Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 165 / 3.76  (Read 1370 times)

kman999

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
165 / 3.76
« on: July 08, 2009, 01:11:41 PM »
Well here is the same ol story, 165 and a 3.76...looking at top 20ish as my reaches and top 30ish as my targets.


Does this seem about right to everyone?  It seems like this type of score requires a shotgun approach to the top schools.  Any insights on chances/schollies?

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #1 on: July 08, 2009, 01:25:27 PM »
Your reaches and targets sound about right.
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

heartbreaker

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3817
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #2 on: July 08, 2009, 01:28:46 PM »
What geographic areas are you interested in?

kman999

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #3 on: July 08, 2009, 03:19:29 PM »
I am interested in three areas primarily, Chicago, Boston, and California...but essentially would like to be near a larger city.

BC and UCLA look to be my top choices right now, but would love to go UMICH.  Debbating a re-take but not sure if I should.  Practice tests ranges from about 160-170 so right in the middle of that. 

violaboy

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1126
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #4 on: July 08, 2009, 04:32:01 PM »
BC and UCLA look good, but if you want Michigan (or anyplace like it), you need to retake.

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2009, 09:02:02 PM »
BC and UCLA look good, but if you want Michigan (or anyplace like it), you need to retake.

I disagree with this. UCLA would be a reach. BC and schools in that range are more a target.

Chicago, Boston and California all offer excellent venues in which you can retake your LSAT.

Seriously, seriously, really, you don't want to go to any of the law schools you'll get into.  Not now.  "Top third at a T25" won't pass muster anymore.

Personal tale of woe?
 
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #6 on: July 08, 2009, 09:11:33 PM »
I guess the crux of my question really is how do you know that top third won't cut it anymore? Speculating or you know people at your T25 who are in that position? Just trying to figure out if you're fear-mongering or giving legit info from your experience.
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2009, 11:58:45 PM »
'Fear-mongering' isn't the right term; it's more 'bitching.'  In any event, the perception that persists here is that such and such a class rank at such and such school opens up such and such doors.  I'd bet, but don't know, that it's still true to some extent, but that the percentiles have tightened up and that the applicable schools have been narrowed.  My school (T20) missed its generally-reported biglaw cutoff by leaps and bounds this past fall, and has seen its OCI employer count halved for this coming fall.  So, while we won't know for sure for another couple months, it's awfully reasonable to say that this general sense--that 33% (or 25%, or top half, or whatever) at the T25 (or T20, or T30, or whatever) get to work at as big a firm as they'd like--isn't in line with the realities of hiring anymore.

Have a conversation with a partner, or a young associate, or whoever.  The same tune all across the board: getting more selective and paring down the schools they look to.  And as has been hashed out elsewhere, it's not a temporary cost cut, but a desire to change the leveraged expansion structures.

In any event, the sky isn't falling necessarily; I'm just saying that the employment assumptions that law applicants make need to change.

As EM said at ATL: "I've said this before but I'll say it again: I feel really bad for the class of 2011. But the class of 2012 is just not paying attention."

Oh, I've had conversations with both junior associates and senior associates, both at big firms and in house and they've all universally said that I should be fine given my law school.  We'll see if that's the case or not :)  I'm not altogether familiar with the employment info for T20 schools which is why I asked my original question(s).

With regard to the bolded, thanks for the information!  It's nice to see some solid numbers and is probably very helpful to those reading.
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

kman999

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2009, 01:39:45 PM »
Well here is the story...two very different paths that I would like to go down.  One is eventually to Army JAG, the other is practicing energy law, hopefully in some capacity with the Department of Energy. 

Thanks for the input, help, optimism, pessimism, I probably will retake just not quite sure yet.  My other, non-law school option, is Army Officer Candidtate School, so we shall see what happens. 

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: 165 / 3.76
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2009, 03:34:50 PM »
Well here is the story...two very different paths that I would like to go down.  One is eventually to Army JAG, the other is practicing energy law, hopefully in some capacity with the Department of Energy. 

Thanks for the input, help, optimism, pessimism, I probably will retake just not quite sure yet.  My other, non-law school option, is Army Officer Candidtate School, so we shall see what happens. 

Are you already in the military?  Will you be using the GI Bill to pay for law school?  If so, I think that would change some answers here.
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French