Texas A&M just announced a buyout of Texas Wesleyan! Forum

[Nova]

I dont think anybody would argue a&m is not a big deal in texas...but thats just an argument thats pointless to make anyway since every state school is a big deal in the respective state.

UF,FSU are big deals in FL,...same with Rugters in NJ.

Well yeah, and they are ranked well above TTT

[NCGuy]

Counterpoint: The University of South Carolina is a big deal in SC and they have a TTT law school.

[Nova]

Counterpoint: The University of South Carolina is a big deal in SC and they have a TTT law school.

Pop of SC: 4.6 million

Pop of TX: 25.6 million

[Bildungsroman]

Counterpoint: The University of South Carolina is a big deal in SC and they have a TTT law school.

Pop of SC: 4.6 million

Pop of TX: 25.6 million

# of law schools in SC: 2
# of law school in Texas: 9

[Aberzombie1892]

Counterpoint: The University of South Carolina is a big deal in SC and they have a TTT law school.

Pop of SC: 4.6 million

Pop of TX: 25.6 million

# of law schools in SC: 2
# of law school in Texas: 9

Yeah I was also going to say that showing population differences really didn't disprove NCGuy's point.

[sundance95]

No man, when Dickinson Law merged with Penn State it shot up in the rankings and employers started coming IN DROVES.

I get what you are saying, but its worth pointing out that unlike Pennsyltucky, DFW is a major legal market. I don't see the downside for A&M, TxWes grads & students, or the TX legal market, and I see upside for A&M and the TxWex folks.

[Nova]

Counterpoint: The University of South Carolina is a big deal in SC and they have a TTT law school.

Pop of SC: 4.6 million

Pop of TX: 25.6 million

# of law schools in SC: 2
# of law school in Texas: 9

Yeah I was also going to say that showing population differences really didn't disprove NCGuy's point.

Just pointing out a dissimilarity. The A&M brand is stronger than every other college in TX with a law school except for UT. It is surely going to draw a lot more attention from TTT applicants.

[Aberzombie1892]

Well, we have to consider why some people believe the school will shoot up in rankings.

Student - Most applicants that are considering UT/SMU/UH/Baylor won't really start flocking to A&M - it will likely attract students from Tech/St. Mary's/South Texas.

Faculty score - the faculty is pretty much set. A&M could add some faculty, but that's it.

Expenses per student - A&M will likely build a new structure, but expenses per student is a small fraction of rank

Lawyer score - who knows? Possibly the same.

I cannot think of anything else that will be relevant. Personally, I would hope A&M doesn't end up like Vermont law or Syracuse law (quasi prestigious schools with crappy law schools).

[Titleist]

People ITT are assuming since the TAMU name is on it TAMU students will flock here. My argument is- if you are a TAMU student who can get in to UT, SMU, UH or Baylor why would you take the risk to go to this TTTT? Don't say it's a pride thing. I know plenty of Aggies, and a few Aggie pre-law students and they are not dumb enough to skip out UT law (for instance) in favor of TTTTAMU law.


If the same caliber of students keep going to the school its going to remain in the bottom of the barrel in Texas.

[Nova]

TTTTAMU law.

I like what you did there

[NCGuy]

Vermont Law isn't affiliated with the University of Vermont, it's a private law school with no undergraduate affiliation.

The size of Texas and SC respectively doesn't disprove my point. The original point was that Texas A&M has a strong brand in Texas so surely the top A&M students would flock to it and cause a rise in the rankings. USC has a VERY strong brand in South Carolina and it hasn't resulted in anything. Texas A&M won't rise in the rankings just because of this.

[kalvano]

A lot of people in this thread are vastly overvaluing the A&M name.

[Nova]

The original point was that Texas A&M has a strong brand in Texas so surely the top A&M students would flock to it and cause a rise in the rankings.

IDK where that was said. More like Texans considering 3rd and 4th tier law schools will flock to it. Baby steps. You can keep pointing to SC, but they really are very different situations. This thread is just a bunch of speculation and predictions really. You can say the buy out wont affect its rankings indirectly long term, but who knows. It seems more likely, to me, that A&M super charges TW and they get off the bottom of the ocean. Sure, they wont be respected by TLS for a long time, if ever, but they probably wont stay at the very bottom/be one of the worst schools in the country.

[jne381]

I think the acquisition is a good thing overall. The law school already exists, so it isn't adding any more lawyers to the market. It is better the more National Universities buy up these crappy law schools. The universities want to have a good law school that educates the students well and builds up a good reputation. As such, they will invest in the schools.

TAMU School of Law will eventually rise in the rankings, but it will take time as they hire qualified academics as they become available. Likewise, the caliber of students will rise as well. Of course it will take time for them to be a target of employers, but there is no reason they will not be over time. This is a long term project and you have to have vision 20-30 years down the road.

[Bildungsroman]

I think the acquisition is a good thing overall. The law school already exists, so it isn't adding any more lawyers to the market. It is better the more National Universities buy up these crappy law schools. The universities want to have a good law school that educates the students well and builds up a good reputation. As such, they will invest in the schools.

TAMU School of Law will eventually rise in the rankings, but it will take time as they hire qualified academics as they become available. Likewise, the caliber of students will rise as well. Of course it will take time for them to be a target of employers, but there is no reason they will not be over time. This is a long term project and you have to have vision 20-30 years down the road.

Why will it eventually rise? Plenty of big universities have shit law schools (see, e.g., Penn State, MSU, Ole Miss, Rutgers, Nebraska).

[rad lulz]

The original point was that Texas A&M has a strong brand in Texas so surely the top A&M students would flock to it and cause a rise in the rankings.

IDK where that was said. More like Texans considering 3rd and 4th tier law schools will flock to it. Baby steps. You can keep pointing to SC, but they really are very different situations. This thread is just a bunch of speculation and predictions really. You can say the buy out wont affect its rankings indirectly long term, but who knows. It seems more likely, to me, that A&M super charges TW and they get off the bottom of the ocean. Sure, they wont be respected by TLS for a long time, if ever, but they probably wont stay at the very bottom/be one of the worst schools in the country.

They should probably just shut this fucker down because we don't need more lawl skoolz

[NCGuy]

I think the acquisition is a good thing overall. The law school already exists, so it isn't adding any more lawyers to the market. It is better the more National Universities buy up these crappy law schools. The universities want to have a good law school that educates the students well and builds up a good reputation. As such, they will invest in the schools.

TAMU School of Law will eventually rise in the rankings, but it will take time as they hire qualified academics as they become available. Likewise, the caliber of students will rise as well. Of course it will take time for them to be a target of employers, but there is no reason they will not be over time. This is a long term project and you have to have vision 20-30 years down the road.

Why will it eventually rise? Plenty of big universities have shit law schools (see, e.g., Penn State, MSU, Ole Miss, Rutgers, Nebraska).

Penn State and MSU both have tier 2 law schools, which is about as high as A&M Law could ever be anyway. Calling Tier 2 "shit" is also an unwarranted criticism.

[rad lulz]

I think the acquisition is a good thing overall. The law school already exists, so it isn't adding any more lawyers to the market. It is better the more National Universities buy up these crappy law schools. The universities want to have a good law school that educates the students well and builds up a good reputation. As such, they will invest in the schools.

TAMU School of Law will eventually rise in the rankings, but it will take time as they hire qualified academics as they become available. Likewise, the caliber of students will rise as well. Of course it will take time for them to be a target of employers, but there is no reason they will not be over time. This is a long term project and you have to have vision 20-30 years down the road.

Why will it eventually rise? Plenty of big universities have shit law schools (see, e.g., Penn State, MSU, Ole Miss, Rutgers, Nebraska).

Penn State and MSU both have Tier 2 law schools, which is about as high as A&M Law could ever be anyway. Calling Tier 2 "shit" is also an unwarranted criticism.

Have you seen the employment stats and how much people are borrowing on average to go there? They're pretty shitty brah.

[NCGuy]

I think the acquisition is a good thing overall. The law school already exists, so it isn't adding any more lawyers to the market. It is better the more National Universities buy up these crappy law schools. The universities want to have a good law school that educates the students well and builds up a good reputation. As such, they will invest in the schools.

TAMU School of Law will eventually rise in the rankings, but it will take time as they hire qualified academics as they become available. Likewise, the caliber of students will rise as well. Of course it will take time for them to be a target of employers, but there is no reason they will not be over time. This is a long term project and you have to have vision 20-30 years down the road.

Why will it eventually rise? Plenty of big universities have shit law schools (see, e.g., Penn State, MSU, Ole Miss, Rutgers, Nebraska).

Penn State and MSU both have Tier 2 law schools, which is about as high as A&M Law could ever be anyway. Calling Tier 2 "shit" is also an unwarranted criticism.

Have you seen the employment stats and how much people are borrowing on average to go there? They're pretty shitty brah.

When I think "shit," I think T3/T4. You could justify T2 with a lot of aid (which keeps borrowing down) but it's pretty difficult to EVER justify a T3/T4.

And yes, this is my official endorsement of the idea that A&M Law won't rise above T2 status.

[rad lulz]

Go look at the employment stats and you will see that the distinction between T2 and T3/4 is largely meaningless.

[NCGuy]

Go look at the employment stats and you will see that the distinction between T2 and T3/4 is largely meaningless.

I've seen the employment stats but I still think it's a bit unfair to lump Penn State/MSU in with the TJs and Cooleys of the world. In terms of educational quality, they're still in the upper half of law schools in the country. You won't get BIG LAWL from either tier though

As far as MSU goes though, where they top out in the rankings may be a good indicator of where A&M could end up.

[rad lulz]

Go look at the employment stats and you will see that the distinction between T2 and T3/4 is largely meaningless.

I've seen the employment stats but I still think it's a bit unfair to lump Penn State/MSU in with the TJs and Cooleys of the world. In terms of educational quality, they're still in the upper half of law schools in the country. You won't get BIG LAWL from either tier though

As far as MSU goes though, where they top out in the rankings may be a good indicator of where A&M could end up.

Educational quality is basically meaningless, you know.

Also the rankings are basically meaningless.

[jne381]

Go look at the employment stats and you will see that the distinction between T2 and T3/4 is largely meaningless.

I've seen the employment stats but I still think it's a bit unfair to lump Penn State/MSU in with the TJs and Cooleys of the world. In terms of educational quality, they're still in the upper half of law schools in the country. You won't get BIG LAWL from either tier though

As far as MSU goes though, where they top out in the rankings may be a good indicator of where A&M could end up.

Educational quality is basically meaningless, you know.

Also the rankings are basically meaningless.

Yes, rankings for any given year are meaningless in comparison to employment numbers, but they are part of long term strategies. Of course that shouldn't matter to you as a law student, but it does matter to the schools. Higher rankings gain interest from better candidates, better candidates raise the rankings and do a better job in the workplace, schools with better people in the workplace and higher rankings will slowly gain a bit more attention from employers. etc, etc...

Though MSU is still a private school, technically, and I am not sure about PSU, MSU does offer a lot of financial help. State schools that can reduce the price of law school will be a big help to the profession in general. Despite the troubles in the legal market, the real problem is the cost of the legal education, and less so about the number of lawyers. As hard as it may be to believe, there are many many people that need competent representation that can't afford it. It can be argued that the Cooleys of this world care less about the quality of the education, and more about the money it makes. I think this will be less true at places like TAMU, or at least I hope so.

[sunynp]

Go look at the employment stats and you will see that the distinction between T2 and T3/4 is largely meaningless.

I've seen the employment stats but I still think it's a bit unfair to lump Penn State/MSU in with the TJs and Cooleys of the world. In terms of educational quality, they're still in the upper half of law schools in the country. You won't get BIG LAWL from either tier though

As far as MSU goes though, where they top out in the rankings may be a good indicator of where A&M could end up.

Educational quality is basically meaningless, you know.

Also the rankings are basically meaningless.

Yes, rankings for any given year are meaningless in comparison to employment numbers, but they are part of long term strategies. Of course that shouldn't matter to you as a law student, but it does matter to the schools. Higher rankings gain interest from better candidates, better candidates raise the rankings and do a better job in the workplace, schools with better people in the workplace and higher rankings will slowly gain a bit more attention from employers. etc, etc...

Though MSU is still a private school, technically, and I am not sure about PSU, MSU does offer a lot of financial help. State schools that can reduce the price of law school will be a big help to the profession in general. Despite the troubles in the legal market, the real problem is the cost of the legal education, and less so about the number of lawyers. As hard as it may be to believe, there are many many people that need competent representation that can't afford it. It can be argued that the Cooleys of this world care less about the quality of the education, and more about the money it makes. I think this will be less true at places like TAMU, or at least I hope so.

Not sure if serious. There are plenty of lawyers now who could represent these people, if those clients had money to pay them. It isn't as if there is an undersupply of lawyers now. The issue is that the clients can't afford them. The cost of law school and repaying loans is not the issue keeping people from representing clients that can't pay.
Even people who don't have loans are struggling to find work. The problem is that the clients don't have money.
Lack of supply is not going to be a problem in the legal field for the foreseeable future.

[NCGuy]

I would argue that given a full scholarship at PSU/MSU and Cooley/TJ, it would be a wiser gamble to go with PSU/MSU.