2.98/159- want honest opinions! Forum

[Generic20101L]

My GPA isnt that far away from the 25th at a few of my targets. Yes, I know American, Villanova are major reaches, and Im only applying to American bc connections there could give me a chance of catching a hail mary pass lol. The T-20 generally have that rule in terms of 25/75 but the Tier 2 schools vary a lot ( at least according to what i see on LSN).

I got waitlisted at American today and my GPA is more than .5 lower than yours and I have a similar LSAT score. I also haven't made a C since 2001, and did 6 years of military in a very technical, high profile job, and am fluent in a pretty difficult (but relevant) foreign language, but still, I have a sub 2.5 LSAC GPA.

Lawschoolcalculator.com said I had a 9 percent chance at American, I applied literally a week and a half ago, and got waitlisted today. Apply and see, no harm in that.

[JCougar]

Fair enough. Though I think the safe rule is "below both medians = out." Below 25th on either, and not above 75% on the other = out. Assuming you are below the 25% GPA of all of those schools (I didn't check but I think they all hit 3.0) then you'll need to be above their 75% LSAT.

That's an interesting rule. I had never heard that before. Does it matter how above or below the 25th or 75th % you are? Like if you are significantly below the GPA line, do you then need to be significantly above the LSAT line, or should just being above the 75% suffice? I imagine it will vary by schools as well

It does vary by school. Some schools really do seem to use their algorithm published on the LSAC website, which if I am not mistaken, is primarily what LSP is based on, and would require a progressively higher LSAT for a progressively lower GPA, and vice versa. Others seem to have a different strategy not based on their algorithm at all -- the "auto-admit and throw money at applicants at or just above one of either of last year's medians in the hopes of raising your medians" strategy. Unless you have IU-Bloomington's "straight line" strategy where everyone at or above 164 on the LSAT is an auto-admit regardless of other factors. For these schools, LSP will probably be less accurate.

Also, applying in-state somewhere can significantly alter your chances.

[BigA]

Others seem to have a different strategy not based on their algorithm at all -- the "auto-admit and throw money at applicants at or just above one of either of last year's medians in the hopes of raising your medians" strategy.

Thanks for that nugget of info Cougar. I'd like to know more schools that fall into this category more or less, cuz I'll probably want to target them. Anyone know of anymore?

And to the OP, you mentioned having an addendum for your GPA. I think everyone has failed to consider that you might have a legitimate reason for your poor grades that first year. The extent to which schools look over that first year may depend on how compelling your addendum is

[eagles86]

I started off in the wrong major at the wrong school, so I changed that after the first year. Also, the school i went to is known for grade deflation (and for those who think im bs'ing, the ny times did an article on it). My grades had nothing to do with excessive partying lol.

[BigFatPanda]

1 year out of undergrad...2.1 freshman year and 3.4 soph- senior year
- have good recs, internships, addendum explaining the 1st year grades
Chance me and include waitlists..please dont rely on Lawschoolpredictor too much as it seems a bit more pessimstic than it should be.

RU-Newark
RU- Camden
Villanova
Miami
Denver
San Diego
Seton Hall
American
Pittsburgh

I am really really confused as to why people on this board would suggest that you won't be able to go to these schools. With the exception of American (I was waitlisted by American part time two years ago with 3.11/159, 2.8 my first year major in CompSci and 3.3 my senior year maj in Electrical Engineering), you have a good chance at these schools. Just to be safe, apply to their part time program.

[Kiersten1985]

OP, can I ask what you thought people were going to say when you posted this originally? You seem so defensive towards what people are telling you and I can't quite see why.

To the above - a 3.11 is way different than a 2.98.

[BigFatPanda]

OP, can I ask what you thought people were going to say when you posted this originally? You seem so defensive towards what people are telling you and I can't quite see why.

To the above - a 3.11 is way different than a 2.98.

My friend had 2.92/162 and he was admitted to George Mason part time. Granted, he's an EE and he had extensive work history in Intellectual Property, but its really just about the LSAT. Case in point, me: i was rejected by GMU last year because my LSAT didn't make the cut. Given the same GPA, but with a higher LSAT, i made the cut. To schools on OP's list, 159 is reasonable.

Further, OP is defensive because everyone is being offensive (Thats right Columbia_Law, i am talking about you): putting him down like he has no chance at these schools when in fact, his credentials have a reasonable chance. Look, the guy might just end up with a 2.98 at a decent law school and be like an attorney for a medium / small firm or working for the local government. Big deal if he doesn't have a shot at bigLaw. With the Federal govt about to revamp loan repayment programs, OP can pretty much clear himself of any debt in about 10 years if he works for the government or non-profit.

[BigFatPanda]

1 year out of undergrad...2.1 freshman year and 3.4 soph- senior year
- have good recs, internships, addendum explaining the 1st year grades
Chance me and include waitlists..please dont rely on Lawschoolpredictor too much as it seems a bit more pessimstic than it should be.

RU-Newark
RU- Camden
Villanova
Miami
Denver
San Diego
Seton Hall
American
Pittsburgh

eagles86,

As long as your personal statement isn't too bad, I would bet that you get into two of those schools. I think you're in at Seton Hall. Unfortunately, you're probably not even close with American, Villanova, or San Diego. Not even in the ball game. However, it is conceivable that two or three of your choices might admit you. Maybe you should apply to Hofstra, Maine, Gonzaga and Catholic. They're roughly equivalent to some of the schools on your list and you have a decent shot, according to LSP. If you're applying to American, which is out of your reach currently, and Seton Hall (a Catholic school), why not apply to Catholic? It's in DC and it's not ranked much lower than Rutgers-Newark.

Catholic is a really really bad idea, they absolutely refuse to consider anyone [strike]above[/strike] below a 160, given OP's GPA.

[Kiersten1985]

OP, can I ask what you thought people were going to say when you posted this originally? You seem so defensive towards what people are telling you and I can't quite see why.

To the above - a 3.11 is way different than a 2.98.

My friend had 2.92/162 and he was admitted to George Mason part time. Granted, he's an EE and he had extensive work history in Intellectual Property, but its really just about the LSAT. Case in point, me: i was rejected by GMU last year because my LSAT didn't make the cut. Given the same GPA, but with a higher LSAT, i made the cut. To schools on OP's list, 159 is reasonable.

Further, OP is defensive because everyone is being offensive: putting him down like he has no chance at these schools when in fact, his credentials have a reasonable chance. Look, the guy might just end up with a 2.98 at a decent law school and be like an attorney for a medium / small firm or working for the local government. Big deal if he doesn't have a shot at bigLaw. With the Federal govt about to revamp loan repayment programs, OP can pretty much clear himself of any debt in about 10 years if he works for the government or non-profit.

I understand him getting annoyed with people giving answers like "give up on law school" or whatever but the way he's going about arguing with everyone leads me to believe that he created this thread with the hope that people were going to pat him on the back and say "don't worry about that old LSP and records of admissions statistics from the past 5 years! You'll get into all those schools!" I'm not saying he'll be out at all of them, but even he has a "chance" he still doesn't have a "great chance." People are just being honest with him.

And for your friend that's great - but like you said, he was EE with WE and a 160+. It's a totally different story. That's like saying I'll get into Harvard because my friend did. Granted, he had a 178 and cured cancer... Two different situations entirely.

[NYVA311]

"Catholic is a really really bad idea, they absolutely refuse to consider anyone above a 160, given OP's GPA."

What do you mean? They don't accept people below a 160 LSAT? Their median is 158....I think they have to accept a lot of people well below a 160 if they want enough people to deposit. I'm hoping to get into Catholic with a few points lower than OP's LSAT and a 3.66 GPA.

[BigFatPanda]

"Catholic is a really really bad idea, they absolutely refuse to consider anyone above a 160, given OP's GPA."

What do you mean? They don't accept people below a 160 LSAT? Their median is 158....I think they have to accept a lot of people well below a 160 if they want enough people to deposit. I'm hoping to get into Catholic with a few points lower than OP's LSAT and a 3.66 GPA.

Your GPA is good so don't worry.

[NYVA311]

"Catholic is a really really bad idea, they absolutely refuse to consider anyone above a 160, given OP's GPA."

What do you mean? They don't accept people below a 160 LSAT? Their median is 158....I think they have to accept a lot of people well below a 160 if they want enough people to deposit. I'm hoping to get into Catholic with a few points lower than OP's LSAT and a 3.66 GPA.

Your GPA is good so don't worry.

Ah, okay. Was getting scared for a second. Yeah, with a GPA below their 25%, OP would likely need an LSAT around their 75%. Makes sense.

[BigFatPanda]

OP, can I ask what you thought people were going to say when you posted this originally? You seem so defensive towards what people are telling you and I can't quite see why.

To the above - a 3.11 is way different than a 2.98.

My friend had 2.92/162 and he was admitted to George Mason part time. Granted, he's an EE and he had extensive work history in Intellectual Property, but its really just about the LSAT. Case in point, me: i was rejected by GMU last year because my LSAT didn't make the cut. Given the same GPA, but with a higher LSAT, i made the cut. To schools on OP's list, 159 is reasonable.

Further, OP is defensive because everyone is being offensive: putting him down like he has no chance at these schools when in fact, his credentials have a reasonable chance. Look, the guy might just end up with a 2.98 at a decent law school and be like an attorney for a medium / small firm or working for the local government. Big deal if he doesn't have a shot at bigLaw. With the Federal govt about to revamp loan repayment programs, OP can pretty much clear himself of any debt in about 10 years if he works for the government or non-profit.

I understand him getting annoyed with people giving answers like "give up on law school" or whatever but the way he's going about arguing with everyone leads me to believe that he created this thread with the hope that people were going to pat him on the back and say "don't worry about that old LSP and records of admissions statistics from the past 5 years! You'll get into all those schools!" I'm not saying he'll be out at all of them, but even he has a "chance" he still doesn't have a "great chance." People are just being honest with him.

And for your friend that's great - but like you said, he was EE with WE and a 160+. It's a totally different story. That's like saying I'll get into Harvard because my friend did. Granted, he had a 178 and cured cancer... Two different situations entirely.

I pointed to the case of my friend and me to make the point that as long as one makes the LSAT cut at a school, that school will most likely overlook whatever undesirability one may have. In my case, a multiple LSAT taker. In OP's case, his GPA.

And i think you're probably on the point with respect to OP's intention: he's probably looking for a pat on the back; and given the list of schools he listed, he is reasonable to expect such (its not like he's applying to Berkeley, UVA, or something). The fact is, with so many people applying to law school, we all need someone to pat each other on the back, to affirm the choices we made when the choices are reasonable.

[BigFatPanda]

"Catholic is a really really bad idea, they absolutely refuse to consider anyone above a 160, given OP's GPA."

What do you mean? They don't accept people below a 160 LSAT? Their median is 158....I think they have to accept a lot of people well below a 160 if they want enough people to deposit. I'm hoping to get into Catholic with a few points lower than OP's LSAT and a 3.66 GPA.

Your GPA is good so don't worry.

Ah, okay. Was getting scared for a second. Yeah, with a GPA below their 25%, OP would likely need an LSAT around their 75%. Makes sense.

For some season, Catholic is expensive and i really doubt they would throw money at you (my opinion). Given your credentials, you should seriously consider American ($5k cheaper in tuition) and if you're Virginia resident, GMU can be a steal for you (PT 1st year and transfer to FT 2L?).

[eagles86]

I dont even want to work in biglaw. Sure the pay is great but you basically lose the rest of your life lol. I think the general consensus is "we'll see" as its really impossible to tell what will happen at the places i have around a 50/ 50 shot. I could see a scenario where im waitlisted and then get in a couple..which for me is as good as an acceptance. I dont give a ___ about ppl like columbia law...typical type A personality jerk.

[JCougar]

Others seem to have a different strategy not based on their algorithm at all -- the "auto-admit and throw money at applicants at or just above one of either of last year's medians in the hopes of raising your medians" strategy.

Thanks for that nugget of info Cougar. I'd like to know more schools that fall into this category more or less, cuz I'll probably want to target them. Anyone know of anymore?

And to the OP, you mentioned having an addendum for your GPA. I think everyone has failed to consider that you might have a legitimate reason for your poor grades that first year. The extent to which schools look over that first year may depend on how compelling your addendum is

I definitely don't have an all-inclusive list, but it seems to me that a lot of schools in the Midwest tend to do this. WUSTL, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana (blatantly), Case Western, DePaul, Chicago-Kent, Loyola, all have taken people with sub-3.00 GPAs if your LSAT is at or above median. Other schools, such as American, Washington & Lee, Florida State, and Wake Forest have done it as well. Most of those have medians in the 160-167 range, though, so you need to score somewhere in there to get in. Makes sense, though, because scores below that range are a dime a dozen and are significantly less coveted. The best way to figure out whether you're in or not is to simply check out lawschoolnumbers.com and look up each individual school and their admissions graphs over the last 2 years.

[lawman335]

to be honest your score is very less i suggest you to retake the test, try to get above 170 that will be a better score........

[TTTennis]

to be honest your score is very less i suggest you to retake the test, try to get above 170 that will be a better score........

WOW lawman, your insight is spectacular. How in the world did you become so smart?! With that kind of logical reasoning you're going to be the best lawyer that ever lived! What kind of retarded advice is that? Of course a 170 would be a better score and don't you think if the OP could, he/she would get a 170? No, you're right, I'm sure the OP was thinking that he/she should score below the 90th + percentile just so his/her chances of being accepted to law school would be a little more difficult (because the OP loves a challenge).

In fact, you know what, I think the new advice for everyone of tls should be, "if below a 180, retake!" Honestly, we are all so intelligent that we could easily score that it we tried hard enough...right? And we should all go to YHS...the rest of the law schools are for chumps and losers that can't score a 180! haha

[vanwinkle]

I think the new advice for everyone of tls should be, "if below a 180, retake!"

Change it to 170 and that's his actual advice. He's been going around and posting his retake advice on just about every recent thread where someone asks for advice with a less-than-170 LSAT.

[eagles86]

to be honest your score is very less i suggest you to retake the test, try to get above 170 that will be a better score........

Thanks so much! You're such a genius, we cant we all score in the 98th percentile or better!

[eagles86]

I got into Miami..just had to prove the naysayers wrong. I'm still retaking the lsat in june so whether i attend is another matter. A quick acceptance as a borderline applicant gives me optimism that my personal statement was well above average and stood out.

[Shot007]

Thats really good

If I saw this post earlier I would have said something, because my LSAT is 160 and I have a 2.96, and I've had a pretty good cycle. What people fail to realize is there is a reason these numbers are percentiles....if you are 50th percentile there are obviously 50% of the people below you, and people fail to remember that there are actually people who get accepted below the 25th or 50th percentiles..

[eagles86]

I also have very strong trends and my freshman year was a clear outlier. What schools did you get into?

[eagles86]

Also got rejected from Penn State...very GPA heavy school so that hurt me. Also, out of state

[acoon624]

I have a 157/3.02 in a double major and got rejected from Miami...just to give you a reference.