Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)? Forum
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
The basics:
The schools you are considering
Any t-14 that will have me, UCLA/U$C, UCI(?)
The total Cost of Attendance
Probably sticker
How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings
Loans
Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
Southern California born, raised and schooled
Your general career goals
Moderate material comfort, with the remainder of my happiness afforded by proximity to family, friends, and the beach
Your LSAT/GPA numbers
170/2.9 (B.S., math)
How many times you have taken the LSAT
One time(Oct 2010)
The thread title basically says the rest. Is there any defensible law school route to Southern California for a splitter?
The schools you are considering
Any t-14 that will have me, UCLA/U$C, UCI(?)
The total Cost of Attendance
Probably sticker
How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings
Loans
Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
Southern California born, raised and schooled
Your general career goals
Moderate material comfort, with the remainder of my happiness afforded by proximity to family, friends, and the beach
Your LSAT/GPA numbers
170/2.9 (B.S., math)
How many times you have taken the LSAT
One time(Oct 2010)
The thread title basically says the rest. Is there any defensible law school route to Southern California for a splitter?
- twenty
- Posts: 3189
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
UCLA and USC are very unlikely, UCI is not worth going to at the price you'd have to pay, if they'd take you at all. Unfortunately, being sub-3.0, even ED UVA's going to be a tough sell.slowboat wrote:Any t-14 that will have me, UCLA/U$C, UCI(?)
You have an okay chance at Northwestern with an increased LSAT (read: 173+) Also, this thread should probably be in chances rather than choosing.
Unfortunately for you, none of this:
Is going to happen from NU. So personally, I'd probably skip law school.Your general career goals
Moderate material comfort, with the remainder of my happiness afforded by proximity to family, friends, and the beach
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
This is more of a "what are my chances" than a "choosing a law school" topic, but ill bite.
Unfortunately no, law school is not a very realistic option for you right now in SoCal. USC/UCLA are unlikely to admit you with sub-3.0 -- but even if they did off the WL it would be at sticker, which is unjustifiable. I wouldnt attend UCI for free anyway, and you are out at Cal/SLS. No other law schools in the state are worth consideration if your goal is to be employed as an attorney.
Are you still a senior in college? If so, finish your senior year, get your GPA as high above 3.0 as possible, and see where you stand for Fall 2014. Don't think about applying right now.
If not, do you have work experience post-grad? How many years? That 170 LSAT coupled with a few years of post-grad WE could help you overcome the GPA at Northwestern (this would not be possible coming out directly from UG). However, given your goals, sticker at NU is a tricky bargain. Getting back to CA is already a toss-up, and you'll be looking at $300K in debt. Not a great start for a comfortable, moderately material life.
Rather than law school, what are your options with your math major? What track did you choose, i.e., pure, applied, stats, ect. Do you have any programming utility in ruby/python? Go for software engineering positions then. Given your goals (comfort, beach, friends), taking on superior debt loads for a 30-40% chance at CA biglaw doesnt seem like the most direct route. Consider networking via alumni at your UG for positions in analytics, research, economic consulting (lower tier firms) or just take the CPA exam -- its very learnable for math background.
Best of luck
Unfortunately no, law school is not a very realistic option for you right now in SoCal. USC/UCLA are unlikely to admit you with sub-3.0 -- but even if they did off the WL it would be at sticker, which is unjustifiable. I wouldnt attend UCI for free anyway, and you are out at Cal/SLS. No other law schools in the state are worth consideration if your goal is to be employed as an attorney.
Are you still a senior in college? If so, finish your senior year, get your GPA as high above 3.0 as possible, and see where you stand for Fall 2014. Don't think about applying right now.
If not, do you have work experience post-grad? How many years? That 170 LSAT coupled with a few years of post-grad WE could help you overcome the GPA at Northwestern (this would not be possible coming out directly from UG). However, given your goals, sticker at NU is a tricky bargain. Getting back to CA is already a toss-up, and you'll be looking at $300K in debt. Not a great start for a comfortable, moderately material life.
Rather than law school, what are your options with your math major? What track did you choose, i.e., pure, applied, stats, ect. Do you have any programming utility in ruby/python? Go for software engineering positions then. Given your goals (comfort, beach, friends), taking on superior debt loads for a 30-40% chance at CA biglaw doesnt seem like the most direct route. Consider networking via alumni at your UG for positions in analytics, research, economic consulting (lower tier firms) or just take the CPA exam -- its very learnable for math background.
Best of luck
- TheThriller
- Posts: 2282
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:12 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14
- Robespierre
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 7:02 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
This. Cali is GULC's #3 state for placing its students. And 2.9/170 has a shot in the current environment of declining applications. And OP can consider the part-time program which would allow him to work and limit his debt.TheThriller wrote:OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Yeah, wasn't sure where to put it.jbagelboy wrote:This is more of a "what are my chances" than a "choosing a law school" topic, but ill bite.
Graduated June 2011.jbagelboy wrote:Unfortunately no, law school is not a very realistic option for you right now in SoCal. USC/UCLA are unlikely to admit you with sub-3.0 -- but even if they did off the WL it would be at sticker, which is unjustifiable. I wouldnt attend UCI for free anyway, and you are out at Cal/SLS. No other law schools in the state are worth consideration if your goal is to be employed as an attorney.
Are you still a senior in college? If so, finish your senior year, get your GPA as high above 3.0 as possible, and see where you stand for Fall 2014. Don't think about applying right now.
Limited work experience. Did the LSAT instructor gig briefly after graduation, then some SAT/high school tutoring stuff around my hometown before relocating to the east coast, where I am currently. Been working since December part-time in an office/clerical/bookkeeping type job. Professional aspirations have been shelved as I pursue athletic goals in a non-revenue Olympic sport (rowing). Basically current job allows me to pay for food and shelter, with added benefit of allowing me to sit between training sessions.jbagelboy wrote:If not, do you have work experience post-grad? How many years? That 170 LSAT coupled with a few years of post-grad WE could help you overcome the GPA at Northwestern (this would not be possible coming out directly from UG). However, given your goals, sticker at NU is a tricky bargain. Getting back to CA is already a toss-up, and you'll be looking at $300K in debt. Not a great start for a comfortable, moderately material life.
Pure math, unfortunately. Limited programming utility, took Java in high school, C++ as a general math pre-req in undergrad. Been toying around with Perl and Python online tutorials, know very basic HTML stuff.jbagelboy wrote:Rather than law school, what are your options with your math major? What track did you choose, i.e., pure, applied, stats, ect. Do you have any programming utility in ruby/python? Go for software engineering positions then. Given your goals (comfort, beach, friends), taking on superior debt loads for a 30-40% chance at CA biglaw doesnt seem like the most direct route. Consider networking via alumni at your UG for positions in analytics, research, economic consulting (lower tier firms) or just take the CPA exam -- its very learnable for math background.
I got a close enough sniff at the national team this year to keep me hungry to train for the next year, but I guess I'm facing down the reality of turning 25 next summer and having limited career options. I know that using law school as a panacea for career uncertainty is a terrible reason to go, but I guess I'm trying to get a feel for just how terrible. Initial responses seem to indicate pretty freaking terrible haha.
Thanks, I truly appreciate the advice.jbagelboy wrote:Best of luck
- Tiago Splitter
- Posts: 17148
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
You have a chance to get to Southern California after law school, but going to law school there is almost certainly a non-starter. Which makes the whole situation pretty tricky if you have your heart set on ending up there.
- Doorkeeper
- Posts: 4869
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:25 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
I would retake the October LSAT for a 173+ and aim for GULC, Northwestern, or ED UVA.
Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.
Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.
-
- Posts: 11730
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
If this was me it would be
Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker
Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)
Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker
Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)
-
- Posts: 20063
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Moved to appropriate forum.
- ManoftheHour
- Posts: 3486
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:03 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
What about ND? They sent 10% of their last class to CA. WUSTL only sent about 5-6%.BigZuck wrote:If this was me it would be
Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker
Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)
On that note, how come ND doesn't get as much love from TLS as WUSTL? Looking at LST, ND's stats are superior...at least at first glance.
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Thanks.bk187 wrote:Moved to appropriate forum.
TheThriller wrote:OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14
Robespierre wrote:This. Cali is GULC's #3 state for placing its students. And 2.9/170 has a shot in the current environment of declining applications. And OP can consider the part-time program which would allow him to work and limit his debt.TheThriller wrote:OP has a shot at GULC, which is technically a T14
Is the focus on Georgetown/UVA/NU because those are the only t14 where I might have a shot? Or put another way, do they offer any specific advantages over other lower t14s in getting graduates back to CA? Both Duke and Penn, for example, place a higher percentage than GULC in CA (though taking into consideration GULC huge classes they actually put more people). I know Penn on paper is an auto ding, but I got a WL there from a January app this cycle. Would Penn sticker be a defensible option?Doorkeeper wrote:I would retake the October LSAT for a 173+ and aim for GULC, Northwestern, or ED UVA.
Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.
Also, re: retake, would there be a large enough change to my outcomes to justify the effort of studying for what is far from a sure increase? A 170 puts me at or above the median for all the schools in discussion.
Is there an actual chance of a full ride at WUSTL? More so than an admit to a lower t14?BigZuck wrote:If this was me it would be
Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker
Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)
This might not be substantiated, but the general feeling I get from browsing the forums that for ND vs. WUSTL, the latter is more loosey goosey with money than is the former.ManoftheHour wrote:What about ND? They sent 10% of their last class to CA. WUSTL only sent about 5-6%.BigZuck wrote:If this was me it would be
Don't go to law school>WUSTL full ride>NU sticker
Those are literally the only three options IMO. It's tough to be a CA splitter, good luck (especially with the athletic aspirations, that's really cool)
On that note, how come ND doesn't get as much love from TLS as WUSTL? Looking at LST, ND's stats are superior...at least at first glance.
Yeah, sucks to suck at undergrad.Tiago Splitter wrote:You have a chance to get to Southern California after law school, but going to law school there is almost certainly a non-starter. Which makes the whole situation pretty tricky if you have your heart set on ending up there.
Thanks everyone for the feedback.
-
- Posts: 2166
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
/
Last edited by hoos89 on Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- sublime
- Posts: 17385
- Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
-
- Posts: 11730
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
I don't see Duke or Penn ever happening for that GPA. NU and maybe GULC and UVA are the only T14s that I think would consider a sub-3.0 and I would be very leery of all of those schools at sticker, especially if you're trying to get back to CA.
- bananasplit19
- Posts: 687
- Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.
After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).
So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.
I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.
After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).
So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.
I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.
-
- Posts: 11730
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
About how many Southern CA midlaw jobs are out there and how easy is it for a UCI grad to get them?bananasplit19 wrote:Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.
After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).
So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.
I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.
Anyway if the OP could snag UCI for freesies I think that's a great option.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Makes sense. Where did you end up going, if you don't mind me asking?hoos89 wrote:A lot of WUSTL students are vocal on TLS. But mainly, WUSTL is known for making it rain more than their peers. They pretty much threw a full ride at every 166 LSAT in c/o 2016. So yes...OP does have a chance at a full ride from WUSTL IF that continues. I doubt that is sustainable though, and usually anyone over WUSTL's LSAT median will get in with money, but often less than a full ride. I had the same numbers (2.91/170) in c/o 2015 and got no T14 admissions and $60k from WUSTL ($30k from GWU), but obviously the landscape has changed a bit.ManoftheHour wrote: What about ND? They sent 10% of their last class to CA. WUSTL only sent about 5-6%.
On that note, how come ND doesn't get as much love from TLS as WUSTL? Looking at LST, ND's stats are superior...at least at first glance.
Also, 10% is still a small number. If OP wanted to go to California from either school it would take some hustling.
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Yeah I hear ya on Duke/Penn. I think the Penn WL just gives me a little more optimism about my chances were I to apply earlier/ED, though it's probably misguided.BigZuck wrote:I don't see Duke or Penn ever happening for that GPA. NU and maybe GULC and UVA are the only T14s that I think would consider a sub-3.0 and I would be very leery of all of those schools at sticker, especially if you're trying to get back to CA.
- bananasplit19
- Posts: 687
- Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
I don't have anything except anecdotes about SoCal MidLaw, but those anecdotes come from 2Ls, 3Ls, and recent grads from UCLA, USC, and UCI (yeah, I was one of those 0Ls that bothered everyone; I literally got opinions from every subset from all three schoolsBigZuck wrote:About how many Southern CA midlaw jobs are out there and how easy is it for a UCI grad to get them?bananasplit19 wrote:Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.
After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).
So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.
I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.
Anyway if the OP could snag UCI for freesies I think that's a great option.

One especially frugal friend graduated from UCLA with around $100k in debt, got a MidLaw job (<15 attorney firm) and was out of debt in 21 months. An extreme example, but if you can squeeze your COA to five-digits at graduation, something to consider.
I'm not blindly advocating it (I didn't end up taking that route, after all), just saying that it's something worth exploring if the scholarship money is there!
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
bananasplit19 wrote:Okay, I'll be the UCI shill. If you can get a hefty (and I mean $40k+/yr) scholarship from UCI, that may be a good option. At the very least, it's worth exploring as a possibility.
After all, here's OP's rundown:
- SoCal or bust (UCI has no national footprint, so they're funneling all their kids into LA/OC);
- Not looking for BigLaw (you could easily get "moderate material wealth" from non-BigLaw, assuming you aren't debt-saddled. So, MidLaw, which would be considered a "fail" result under normal TLS circumstances, becomes a "success" result, which dramatically changes the calculus for you);
- Ultra-splitter (most likely eliminating USC/UCLA, although you should apply anyway; some splitters slipped through the cracks this cycle).
So if OP can get that $$$ from UCI (and it's important to note that for OP, I'm only advocating it if you can get near-full tuition), we'd be doing him a disservice by telling him to reject that option out of hand. Even if he gets into a T14, he would be forcing himself to look for BigLaw and BigLaw only, wherever he can get it, and that probably won't be SoCal.
I can assure you it's really not impossible to get that sort of UCI money with those stats. And I can also assure you that UCI COL isn't nearly as high as the doomsayers warn.
That was along the lines of my thinking towards UCI, as well. COA would be further lowered by the ability to commute from home.BigZuck wrote:About how many Southern CA midlaw jobs are out there and how easy is it for a UCI grad to get them?
Anyway if the OP could snag UCI for freesies I think that's a great option.
I'm a bit wary of my ability to get a ton of money from UCI. I've applied there two years in a row now, both times I think literally on the application deadline (my ambivalence towards law school stretches back a-ways). First time I was admitted with 15k/yr, unsuccessfully asked for more money, did not attend. This cycle was a WL. Would applying a third time work against me? ("Not this guy again"). Probably over-thinking it, but something to consider.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- bananasplit19
- Posts: 687
- Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Sorry to hear, OP. For what it's worth, I had a sub-3 GPA, but I also had a couple points on you on the LSAT and some extra WE. Maybe a retake is in order, as others have suggested? It might open up some wallets at T14 (as it did for me) on top of UCI.slowboat wrote:I'm a bit wary of my ability to get a ton of money from UCI. I've applied there two years in a row now, both times I think literally on the application deadline (my ambivalence towards law school stretches back a-ways). First time I was admitted with 15k/yr, unsuccessfully asked for more money, did not attend. This cycle was a WL. Would applying a third time work against me? ("Not this guy again"). Probably over-thinking it, but something to consider.
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
Man I was really hoping retake was not the answer, haha. I'll say again, sucks to suck at undergrad.bananasplit19 wrote:Sorry to hear, OP. For what it's worth, I had a sub-3 GPA, but I also had a couple points on you on the LSAT and some extra WE. Maybe a retake is in order, as others have suggested? It might open up some wallets at T14 (as it did for me) on top of UCI.
Guess I'll start hunting for a retake plan in the LSAT forum (anyone have recommendations?).
-
- Posts: 2166
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
/
Last edited by hoos89 on Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Re: Is SoCal-or-bust a non-starter for a splitter (2.9/170)?
I guess before I commit too much energy to this:
I should confirm that this:slowboat wrote:Man I was really hoping retake was not the answer, haha. I'll say again, sucks to suck at undergrad.
Guess I'll start hunting for a retake plan in the LSAT forum (anyone have recommendations?).
is credited? As in, does a sticker t14 acceptance that a hypothetical 173+ gets me make SoCal-or-bust more tenable?Doorkeeper wrote:I would retake the October LSAT for a 173+ and aim for GULC, Northwestern, or ED UVA.
Anything other than that just isn't worth it if you're aiming specifically for SoCal.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login