appropriate in this situation). Assuming the proper goals (smaller firm, certain public service specialty, etc.) a T2 with good scholarship is a great prospect, but it sounds like you may be aiming for more than Rutgers is likely to give you. If by corporate law you mean biglaw, neither of those schools are going to put you in a great position, and that's saying it lightly. JAG is also incredibly difficult, not to say that it's impossible, but you should be aware of that.

In this situation I would probably avoid GW at full sticker and go for Rutgers. At least then you graduate with less debt.

[omar1]

Having debt sucks so I'd ask Rutgers to make it a full ride and would go to Rutgers.

[Wubbles]

Retake or Rutgers, but your attitude makes me want to say GWU

[Paul Campos]

GW at sticker will leave you with $350K in debt. (Tuition is $63K per year -- they raised it 5% for this fall -- and DC is very expensive).

There might be a law school that's worth that debt level, but it isn't GW.

[totesTheGoat]

How many of you would go into 300k+ worth of debt for GW over Rutgers? Who would take the discount option? And finally, please don't hold back in telling me the scum I am for not securing a T14 offer with significant scholarship.

You're scum or something like that. What do I know, I passed up my T14 offers for money at a T1. Still graduated with $180k in debt. TLS would've told me I was being an idiot, and I was.

I would not go into 300k of debt for GW. In your shoes, I'd either take Rutgers at $30k or retake and come back next year.

[LSATWiz.com]

If Rutgers is virtually free and you have strong Jersey ties, it is clearly the choice between these two. GW is not worth an add'l $300k. You're essentially taking an enormous bet on something that isn't even 50-50 likely, and the lucky 50% get to work insanely hard so the losers lose a lot more than the winners win. Rutgers with no debt is not a bad outcome so is an easy answer given the parameters of your question. If the better school isn't a t-14, and the worse school isn't objectively a scam and in an area you would be happy practicing in and have ties to, this is never going to be a question

[QContinuum]

I refused to join into discussions on this forum on account of the volume of advice being something like "If you don't get into HYS with significant scholarship, then your legal career is already doomed and also you're stupid for not getting into HYS with significant scholarship."

YSH do not award merit scholarships. They award need-based aid only. Therefore no one is "stupid for not getting into HYS with significant scholarship."

Your broader point is also incorrect. I really don't know why this strawman keeps getting raised again and again. The TLS consensus view has never been T13 or bust. We are perfectly happy advising 0Ls with non-BigLaw/elite PI career goals to attend suitable T1/T2 schools at a reasonable cost. We often give this advice. To the extent you frequently see us advise 0Ls to try for the T13/T20, that's only because those 0Ls state a goal that realistically requires attending a T13/T20. Such goals include BigLaw or DoJ or ACLU (or the like), or a $190k starting salary (which means BigLaw), or an in-house gig at Google or similar (which typically requires BigLaw as a prerequisite).

Now, it's generally true that we advise folks to stay away from T3/T4 law schools. This is because these schools generally have bad placement into the practice of law period (regardless of salary). We feel, quite reasonably IMO, that it's a bad idea to forego 3 years of income and go into debt for a degree that will likely end up being nothing more than a scarlet letter and a six-figure debt load. There are niche cases where attending a T3/T4 may make sense, but frankly I can't recall seeing such a case on TLS. (Which makes sense, really. Someone in the rural Midwest, say, who's going to attend their local T4 and join their Dad's practice after graduation is unlikely to find their way to TLS to begin with.)

Aspirations: JAG or Corporate Law

What exactly do you envision as "corporate law"? As stated above, if by "corporate law" you mean BigLaw, neither of your choices is good.

And finally, please don't hold back in telling me the scum I am for not securing a T14 offer with significant scholarship.

I have never seen any TLSer label someone "scum" for not securing a "T14 offer with significant scholarship." There are many respected TLSers who did not attend a T14 at all. (See above point: TLS is perfectly happy to advise folks to attend T1/T2 law schools when doing so is in line with their post-graduation goals.) Many other applicants are unable to attend a T14 on scholarship because their undergrad GPA precludes such an outcome (once the GPA dips low enough, not even a 180 is going to be sufficient to get someone into the T14 with scholarship money). Then there are folks who, in light of their goals, reasonably choose to attend YSHChi at sticker over a significant scholarship at a "lower" T14.

Now, if a poster is needlessly combative, refuses to engage constructively, and insists on making objectively unreasonable decisions, such a poster is likely to be criticized strongly. But s/he would be criticized for their attitude and unreasonable decisionmaking, not their failure to secure a full-ride at UVA.

[LSATWiz.com]

I refused to join into discussions on this forum on account of the volume of advice being something like "If you don't get into HYS with significant scholarship, then your legal career is already doomed and also you're stupid for not getting into HYS with significant scholarship."

YSH do not award merit scholarships. They award need-based aid only. Therefore no one is "stupid for not getting into HYS with significant scholarship."

Your broader point is also incorrect. I really don't know why this strawman keeps getting raised again and again. The TLS consensus view has never been T13 or bust. We are perfectly happy advising 0Ls with non-BigLaw/elite PI career goals to attend suitable T1/T2 schools at a reasonable cost. We often give this advice. To the extent you frequently see us advise 0Ls to try for the T13/T20, that's only because those 0Ls state a goal that realistically requires attending a T13/T20. Such goals include BigLaw or DoJ or ACLU (or the like), or a $190k starting salary (which means BigLaw), or an in-house gig at Google or similar (which typically requires BigLaw as a prerequisite).

Now, it's generally true that we advise folks to stay away from T3/T4 law schools. This is because these schools generally have bad placement into the practice of law period (regardless of salary). We feel, quite reasonably IMO, that it's a bad idea to forego 3 years of income and go into debt for a degree that will likely end up being nothing more than a scarlet letter and a six-figure debt load. There are niche cases where attending a T3/T4 may make sense, but frankly I can't recall seeing such a case on TLS. (Which makes sense, really. Someone in the rural Midwest, say, who's going to attend their local T4 and join their Dad's practice after graduation is unlikely to find their way to TLS to begin with.)

Aspirations: JAG or Corporate Law

What exactly do you envision as "corporate law"? As stated above, if by "corporate law" you mean BigLaw, neither of your choices is good.

And finally, please don't hold back in telling me the scum I am for not securing a T14 offer with significant scholarship.

I have never seen any TLSer label someone "scum" for not securing a "T14 offer with significant scholarship." There are many respected TLSers who did not attend a T14 at all. (See above point: TLS is perfectly happy to advise folks to attend T1/T2 law schools when doing so is in line with their post-graduation goals.) Many other applicants are unable to attend a T14 on scholarship because their undergrad GPA precludes it. Then there are folks who, in light of their goals, reasonably choose to attend YSHChi at sticker over a significant scholarship at a "lower" T14.

Yes, the reason they aren't good choices for that is simply because it is very statistically unlikely to happen from either of them, but if your'e willing to do JAG then your primary interest isn't money. It's also not exactly easy to get JAG.

[QContinuum]

Yes, the reason they aren't good choices for that is simply because it is very statistically unlikely to happen from either of them, but if your'e willing to do JAG then your primary interest isn't money. It's also not exactly easy to get JAG.

JAG and "Corporate Law" are so different, though, that I'm interested in digging a bit further. If OP is actually all in on JAG, that would lead to very different advice than if, say, OP is primarily interested in BigLaw but is willing to consider JAG as a backup option. (JAG doesn't typically work well as a backup option, it's hardly something one can count on waltzing into if BigLaw doesn't pan out.)

[icansortofmath]

JAG is very competitive. They aren't as prestige whoring as big law firms but they are very motivation (as shown by your grades, since they got nothing better to measure your level of motivation) sensitive. They also look for litigation and specifically courtroom experience a lot, which means going to a T14 school will help (since litigation/courtroom jobs, even externship positions, are highly sought after.)

Just to make a broader observation, people basically want the same things for the most part. Six-figure jobs, DOJ, ACLU, posh in house, and yes, JAG, are all pretty sought after by law students. As a result, it shouldn't surprise anyone that recruiters for those jobs don't feel the need to recruit outside of top schools or outside top of class in decent but not top schools.

That's the reality of hiring in banking, consulting, law, and increasingly software engineering.

[QContinuum]

JAG is very competitive. They aren't as prestige whoring as big law firms but they are very motivation (as shown by your grades, since they got nothing better to measure your level of motivation) sensitive. They also look for litigation and specifically courtroom experience a lot, which means going to a T14 school will help (since litigation/courtroom jobs, even externship positions, are highly sought after.)

Just to make a broader observation, people basically want the same things for the most part. Six-figure jobs, DOJ, ACLU, posh in house, and yes, JAG, are all pretty sought after by law students. As a result, it shouldn't surprise anyone that recruiters for those jobs don't feel the need to recruit outside of top schools or outside top of class in decent but not top schools.

That's the reality of hiring in banking, consulting, law, and increasingly software engineering.

Yep to all of the above. The main difference, IMO, is that someone who's all-in on JAG can probably be less price-sensitive than someone who's all-in on private practice.

[MaxMcMann]

For what it’s worth I went to GW with that same mindset.

A week of talking to unemployed and dead i sicd 2Ls and 3Ls or people with unpaid secondments at the FDIC made me queasy. Luckily got into a T13 off the waitlist but I regretted my decision even with a 3/4 scholarship.

[totesTheGoat]

and increasingly software engineering.

Not surprised. The code monkey jobs can be filled with 6-week bootcampers and the development jobs are probably filling up with all the CS majors. The jobs that actually require you to understand how a computer works under the covers are likely still easier to get into, but you need more advanced training to qualify for them.

One of the stupid side effects of blurring the lines between coder, sw dev, and sw engr is that there's very little distinction between bootcamp bobby and masters in computer engineering mary until they get 5+ years into their careers.

Anyway, sorry for dragging it off topic.

[LSATWiz.com]

Yes, the reason they aren't good choices for that is simply because it is very statistically unlikely to happen from either of them, but if your'e willing to do JAG then your primary interest isn't money. It's also not exactly easy to get JAG.

JAG and "Corporate Law" are so different, though, that I'm interested in digging a bit further. If OP is actually all in on JAG, that would lead to very different advice than if, say, OP is primarily interested in BigLaw but is willing to consider JAG as a backup option. (JAG doesn't typically work well as a backup option, it's hardly something one can count on waltzing into if BigLaw doesn't pan out.)

I'd imagine either wants to make a lot of money or help America. Very few people are interested in corporate law because they have a genuine passion for it. The irony here is that while OP is probably wealth driven, they are flat out against hearing the best financial advice.

[Johnnybgoode92]

OP, please google “Scott Bullock” and search for him on TLS. Although his primary focus will be on Seton Hall, he’ll have plenty to say about Rutgers and the NJ legal landscape.