Top Law Schools

Originally wrote this in response to someone asking me in the USC thread how my negotiation went. Thought it'd be helpful to some to post

So ya, I was offered 30k but the fact that USC is the 4th most expensive Law school in the country makes it difficult to choose over others. I sent them an email last week and I told them how I was accepted to Georgetown (with Scholly offer on the way), accepted to UW where I am in state and can go for VERY cheap, Seton Hall (offered me a full ride) and UC Irvine (offered me 40k/year) and about my financial status in that I won't have any assistance from parents. She said we could talk today.

I was surprised by how the phone call went, I expected it to be like me stating my case and her saying ok we'll consider it, all cordial like. But it turned out she was kind of aggressive in that she started going through schools I had mentioned in my original email and saying why they don't even compare to USC and kind of implying I didn't do my research if I'm going to bring up schools like them and it was obvious that she was skeptical that I was as she put it "just shopping around" instead of seriously considering USC. I was put off by this and a little offended considering she was approaching it as if I was simply someone trying to squeeze more money out of USC (even if it were so, not a point they have any right being offended by considering their sticker price) when in fact I legitimately want to know how much they value me. She started saying maybe I need to evaluate what things are most important to me in school in terms of cost, education, employment, network & living area if I'm valuing those offers when compared to USC's.

So once she started with this I stopped trying to be cordial and reminded her that I of course am shopping around because I'm about to make a more than $150k investment so if I'm wasting her time than please let me know but that I originally took it that "You" wanted "me", if this is the case I want to know how much so, but if its not and you don't value me enough to give me more than 30k thats fine I only want to know that. At this point she started bringing up again how USC is much better than some of the other schools I mentioned that were not as traditionally highly ranked but I could go cheaply.

This was frustrating because it seemed like she was trying to remind me of my relatively meager overall worth in terms of competitiveness and kind of questioning whether I really have standing to expect more aid, so I reminded her that I have been admitted to Georgetown who no matter what source you look at, is top tier in post graduation employment statistics, even UW is higher on average than USC in some regards. But USC on the other hand is constantly looking shady appearing towards the lower ends of rankings. (All this and the following I said in a much more cordial tone and professional tone than how i'm typing it and didn't drop any specific numbers or stats as to avoid sounding too bold and coming off as insulting towards USC's rankings). I said that USC was "in the 50s for LST employment score, 23% Underemployment score, only 72% employed 9 months after grad... I made it clear that I know you should take rankings with a grain of salt but I asked her frankly how USC justifies being the 4th highest in terms of cost but has a hard time breaking the top 30 in terms of post graduation employment statistics. Her only answer to this was that because I want to practice in Cali post graduation, that USC would be better. So i asked her why I should choose USC over UCLA in the event I was admitted to which she reminded me that I wasn't yet admitted to UCLA at which point I realized this was about as much I was gonna get out of this conversation.

Overall, I wish I would have been more prepared for the aggressive tone of the conversation. I know it sounds like I was upset with the interviewer but I'm not at all, in fact I appreciate her bluntness, the only regret I have is that I didn't hit her with more hard numbers to let her know I'm not an idiot which I'm not gonna lie, was kind of the tone I felt she started taking with me after our initial discussion. I should admit that I can be particularly easy to offend through undertones and whatnot so please don't take this as me saying USC is jerks or a bad investment, thats not the case, I was mainly just put off because I didn't expect it to go down like a bargain where she was going to tell me its not that USC is too expensive, its that I'm looking at it wrong. I assumed it was understood that the only reason I would write requesting further aid was because it was too expensive for me, telling me I need to reevaluate things seems kind of stupid considering only an idiot would go into a $150k investment without any evaluation and hopefully not too many of them make it by USC's application filter.

Hope this helps, I'll answer any questions too!

yafosho wrote:Originally wrote this in response to someone asking me in the USC thread how my negotiation went. Thought it'd be helpful to some to post

So ya, I was offered 30k but the fact that USC is the 4th most expensive Law school in the country makes it difficult to choose over others. I sent them an email last week and I told them how I was accepted to Georgetown (with Scholly offer on the way), accepted to UW where I am in state and can go for VERY cheap, Seton Hall (offered me a full ride) and UC Irvine (offered me 40k/year) and about my financial status in that I won't have any assistance from parents. She said we could talk today.

I was surprised by how the phone call went, I expected it to be like me stating my case and her saying ok we'll consider it, all cordial like. But it turned out she was kind of aggressive in that she started going through schools I had mentioned in my original email and saying why they don't even compare to USC and kind of implying I didn't do my research if I'm going to bring up schools like them and it was obvious that she was skeptical that I was as she put it "just shopping around" instead of seriously considering USC. I was put off by this and a little offended considering she was approaching it as if I was simply someone trying to squeeze more money out of USC (even if it were so, not a point they have any right being offended by considering their sticker price) when in fact I legitimately want to know how much they value me. She started saying maybe I need to evaluate what things are most important to me in school in terms of cost, education, employment, network & living area if I'm valuing those offers when compared to USC's.

So once she started with this I stopped trying to be cordial and reminded her that I of course am shopping around because I'm about to make a more than $150k investment so if I'm wasting her time than please let me know but that I originally took it that "You" wanted "me", if this is the case I want to know how much so, but if its not and you don't value me enough to give me more than 30k thats fine I only want to know that. At this point she started bringing up again how USC is much better than some of the other schools I mentioned that were not as traditionally highly ranked but I could go cheaply.

This was frustrating because it seemed like she was trying to remind me of my relatively meager overall worth in terms of competitiveness and kind of questioning whether I really have standing to expect more aid, so I reminded her that I have been admitted to Georgetown who no matter what source you look at, is top tier in post graduation employment statistics, even UW is higher on average than USC in some regards. But USC on the other hand is constantly looking shady appearing towards the lower ends of rankings. (All this and the following I said in a much more cordial tone and professional tone than how i'm typing it and didn't drop any specific numbers or stats as to avoid sounding too bold and coming off as insulting towards USC's rankings). I said that USC was "in the 50s for LST employment score, 23% Underemployment score, only 72% employed 9 months after grad... I made it clear that I know you should take rankings with a grain of salt but I asked her frankly how USC justifies being the 4th highest in terms of cost but has a hard time breaking the top 30 in terms of post graduation employment statistics. Her only answer to this was that because I want to practice in Cali post graduation, that USC would be better. So i asked her why I should choose USC over UCLA in the event I was admitted to which she reminded me that I wasn't yet admitted to UCLA at which point I realized this was about as much I was gonna get out of this conversation.

Overall, I wish I would have been more prepared for the aggressive tone of the conversation. I know it sounds like I was upset with the interviewer but I'm not at all, in fact I appreciate her bluntness, the only regret I have is that I didn't hit her with more hard numbers to let her know I'm not an idiot which I'm not gonna lie, was kind of the tone I felt she started taking with me after our initial discussion. I should admit that I can be particularly easy to offend through undertones and whatnot so please don't take this as me saying USC is jerks or a bad investment, thats not the case, I was mainly just put off because I didn't expect it to go down like a bargain where she was going to tell me its not that USC is too expensive, its that I'm looking at it wrong. I assumed it was understood that the only reason I would write requesting further aid was because it was too expensive for me, telling me I need to reevaluate things seems kind of stupid considering only an idiot would go into a $150k investment without any evaluation and hopefully not too many of them make it by USC's application filter.

Hope this helps, I'll answer any questions too!

Wow. That sounds like an intense conversation and a strange approach for them to take considering that, at this point, they're trying to convince you to come there. You would think they'd be a little more open to the discussion, and less combative.

samoby wrote:
Wow. That sounds like an intense conversation and a strange approach for them to take considering that, at this point, they're trying to convince you to come there. You would think they'd be a little more open to the discussion, and less combative.

Exactly, once again it was more passive aggressive than openly aggressive but still, I'm not sure I would say that i am as open to the idea of USC as I was before the convo.

I think it's important to remember that the fact that just because a school has accepted us does not guarantee that they really want us that much. I don't mean any offense by this, but I'd like to play devil's advocate here.

Negotiating for scholarships is standard now, but if you really think about it, mentioning our offers from other schools is rather passive aggressive in itself. It's like "Hey, I want to go to your school and I applied and got in and everything, but here are a few other school I got into and their offers." We've become enthralled with this satisfaction of being able to negotiate and make schools fight for us. Getting into the school and even getting into higher ranked schools doesn't really entitle us to anything, and pointing straight to employment data to compare schools is akin to adcoms throwing out our personal statements/rec letters completely and looking only at GPA/LSAT. To be frank, if their initial offer was only 30k, then they probably don't care for you all that much. I've gotten good offers from higher ranked schools and then waitlisted from lower ranked ones, and I would argue that there's still some basis in how well they think we'll fit in with the culture of the school and how well our interest align with the school's strengths.

On an unrelated note, having gone to USC for undergrad, the alumni network is top notch and really does open a lot of doors (but mostly only in LA). Regardless of what rankings say, given equal cost, I would choose USC over UCLA in a heartbeat. My experiences with the Gould adcoms have all been positive, and I'm really sorry you had such a bad experience with them.

afcart wrote:I think it's important to remember that the fact that just because a school has accepted us does not guarantee that they really want us that much. I don't mean any offense by this, but I'd like to play devil's advocate here.

Negotiating for scholarships is standard now, but if you really think about it, mentioning our offers from other schools is rather passive aggressive in itself. It's like "Hey, I want to go to your school and I applied and got in and everything, but here are a few other school I got into and their offers." We've become enthralled with this satisfaction of being able to negotiate and make schools fight for us. Getting into the school and even getting into higher ranked schools doesn't really entitle us to anything, and pointing straight to employment data to compare schools is akin to adcoms throwing out our personal statements/rec letters completely and looking only at GPA/LSAT. To be frank, if their initial offer was only 30k, then they probably don't care for you all that much. I've gotten good offers from higher ranked schools and then waitlisted from lower ranked ones, and I would argue that there's still some basis in how well they think we'll fit in with the culture of the school and how well our interest align with the school's strengths.

On an unrelated note, having gone to USC for undergrad, the alumni network is top notch and really does open a lot of doors (but mostly only in LA). Regardless of what rankings say, given equal cost, I would choose USC over UCLA in a heartbeat. My experiences with the Gould adcoms have all been positive, and I'm really sorry you had such a bad experience with them.

What he/she did was completely reasonable.. i think he should have just mentioned georgetown though, mentioned some of those others schools even if they are cheaper was a waste.

I'm really sorry that you had a bad experience, I'm sure it wasn't a good feeling especially since you had such different expectations. But I have to say I too had a totally different situation with them. They offered me something like 135 k initially and after having a super friendly and short conversation with them they not only offered me a full ride, they offered to put me in touch with top partners from various Cali firms.

teenybean wrote:I'm really sorry that you had a bad experience, I'm sure it wasn't a good feeling especially since you had such different expectations. But I have to say I too had a totally different situation with them. They offered me something like 135 k initially and after having a super friendly and short conversation with them they not only offered me a full ride, they offered to put me in touch with top partners from various Cali firms.

Had the exact same trajectory. I'm still unsure that USC makes the most sense for me, but it's still an option to this point and I had a pleasant couple of experiences with them.

OP, I'm wondering if emailing offered you an opportunity to express yourself better. Of course, without hearing both sides of a conversation I can't declare that the lady WASN'T a b, but I am surprised by this based on my experience.

afcart wrote: Negotiating for scholarships is standard now, but if you really think about it, mentioning our offers from other schools is rather passive aggressive in itself. It's like "Hey, I want to go to your school and I applied and got in and everything, but here are a few other school I got into and their offers." We've become enthralled with this satisfaction of being able to negotiate and make schools fight for us. Getting into the school and even getting into higher ranked schools doesn't really entitle us to anything, and pointing straight to employment data to compare schools is akin to adcoms throwing out our personal statements/rec letters completely and looking only at GPA/LSAT.

You sound like an adcom. I wonder if you would still have this attitude in three years if you can't find a job and have a monthly student loan payment that's twice your pretax income at Starbucks. Enthralled with the satisfaction? Give me a break. It's about looking out for yourself and making the right business decision. The legal job market is still the worst in history and yet law schools keep pumping up tuition so they can write bigger and bigger numbers on the blank checks they get from the Dept. of Ed. If you want to live inside of a law school brochure fantasy world where it's all about "fit", and negotiation in the face of the rising cost and falling utility of the JD is just an exercise in ego gratification, then be my guest. But for those of us that live in the real world, negotiation is the only tool we have to navigate this financial minefield.

.

NoDayButToday wrote:

Savage13 wrote:

afcart wrote: Negotiating for scholarships is standard now, but if you really think about it, mentioning our offers from other schools is rather passive aggressive in itself. It's like "Hey, I want to go to your school and I applied and got in and everything, but here are a few other school I got into and their offers." We've become enthralled with this satisfaction of being able to negotiate and make schools fight for us. Getting into the school and even getting into higher ranked schools doesn't really entitle us to anything, and pointing straight to employment data to compare schools is akin to adcoms throwing out our personal statements/rec letters completely and looking only at GPA/LSAT.

You sound like an adcom. I wonder if you would still have this attitude in three years if you can't find a job and have a monthly student loan payment that's twice your pretax income at Starbucks. Enthralled with the satisfaction? Give me a break. It's about looking out for yourself and making the right business decision. The legal job market is still the worst in history and yet law schools keep pumping up tuition so they can write bigger and bigger numbers on the blank checks they get from the Dept. of Ed. If you want to live inside of a law school brochure fantasy world where it's all about "fit", and negotiation in the face of the rising cost and falling utility of the JD is just an exercise in ego gratification, then be my guest. But for those of us that live in the real world, negotiation is the only tool we have to navigate this financial minefield.

+1

Preach!

+2...I'm sure we all wished we could make our decision based on "fit" but choosing a law school is a pragmatic business decision, so negotiation is fair, and actually...Unless you have a complete full ride, it seems silly not to ask for more money...let's see 1 email could = saving 100s, 1000s, if not 10000s of dollars once you include accrued/compounded interest.

Snowboarder1588 wrote:

NoDayButToday wrote:

Savage13 wrote:

afcart wrote: Negotiating for scholarships is standard now, but if you really think about it, mentioning our offers from other schools is rather passive aggressive in itself. It's like "Hey, I want to go to your school and I applied and got in and everything, but here are a few other school I got into and their offers." We've become enthralled with this satisfaction of being able to negotiate and make schools fight for us. Getting into the school and even getting into higher ranked schools doesn't really entitle us to anything, and pointing straight to employment data to compare schools is akin to adcoms throwing out our personal statements/rec letters completely and looking only at GPA/LSAT.

You sound like an adcom. I wonder if you would still have this attitude in three years if you can't find a job and have a monthly student loan payment that's twice your pretax income at Starbucks. Enthralled with the satisfaction? Give me a break. It's about looking out for yourself and making the right business decision. The legal job market is still the worst in history and yet law schools keep pumping up tuition so they can write bigger and bigger numbers on the blank checks they get from the Dept. of Ed. If you want to live inside of a law school brochure fantasy world where it's all about "fit", and negotiation in the face of the rising cost and falling utility of the JD is just an exercise in ego gratification, then be my guest. But for those of us that live in the real world, negotiation is the only tool we have to navigate this financial minefield.

+1

Preach!

+2...I'm sure we all wished we could make our decision based on "fit" but choosing a law school is a pragmatic business decision, so negotiation is fair, and actually...Unless you have a complete full ride, it seems silly not to ask for more money...let's see 1 email could = saving 100s, 1000s, if not 10000s of dollars once you include accrued/compounded interest.

I never said there was anything wrong about negotiating =/ There is absolutely no doubt that everyone should. Just wanted to come up with some possible explanations for why the woman she spoke to might have been aggressive, and I stand by my point that we shouldn't expect a scholarship increase just because we got into a higher ranked school.

I was the one that you replied to in a PM. Thank you for the lengthy reply, by the way. Like a few people have posted here, I had a positive experience with Adm./Fin. Aid negotiating my scholarship. It occasionally just seems like the luck of draw, honestly. It is a new, weird line that both potential matriculators and admissions officers have to carefully tread through.

Interesting they are offering full rides, because in the past they only offered one(the rothman) and maybe one or two more although it wasn't every year like the rothman.

Based on this OP I think you should rule out litigation.

First of all let me just restate that I do not have any angry feelings towards USC because of this convo and I just want to reiterate that the lady was never blatantly rude towards me or unprofessional, it was simply that the tone of the entire conversation was so in opposition to the overwhelming trend towards cordiality and accommodation that every law school seemed to employ when dealing with prospective students. In fact I probably wouldn't have made this post if it wasn't for the last comment that I must say was a little rude when I asked her (and I find it to be a very legitimate question) why someone should choose for example USC over UCLA considering the ONLY benefit she could list over Georgetown was the Cali locality (where I ideally want to work upon graduation). Her answer was "well I think its important to remember that you haven't been admitted to UCLA". I took that as a bit blunt and tactless.
The Lesson I hope people produce from this is not one of hating on USC, its on college scholarship negotiation in general in that people should be conscious of their relative worth in the eyes of the law school when negotiating scholarships. i.e.

teenybean wrote:I'm really sorry that you had a bad experience, I'm sure it wasn't a good feeling especially since you had such different expectations. But I have to say I too had a totally different situation with them. They offered me something like 135 k initially and after having a super friendly and short conversation with them they not only offered me a full ride, they offered to put me in touch with top partners from various Cali firms.

This exactly proves my point, from the start she was not very open towards my request and it was made obvious by her tone which once again, is perfectly fine, thats what the purpose of me writing was for, to analyze my worth to them. But clearly with you the representative was super friendly and never once was hassling you about your decision making abilities and whatnot because they didnt' want to run the risk of offending you considering your such a hot ticket candidate. Me on the other hand I completely acknowledged that my admission was fortunate (3.17 gpa 164 lsat, AA-URM). Its just that every person gets the same generic messages saying how much they value you which really messes with your head as an applicant who then figures out that in reality, they don't hold you in very high regard when compared with other applicants.

And on that tangent, to the guy who said he was being a devil's advocate but then was hated on (lol) I actually agree with much of what your saying, I am very aware that my worth is relative in their eyes but thats the thing, they're entire target candidate group is aspiring lawyers, students who you know have spent hours in preparation for the scholarship negotiation conversation (i had a page of notes with statistics on it during the convo to use) and will analyze every tone, phrase and implication from the conversation because thats how we are taught to think. But what you said doesn't make much sense when you factor in that I specifically never used a single stat other than USC being 4th highest in cost (which I don't care how you look at it in a conversation BASED on one's inability to finance tuition, bringing up USC's absurd and seemingly esoteric sticker price is entirely justified). To be honest She seemed offended off the bat that a 3.17 student was requesting MORE than 30k. The part that makes me want to start off on a rant though is that she seemed offended because I was "Shopping around". I'm sorry but USC is a fucking joke when it comes to justifying its pricing, it has only declined in rankings annually and its employment statistics are horrifying to say the least and as the conversation went on I noticed that she had literally no answer for this but didn't hesitate to get offended by me bringing it up. It became obvious that the only reason they can charge so much is because of the huge falloff that exists in the rankings for California schools after USC. So when she said "well you haven't been accepted to UCLA yet" I realize now that was her legitimate answer, you wouldn't choose UCLA over USC, you only would if you didnt' get in.

cron1834 wrote:
OP, I'm wondering if emailing offered you an opportunity to express yourself better. Of course, without hearing both sides of a conversation I can't declare that the lady WASN'T a b, but I am surprised by this based on my experience.

Once again I want to say, the lady was not a 'B'. I had the conversation at first over email though and she then requested that I call her to discuss it a few days later. I wish I could have stayed over email, it probably would have been more cordial.

Hutz_and_Goodman wrote:Based on this OP I think you should rule out litigation.

Fuck you lol

In summary, I agree with the critics here, I realize you shouldn't go in thinking they owe you Ship money and they also have every right to say that we aren't competitive enough to merit receiving more. But for a lady whose JOB it is to discuss these matters with students it seems like she would be a little more understanding that students aren't just going to throw Harvard money at USC without first doing some research. I'm not "shopping around" the last thing she said in our convo was that I should really come and visit the campus because "If you were going to buy a car or house you wouldn't buy it without first checking it out first hand". If this is her opinion it is more than a little hypocritical for her to be offended that I try to get the best deal I can for one of the largest and most influential decisions I will ever make in my entire life, financial or other. On top of this just the fact that her final selling point was to come and see the school after we had just discussed all these shortcomings and points of hesitance as if a cool campus (which i don't doubt there is any better campus in the country coolness wise) will suddenly quiet my concerns over the extra tens of thousands USC costs. It just felt even more like BS after that so like I said, I didn't go away angry at USC more just suspect about its actual worth and unless i'm mistaken, that is probably not the impression USC's dean would want to leave with a potential student, no matter how little relative worth they may have in their eyes once admitted.

If she simply would have said something along the lines of We appreciate your request and will try to give you more funds but funds are limited and we'll see what we can do I would have no problem. This wouldn't have been false and even if it is partly BS in its generic answer, its at least less hostile than the BS she gave me (which really is what our entire conversation consisted of, BS).

Sorry for the length but might as well expand completely instead of unintentionally deterring people from what still is a great school like USC. My comments are more on Scholly negotiating in general and of my experience with a particular person who represents Scholly negotiators. I know I would have found it helpful to read post before my convo with her.

There are people with 3.1 GPA going to hastings,loyola,santa clara, pepp, irvine at the sticker price in the state of california(all schools much worse than USC), so it caught her off guard when you asked for more. That's basically it, but you should ask for more. You got nothing to lose.

.

xJD2017x wrote:There are people with 3.1 GPA going to hastings,loyola,santa clara, pepp, irvine at the sticker price in the state of california(all schools much worse than USC), so it caught her off guard when you asked for more. That's basically it, but you should ask for more. You got nothing to lose.

Irvine actually has better employment prospects if you consider clerkships. UCI at 18% clerkship rate, USC at 4%. USC at ~60% employment less school-funded, UCI at ~64%. Biglaw is 30% USC vs. 15% Irvine, but when you consider that federal clerks have biglaw in the bag, Irvine effectively ties on that. That said, UCI is in a downward trajectory, but then, so is USC.

I actually had a fairly similar experience, but I'm more disappointed rather than bothered. I really like USC as a school and I legitimately hope they succeed, but refusing to budge on scholarship offers is a surefire way to see medians drop again.

NorCalLaw wrote:

xJD2017x wrote:There are people with 3.1 GPA going to hastings,loyola,santa clara, pepp, irvine at the sticker price in the state of california(all schools much worse than USC), so it caught her off guard when you asked for more. That's basically it, but you should ask for more. You got nothing to lose.

Irvine actually has better employment prospects if you consider clerkships. UCI at 18% clerkship rate, USC at 4%. USC at ~60% employment less school-funded, UCI at ~64%. Biglaw is 30% USC vs. 15% Irvine, but when you consider that federal clerks have biglaw in the bag, Irvine effectively ties on that. That said, UCI is in a downward trajectory, but then, so is USC.

They had much smaller class size which helped this year(even this year,USC much higher median salary though) and will to a lesser extent going forward, but USC>>>>>>UCI. No serious individual would dispute that ,especially this year when Irvine isn't even giving much money.

twenty wrote:I actually had a fairly similar experience, but I'm more disappointed rather than bothered. I really like USC as a school and I legitimately hope they succeed, but refusing to budge on scholarship offers is a surefire way to see medians drop again.

A couple of people here said they got bumped to full rides, I haven't even heard yet. There would have to be another substantial decrease of applicants for the medians to go from 167 to 165 in two years.

xJD2017x wrote:

NorCalLaw wrote:

xJD2017x wrote:There are people with 3.1 GPA going to hastings,loyola,santa clara, pepp, irvine at the sticker price in the state of california(all schools much worse than USC), so it caught her off guard when you asked for more. That's basically it, but you should ask for more. You got nothing to lose.

Irvine actually has better employment prospects if you consider clerkships. UCI at 18% clerkship rate, USC at 4%. USC at ~60% employment less school-funded, UCI at ~64%. Biglaw is 30% USC vs. 15% Irvine, but when you consider that federal clerks have biglaw in the bag, Irvine effectively ties on that. That said, UCI is in a downward trajectory, but then, so is USC.

They had much smaller class size which helped this year(even this year,USC much higher median salary though) and will to a lesser extent going forward, but USC>>>>>>UCI. No serious individual would dispute that ,especially this year when Irvine isn't even giving much money.

I dispute it, insofar as I think USC is only marginally better, especially considering instate price. Those salary numbers don't take into account post-clerkship salaries, which usually come with an additional bonus on top of the biglaw $160k.

USC is massively overrated and over-ranked right now.

In a couple of year Irvine will be just another hastings. USC is not over-ranked because there is no one behind them that deserves to be ahead of them based on any serious metric, even the two schools that finished ahead of them this year which are usually behind(Emory,WUSTL) did a much better job gaming the rankings.

NorCalLaw wrote:
USC is massively overrated and over-ranked right now.

lol

The money to pay athletes has to come from somewhere! haha