UGA (sticker) vs Emory ($$$) -- Need help deciding ASAP Forum

[mebeSajid]

I think everyone has forgotten UGA's recent rankings slide as well. GA law as a whole took a hit during the last rankings cycle. Emory is clearly the better school.

A smaller hit, as UGA's been pretty consistently around the #35 position for a few years, and the rise up to #28 has to be considered a statistical blip. Every school's placement has taken a hit, but Emory's is disproportionate, mostly because of the number of people at the school who want biglaw. And given that our economy looks headed for a double-dip recession, it's unlikely that Emory's placement will improve substantially - there isn't much to indicate that Atlanta law firms consider Emory grads superior to UGA grads when they have the same class rank. It's possible that a firm might go to the top 25% in the class at Emory where they go to top 20% at UGA, but that's an extra ten people. Not exactly large sample sizes there, even if it is true, and the evidence is pretty sparse.

And that doesn't take into account that Emory costs well over $100k more at sticker. That's a lot of student loan payments. I'm saying this as someone who chose UGA over Emory (and Georgetown), so take what I say with a grain of salt. But I also had Emory 1Ls and 2Ls tell me to to go UGA at Admitted Students Day in 2010. If that's not damning, I don't know what is.

[molloyboytoy]

However, If you can afford it, then Emory is the better school by your own admission. Emory is better in every single area of graduate education business, medical etc. In addition, Emory's degree has portability, whereas UGA grads have admitted that there's doesn't. So, if you want to practice in GA fine, if you don't then you're done. I get that you like UGA, I could tell you were a student there by the way opened your post, however, stats talk, if debt isn't a concern then Emory is better (as I said earlier). Also, it's almost a given that they will go back down in the rankings next year, there's way to much money in their program to watch it crash and burn at 35 and beyond.

[mebeSajid]

However, If you can afford it, then Emory is the better school by your own admission. Emory is better in every single area of graduate education business, medical etc. In addition, Emory's degree has portability, whereas UGA grads have admitted that there's doesn't. So, if you want to practice in GA fine, if you don't then you're done. I get that you like UGA, I could tell you were a student there by the way opened your post, however, stats talk, if debt isn't a concern then Emory is better (as I said earlier). Also, it's almost a given that they will go back down in the rankings next year, there's way to much money in their program to watch it crash and burn at 35 and beyond.

Not at all, because the price paid has to factor into a school. I'm a GT grad saying that UGA is better than Emory when price is taken into consideration (and I'm going to need to take a shower after this post - I feel dirty just saying that). Even if debt isn't a concern, the opportunity cost of that extra 100k is prohibitive, because that's money that can be used elsewhere. Like planning for life after law school.

If the schools costs were equal, would I have attended Emory? Probably, simply because Emory has an advantage by being in Atlanta (though the scenery in Athens is much, much, much better - I've spent quite a bit of time on Emory's campus as well so I have a basis for comparison). The two schools have roughly equivalent self-selection in state, and while Emory's out of state placement is better, that appears to be due more to self-selection than anything else, as UGA grads don't want to go out of state. In any case, firms appear to look at similar class ranks when looking at students from the two schools. I've got nine screening interviews for out of state firms lined up already, and this is after missing out on 2-3 job fairs because of scheduling conflicts. It's not like UGA students can't go out of state if they don't want to.

Is Emory better than UGA in some areas of graduate education, like business? Sure, but being better than Terry isn't much of an accomplishment. But when I was looking at B-schools a few years back, I considered Gozuieta a safety school - it's still not worth the price. GT's MBA program is better even when not taking price into account - Emory's an overpriced school for almost everything it does, save medicine. My point isn't that Emory's a crappy school - if the price was equal I would have gone to Emory (and my parents offered to foot the bill for Emory so debt was not a concern). It's just not worth the money you pay.

[molloyboytoy]

Saying that money can be invested elsewhere is completely speculative (job placement after law school/ more variables). In addition, you admitted that the degree has more value by saying that UGA even being in the top 30 was an anomaly, whereas Emory has been there for almost a decade. Also, the other kid who posted about LSAT medians is correct when he states that Emory students have much higher LSAT scores than UGA. To address your last post, there are also many UGA grads that regret there decision to attend UGA law school, as there are at every school save Yale or Harvard for the most part. It's also a unanimous given that an Emory degree has more prestige and portability by having better programs in all areas of graduate study. UGA is basically known mostly for "dawgs" sports and is considered an average school by most people that I've spoken to (whether that's deserved is debatable/ I think it may be underrated). Ultimately, it depends on one's situation which school is the right choice for their situation. However, if you eliminate cost, then Emory is clearly a better school, as the person who created this thread seems to think. Finally, and I think most importantly, Emory is ranked 18th by the nation's top firm recruiters for prospective hiring, whereas UGA didn't place in the top 25 in lieu of schools such as UNC, Iowa, and BC. I think that statistic is pretty telling concerning which school provides the prospective lawyer with better prospects. I just want to say that I LIKE UGA as well, I'm not a hater.

[mebeSajid]

Saying that money can be invested elsewhere is completely speculative (job placement after law school/ more variables).

Not at all - the extra 100k can be used elsewhere, no matter what. That's the very definition of opportunity cost. Granted, that's continuing your assumption that one does actually have the money and is not incurring debt. If one is incurring debt, the opportunity cost is substantially greater.

In addition, you admitted that the degree has more value by saying that UGA even being in the top 30 was an anomaly, whereas Emory has been there for almost a decade. Also, the other kid who posted about LSAT medians is correct when he states that Emory students have much higher LSAT scores than UGA.

Which would make sense only if biglaw employers paid attention to USNWR rankings, and went substantially deeper into Emory's class as a result. There's nothing to indicate that they do. Atlanta biglaw looks at top 15-20 percent from both schools and typically requires LR. Does Emory place better up and down the coast? Yes. But that's a matter of self-selection - UGA grads prefer to stay in Atlanta. UGA grads have been able to find jobs in DC and NY if they've had the grades for it, which is exactly the same situation as Emory. Emory simply has more exposure - it's nothing more than a function of self-selection and not any perception in the intrinsic quality of the school.

To address your last post, there are also many UGA grads that regret there decision to attend UGA law school, as there are at every school save Yale or Harvard for the most part.

Sure, but they have substantially less debt, so it's easier for them to start over, as it were. Which matters a lot, if you're in the bottom third of the class.

It's also a unanimous given that an Emory degree has more prestige and portability by having better programs in all areas of graduate study. UGA is basically known mostly for "dawgs" sports and is considered an average school by most people that I've spoken to (whether that's deserved is debatable/ I think it may be underrated).

It's unclear how much employers care about lay prestige when hiring law school grads - it's unlikely that the effect is substantial. And it's not like having Emory on your resume is going to get you laid.

Ultimately, it depends on one's situation which school is the right choice for their situation. However, if you eliminate cost, then Emory is clearly a better school, as the
person who created this thread seems to think.

Given that law school is a very risky, life altering investment, I'm not sure you can eliminate cost.

Finally, and I think most importantly, Emory is ranked 18th by the nation's top firm recruiters for prospective hiring, whereas UGA didn't place in the top 25 in lieu of schools such as UNC, Iowa, and BC. I think that statistic is pretty telling concerning which school provides the prospective lawyer with better prospects. I just want to say that I LIKE UGA as well, I'm not a hater.

Link? In any case, comparable biglaw placement numbers are pretty telling (especially since UGA does substantially better for Article III clerkships, which amount to a back door into biglaw in any case). I'm of the opinion that how deep into a school's class employers and judges are willing to go is the single biggest indicator of a school's quality, as that is a pretty fair approximation of the risk/reward calculation that a person is making when attending a school. I'm of the opinion that attending Emory at sticker is an insanely risky proposition - it can take two decades for your finances to recover if you don't do well 1L year. The risk is substantially lower at UGA, the reward (a first year biglaw salary, or PI if that's what you're looking for) is identical, and the probability of the reward (which essentially amounts to the difference between two schools) isn't substantial enough to justify the risk.

The OP is in a unique position where his scholarship from Emory reduces the risk to the point where the difference between the two schools in the probability of getting a job might affect his decision, and the decision between living in Atlanta and Athens becomes a factor too. In the OP's position, I probably would have made the same decision, simply because I'd rather live in Atlanta than Athens. But for a person evaluating both schools at sticker and having to choose one or the other, I think the decision to attend Emory is both risky and foolish. And I like Emory as well, and am friends with quite a few Emory Law grads.

[BruceWayne]

I'm sorry, but why are the Emory proponents talking like it's Duke or something (places "well" outside of GA, "much" higher LSAT scores than UGA--as if that matters anyway). This thing about Emory being a "national" school is very misplaced. It's dangerous to tell people that if they attend Emory over UGA they will have great chances at a job outside of Georgia, and therefore attending Emory over UGA--even at sticker is a smart idea. Frankly, the only people at Emory who will be able to take advantage of its "national" placement are those in the top 10--probably top 5 percent of the class. If that's not where you end up I wouldn't bank on getting a biglaw firm job outside of Georgia. And the irony in that is that you would have that option if you landed that high up in the class at UGA too. Unless Emory gives you a BIG scholarship it definitely isn't worth taking over UGA. I hate to say this, but Emory is probably one of the most overrated schools in the nation--UVA/Duke price but with essentially the same placement power as far less expensive schools (UGA, Bama, UNC, etc.). But I thought this was pretty well known; they've received a lot of poor job placement publicity lately. Frankly, the descriptions being given to Emory's placement ITT are really more accurate of Vanderbilt; I'm wondering if people are confusing the two schools.

[molloyboytoy]

First, it is completely speculative to one's personal situation whether you have blank dollars before and after law school. Again, the majority of your argument is based upon your personal opinion instead of statistical evidence (which bears out my points). If you have a 145K job versus 50K etc etc..which school was better? It depends on your personal situation and where you end up. I get it you don't like Emory and it's costly... fine. However, this whole thread is about assumption and your assuming sticker price as I'm talking about the degree as a whole vs. UGA's. Statistics such as job placement numbers, LSAT scores, rankings, public opinion, firm recruiter surveys are bear out placing Emory ahead of UGA, the exact point I was making. In addition, the OP that was the basis of this thread chose Emory ...only further reinforcing my point that Emory is perceived (justly or unjustly) to be a better school which is what I'm saying eliminating any mention of money. If you can afford it, it's better...and in the OP's situation it was better for him. Emory is better than UGA (which isn't really saying much). I mean you admitted it yourself when you stated that UGA even being in the top thirty was an anomaly. Of course, when defending your argument, rankings matter, but when someone assert's Emory's rankings dominance over UGA...they don't. Personally, if Emory was still #22 you and I both know that this conversation wouldn't even be taking place. So you can let out all your Emory frustration now, in case they rebound in the rankings next year. Bottom line, the OP chose Emory PM him and tell him how bad his mistake was if you wish.

[molloyboytoy]

Basically, I think we both can concede that if price is negligible, then Emory is the better choice, as it was for OP. IMO that makes Emory a better school for a people that are out-of-state and anyone in-state that's dealing with a negigible difference in price. That plus the stats people have highlighted make Emory a better school (like I said I think UGA is underrated). I missed the bottom of your post and I apologize. I PM'd you the link about firm rankings. This whole argument depends on whether your situation makes the 100K extra worth it, which is why I think it depends on one's situation and isn't necessarily foolish (especially if one can afford it, like this case where OP didn't mind the extra 45-50K).

[mebeSajid]

First, it is completely speculative to one's personal situation whether you have blank dollars before and after law school.

In English, please? The amount you spend on law school is very relevant to whether it's an intelligent decision to attend a school. To reduce this to the level of the absurd, it's only slightly less stupid to pay for Cooley at sticker if you can afford it than it is to borrow money to attend. Ergo, how much you can afford to pay without taking on debt might be relevant in the abstract, but it's not nearly as relevant when comparing schools.

Again, the majority of your argument is based upon your personal opinion instead of statistical evidence (which bears out my points). If you have a 145K job versus 50K etc etc..which school was better? It depends on your personal situation and where you end up.

That biglaw placement for the two firms is similar. You only need to look at OCI interview criteria to see how deep into a school's class a firm will go (and the top OCI firms typically won't go below top 10% at either school). Most firms will go about the same depth into Emory's class as UGA's class. This is corroborated by biglaw placement numbers earlier in the thread.

I get it you don't like Emory and it's costly... fine. However, this whole thread is about assumption and your assuming sticker price as I'm talking about the degree as a whole vs. UGA's.

Sure, but how much you pay factors into your return on investment on the legal education - one isn't paying for a piece of paper that says Juris Doctorate on it. One is paying for the opportunities it brings. The amount you spend on the degree has to factor into that, as one has to consider student loan payments after getting out of law school if one has to borrow to attend a school. If you're in the enviable position of being able to pay for law school without incurring debt (which would make choosing between Emory and UGA stupid - in that situation you should retake and shoot for the top 14), that amounts to how much money you'll have available for expenses/investments/splurges both during and after law school. I've already said that were the two schools the equivalent price, I would have attended Emory, and not because of USNWR, but because I'd prefer to be in Atlanta. But the expected amount of debt post-graduation is very relevant.

Statistics such as job placement numbers,

No they don't. Emory's biglaw + Article III clerkship numbers are quite similar to UGA's. And this is despite the fact that a larger proportion of UGA's class is interested in PI.

LSAT scores,

Irrelevant. LSAT scores are mildly predictive of ability to get grades 1L year, but not especially so.

rankings, public opinion,

How is this remotely relevant? Lay prestige doesn't count for a whole lot in legal hiring, and the Emory name isn't really prestigious enough to open any kind of doors by itself.

firm recruiter surveys are bear out placing Emory ahead of UGA, the exact point I was making.

Except that you still need to be in the top 15% of your class to even get those firms, who you suggest value Emory over UGA, to even talk to you. And that's true for either school.

In addition, the OP that was the basis of this thread chose Emory ...only further reinforcing my point that Emory is perceived (justly or unjustly) to be a better school which is what I'm saying eliminating any mention of money.

The perception of going to a better school won't pay your student loans if you're stuck at the median.

Emory is better than UGA (which isn't really saying much). I mean you admitted it yourself when you stated that UGA even being in the top thirty was an
anomaly. Of course, when defending your argument, rankings matter, but when someone assert's Emory's rankings dominance over UGA...they don't.

How are year to year fluctuations in the rankings really all that relevant to one's career prospects? It's not like a firm is going to refuse to come to OCI just because Emory dropped to 30 from 22.

That biglaw placement for the two firms is similar? You only need to look at OCI interview criteria to see how deep into a school's class a firm will go. Most firms will go about the same depth into Emory's class as UGA's class. As mentioned earlier in the thread

As I said above - if one can actually pay the 100k out of pocket, then the correct answer is to retake the LSAT and shoot for the likes of Vanderbilt and the lower top 14.

[molloyboytoy]

You stated yourself that if you were in the situation of the OP, you would choose Emory. That means that you set a precedent that if you have between 45-50K extra in debt, you would choose Emory. Also, that makes it clear that if cost was close to the same, such as with in-state tuition and out-of-state tuition Emory would also be chosen by you. Therefore, your argument amounts to only if you are going to have over 50K in debt more or are paying sticker price, then you should choose UGA. That's a small minority of Emory students (and I could agree with you). However, you made my point that if price is negligible, EMORY IS THE BETTER SCHOOL BECAUSE THAT'S VIRTUALLY EVERY STUDENT'S SITUATION EXCEPT A SMALL MINORITY. My original post which you attacked was "Everyone has forgotten UGA's recent rankings slide, Emory is clearly the better school". (talking to OP who agreed with me and chose Emory). You made my exact case for me that it depends on one's situation and I proved statistically that Emory has the edge in every category (see splitting hair's job analysis (he flip-flopped from supporting UGA after he looked at both's job placement). Check mate I won't be responding anymore.

[molloyboytoy]

Basically the case that was made is: if it's economically feasible for you, negligible price or no debt attend Emory, if paying sticker on loans go to UGA. You've pretty much painted your own picture of Emory being the better choice for the OP and the majority of Emory students.

[mebeSajid]

Check mate I won't be responding anymore.

Are you a K->JD 0L? You certainly post like one.

[molloyboytoy]

Saying things like "write in English" accomplish the same thing. You don't have a response so this is your answer. You set the precedent that proved Emory superior by your own assertions about when to go to Emory and not to attend Emory. I don't have time for this stupid garbage. You don't attack my FACT about UGA's ranking slide, we don't have this garbage conversation. I'm done. You can have the last word.

[mebeSajid]

I'm going to do something stupid and respond to this - I'm tired of doing interview research at this point.

You stated yourself that if you were in the situation of the OP, you would choose Emory. That means that you set a precedent that if you have between 45-50K extra in debt, you would choose Emory.

I said I would do so because I don't want to live in Athens. I said so because I have family in Atlanta. Quit misrepresenting what I'm saying - being closer to family would be worth the extra money in debt to me.

Also, that makes it clear that if cost was close to the same, such as with in-state tuition and out-of-state tuition Emory would also be chosen by you. Therefore, your argument amounts to only if you are going to have over 50K in debt more or are paying sticker price, then you should choose UGA.

WTF?

That's a small minority of Emory students (and I could agree with you). However, you made my point that if price is negligible, EMORY IS THE BETTER SCHOOL BECAUSE THAT'S VIRTUALLY EVERY STUDENT'S SITUATION EXCEPT A SMALL MINORITY.

NOT AT ALL BECAUSE I'M TYPING IN CAPS TOO, AND LOOK I'M GOING TO RANDOMLY BOLD SOMETHING AS WELL. Price is not negligible for most students - I said I would have chosen Emory in the OP's situation because of the school's location. Not because of the school's reputation, which among recruiters isn't especially different from UGA's, especially if you want biglaw. You'll still need Latin Honors, you'll still need Law Review. That's not going to change.

You made my exact case for me that it depends on one's situation and I proved statistically that Emory has the edge in every category (see splitting hair's job analysis (he flip-flopped from supporting UGA after he looked at both's job placement). Check mate I won't be responding anymore.

He flip-flopped because he cared about the number of people who reported salary data. He did so based on C/O 2009 data. If you can't figure out what's wrong with using 2009 data, you shouldn't be going to law school.

Basically the case that was made is: if it's economically feasible for you, negligible price or no debt attend Emory, if paying sticker on loans go to UGA. You've pretty much painted your own picture of Emory being the better choice for the OP and the majority of Emory students.

Sheesh - I said if there was a no debt situation, retake and shoot for Vandy/T14. Quit misrepresenting what I say.

[molloyboytoy]

Since you asked for it, you said "I'd make the same decision because I'd rather live in Atlanta". That means it was worth it to you ,for whatever reason to elect to take 50K in debt like the OP to go to Emory.Then your argument that it's insanity to go to Emory at sticker price is severely weakened if it's only 50K more. Further, that means it's not crazy or foolish to do so, if location isn't a crazy factor for subsuming large amounts of debt. You admit that 50k debt for location is plausible even preferrable to you, then what's another 50K for better job opportunities, lay prestige etc (placement numbers/ hiring firms, US news ranking). It makes your argument that sticker price is foolish weak. If you can afford it within your personal parameters of 50K debt (which is the majority of Emory students) then it's not insane or foolish to attend Emory, in fact it can be preferrable. In addition, stats show that Emory has an advantage over UGA in virtually every important area, as I've highlighted a hundred times. So, I believe that my initial argument that Emory is slightly better than UGA is completely logical and I believe that with your position that it's worth 50K debt for location (in some situation) weakens your argument that another 50K for the other intangibles mentioned above is insane. Again I will reiterate that it depends on your personal situation as I've said before and that I personally at sticker price would go to UGA, however, I stand by my view that Emory is a better school, which I've provided numerous stats to substantiate, and that you weakened your argument about the insanity of sticker at Emory by saying 50K debt for location is preferrable in certain situations because it makes it less than insane for someone to pay another 50 for the intangibles I highlighted above. Last post and it was by request.

[molloyboytoy]

I know that you will assert the negligibility or lack of meaning of the intangibles I highlighted, however, location guarantees or posits even less than those intangibles so it would still weaken your argument concerning Emory being an insane proposition at sticker price, which for someone on loans at sticker would be unwise in my view. This is why I think your argument looks less than solid. Again, what it would come down to is statistics which like it or not favor Emory over UGA which is why my initial assertion was that Emory was SLIGHTLY better than UGA.

[molloyboytoy]

excuse me, sub that with clearly (if stats are what dictates) I misquoted myself lol.

[yu9ePUsw]

I just cast the tie vote in favor of UGA's tuition and the "school/life" balance.

Who will win? . . .

[rapstar]

You stated yourself that if you were in the situation of the OP, you would choose Emory. That means that you set a precedent that if you have between 45-50K extra in debt, you would choose Emory. Also, that makes it clear that if cost was close to the same, such as with in-state tuition and out-of-state tuition Emory would also be chosen by you. Therefore, your argument amounts to only if you are going to have over 50K in debt more or are paying sticker price, then you should choose UGA. That's a small minority of Emory students (and I could agree with you). However, you made my point that if price is negligible, EMORY IS THE BETTER SCHOOL BECAUSE THAT'S VIRTUALLY EVERY STUDENT'S SITUATION EXCEPT A SMALL MINORITY. My original post which you attacked was "Everyone has forgotten UGA's recent rankings slide, Emory is clearly the better school". (talking to OP who agreed with me and chose Emory). You made my exact case for me that it depends on one's situation and I proved statistically that Emory has the edge in every category (see splitting hair's job analysis (he flip-flopped from supporting UGA after he looked at both's job placement). Check mate I won't be responding anymore.

Basically the case that was made is: if it's economically feasible for you, negligible price or no debt attend Emory, if paying sticker on loans go to UGA. You've pretty much painted your own picture of Emory being the better choice for the OP and the majority of Emory students.

Saying things like "write in English" accomplish the same thing. You don't have a response so this is your answer. You set the precedent that proved Emory superior by your own assertions about when to go to Emory and not to attend Emory. I don't have time for this stupid garbage. You don't attack my FACT about UGA's ranking slide, we don't have this garbage conversation. I'm done. You can have the last word.

Since you asked for it, you said "I'd make the same decision because I'd rather live in Atlanta". That means it was worth it to you ,for whatever reason to elect to take 50K in debt like the OP to go to Emory.Then your argument that it's insanity to go to Emory at sticker price is severely weakened if it's only 50K more. Further, that means it's not crazy or foolish to do so, if location isn't a crazy factor for subsuming large amounts of debt. You admit that 50k debt for location is plausible even preferrable to you, then what's another 50K for better job opportunities, lay prestige etc (placement numbers/ hiring firms, US news ranking). It makes your argument that sticker price is foolish weak. If you can afford it within your personal parameters of 50K debt (which is the majority of Emory students) then it's not insane or foolish to attend Emory, in fact it can be preferrable. In addition, stats show that Emory has an advantage over UGA in virtually every important area, as I've highlighted a hundred times. So, I believe that my initial argument that Emory is slightly better than UGA is completely logical and I believe that with your position that it's worth 50K debt for location (in some situation) weakens your argument that another 50K for the other intangibles mentioned above is insane. Again I will reiterate that it depends on your personal situation as I've said before and that I personally at sticker price would go to UGA, however, I stand by my view that Emory is a better school, which I've provided numerous stats to substantiate, and that you weakened your argument about the insanity of sticker at Emory by saying 50K debt for location is preferrable in certain situations because it makes it less than insane for someone to pay another 50 for the intangibles I highlighted above. Last post and it was by request.

I know that you will assert the negligibility or lack of meaning of the intangibles I highlighted, however, location guarantees or posits even less than those intangibles so it would still weaken your argument concerning Emory being an insane proposition at sticker price, which for someone on loans at sticker would be unwise in my view. This is why I think your argument looks less than solid. Again, what it would come down to is statistics which like it or not favor Emory over UGA which is why my initial assertion was that Emory was SLIGHTLY better than UGA.

excuse me, sub that with clearly (if stats are what dictates) I misquoted myself lol.

you gotta love a man who keeps his word. i understand though, you're an emory guy...

[splittinghairs]

You made my exact case for me that it depends on one's situation and I proved statistically that Emory has the edge in every category (see splitting hair's job analysis (he flip-flopped from supporting UGA after he looked at both's job placement). Check mate I won't be responding anymore.


He flip-flopped because he cared about the number of people who reported salary data. He did so based on C/O 2009 data. If you can't figure out what's wrong with using 2009 data, you shouldn't be going to law school.

I changed my vote based on OP's situation only. In this situation the difference in total COA is about 30-40K (40k would be more realistic factoring in the slight yet still discernable difference in COL between Athens and Atlanta).

If you look at a shallow comparison of LST for both schools, it seems that Emory is way better than UGA (one might even be inclined to use words such as "Emory has the edge in every category"). It seems that 30% from Emory get >145k while only 8% get >145k. Furthermore, 45% make >75k from Emory while 24% make >85k from UGA.

However, if we compare NLJ 250 + A3 Clerkships we would get 23 + 5 from Emory and 16+10 from UGA. Based on this analysis the difference in getting the top jobs doesnt look too different. So question remains what happens to the 70-75% of the class who strike out in these prestigious employment? Also another question is why does this analysis seem to minimize the difference between Emory and UGA and LST's self-reported data seem to suggest a bigger difference?

Well first, from LST we can surmise that Emory seemed to have placed anywhere from about 10-15% more of their class into the fabled midlaw (those making around 75k-145k) than those of UGA. However, looking more carefully on LST reveals the travesty that more than 30% of Emory grads did not find a full-time JD required job. I have pointed this out before, but I will emphasize this again it is just a sham when a top 30 law school that charges 45k a year in tuition placed less than 70% of its class into full-time, JD required jobs (in plain English this means full-time attorney work), which means that over 30% of the class either worked in part-time, non-legal jobs (think mcdonalds), pursued another degree because obviously their law degree wasnt enough to get them a job or they were unemployed.

Essentially to break it down for both schools

Emory: 28% in great shape (NLJ 250 or A3 clerkship), ~15% in midlaw (making 75k-145k), 20-25% in a combination of small firms, Government (DA's), or PI (PD's), ~30% are fucked over
UGA: 26% in great shape (NLJ 250 and A3 clerkship), ~7.5% in midlaw (85k-130k) 35-40% in small firms, gov or PI, ~20% are fucked (but at least they arent as mired in debt as Emory grads)

Second, the reason the salary breakdown on LST seem to suggest a bigger difference is because over half of Emory's class work outside of GA, whereas only 20-25% of UGA grads work outside of GA. Atlanta is actually considered a secondary market, so its biggest firms like Alston and Bird pay 145k rather than 160k. So when LST shows Emory having 15% making over 160k, it would tend to suggest that those graduates are working outside of GA. In GA you have NLJ 250 firms like Troutman Sanders that pay 130k, so perhaps that is why UGA shows 7.5% making 130k-145k. What this does show is that Emory definitely does place better out of GA such as in NYC or DC than UGA. Whether it might be smarter to just go to Fordham or BC/BU if you want to work outside of GA is another debate, but it is undeniable that Emory has more mobility (no doubt some of this degree portability is attributed to self selection but not all) than UGA.

I will now defend myself for using C/O 2009 employment stats. First and foremost, I cite class of 2009 LST because they are the most recent available stats and yes I know OP will be graduating 5 years after CO of 2009. In addition, I feel that C/O 2009 can be a fair estimate of what the class of 2014 might look like. 2008 was the zenith of pre-crash stats. C/O 2009 did their OCI during 2007 which is basically right before or during the housing market collapse. Full employment stats for 2010 is by all accounts going to be much worse than 2009 (NLJ 250 for 2010 has already giving a clue to this). It will take a few years for us to get back to pre-ITE if we get there at all. Even if you are an optimist and you feel that we will eventually get back to pre-crash, remember that the class of 2014 will do their OCI only a year and a half from right now. So even though C/O 2009 seem ancient, it might just turn out to be similar for the class of 2014.

[Sandro]

Boom. That just happened ^

[mebeSajid]

Since you asked for it, you said "I'd make the same decision because I'd rather live in Atlanta". That means it was worth it to you ,for whatever reason to elect to take 50K in debt like the OP to go to Emory.

WTF? It may have been worth it to me for quality of life considerations. However, it wouldn't have been 50k, since I have family in Atlanta which meant that I wouldn't have had to pay for a place to live. That would have made it more like 20k. If you feel an extra 50k (or even 150k) translates to a better quality of life that you prefer, by all means go ahead - quality of life determinations are highly individualistic and subjective.

Then your argument that it's insanity to go to Emory at sticker price is severely weakened if it's only 50K more. Further, that means it's not crazy or foolish to do so, if location isn't a crazy factor for subsuming large amounts of debt. You admit that 50k debt for location is plausible even preferrable to you, then what's another 50K for better job opportunities, lay prestige etc (placement numbers/ hiring firms, US news ranking). It makes your argument that sticker price is foolish weak. If you can afford it within your personal parameters of 50K debt (which is the majority of Emory students) then it's not insane or foolish to attend Emory, in fact it can be preferrable.

Incoherent blurb from Emory muppet is incoherent, but I'll give it a shot anyway. But since we're doing this: this idea that Emory confers some kind of lay prestige is absurd nonsense. Since you've been unable to understand this, I'm going to go point by point, and use small words so that you can comprehend this.

1. At either school, your class rank will matter much, much more than where you got your degree from. Most employers will have the exact same grade cutoff for either school. Do you understand what this means? It means employers view the schools identically - they do not differentiate between the two schools. This means that a given candidate's grades will determine whether he gets a screening interview, and once you get to the interview your personality is what determines whether or not you get the job.

2. I don't think you understand how debilitating student loan debt is. 100k in debt means you're paying anywhere between 1k and 1.5k per month for 10-15 years. That's a lot of money for a very long time. To put it to you simply: 10 years ago was pre-9/11, and you were in the sixth grade.

3. OCI data on NALP says that UGA will have 110 firms interviewing in 2011, whereas Emory will have 104. This does not include UGA's marked advantage in Article III clerkships, plus small firm type jobs. While NALP admittedly doesn't include things like Emory's NY interview program, Emory's placement in NYC and DC the last few years has been abysmal. One can seriously argue that the opportunities for the two schools are virtually identical. I'd say the only place where an Emory grad might have an advantage is 1L OCI, but that's only because of UGA's retarded 1L grading system. But that affects maybe five people in the entire class at either school, because that's the number of people that have a shot at biglaw jobs 1L year.

4. This rubbish about "lay prestige" has to stop. Emory grads are rightly viewed as pretentious twits in Atlanta - the consulting firm I worked for before law school stopped hiring Emory grads (both undergrad and MBA) because they were so entitled and lazy. We found that Georgia Tech grads were far smarter, much more hard working, and generally more competent. Plus, it's not as if having Emory on your wall is going to get you laid. You're going to a second-rate private school, not Harvard.

In addition, stats show that Emory has an advantage over UGA in virtually every important area, as I've highlighted a hundred times.

Except for judicial clerkships, where UGA is substantially better, and biglaw placement in Atlanta, where UGA is slightly better, and biglaw's grade cutoffs for both schools, which are essentially identical. Those are fairly important areas. And average student debt at graduation.

So, I believe that my initial argument that Emory is slightly better than UGA is completely logical and I believe that with your position that it's worth 50K debt for location (in some situation) weakens your argument that another 50K for the other intangibles mentioned above is insane.

Wait, so you're saying that just because I think it's ok to spend an extra 50k for quality of life considerations that are personal to me that I should also think that it's reasonable to spend another 50k for this mysterious "lay prestige"? Seems like an absurd argument - you haven't substantiated anything else except for a random employer survey where they talked about school reputations, but even that isn't borne out by who employers actually hire.

[mebeSajid]

I will now defend myself for using C/O 2009 employment stats. First and foremost, I cite class of 2009 LST because they are the most recent available stats and yes I know OP will be graduating 5 years after CO of 2009. In addition, I feel that C/O 2009 can be a fair estimate of what the class of 2014 might look like. 2008 was the zenith of pre-crash stats. C/O 2009 did their OCI during 2007 which is basically right before or during the housing market collapse. Full employment stats for 2010 is by all accounts going to be much worse than 2009 (NLJ 250 for 2010 has already giving a clue to this). It will take a few years for us to get back to pre-ITE if we get there at all. Even if you are an optimist and you feel that we will eventually get back to pre-crash, remember that the class of 2014 will do their OCI only a year and a half from right now. So even though C/O 2009 seem ancient, it might just turn out to be similar for the class of 2014.

Finally - an intelligent post in this thread. Albeit one I (somewhat) disagree with. I can understand that it's reasonable to use 2009 data as it's the most recent available, but OCI then was a very different beast - while the housing bubble was an issue then, no one predicted how bad things would get. Lehman collapsed in late-2008, and that's really when all hell broke loose in terms of layoffs and massive no-offers for the class of 2010. I think firms are going to be much, much more cautious about hiring from now on, and we're going to see much smaller class sizes for the next few years with the exception of places like the V10. In any case, given how our political system seems to discourage making pragmatic policy decisions these days, I don't think we'll see the kind of substantial economic growth necessary to cause a return to c/o 2009 hiring levels for a fairly long time.

To summarize, I understand why you've used them, and I'm not calling you out on using them - they're really all you've got to go on, and you understand their limitations. But they're pre-ITE numbers, and they provide a hopelessly distorted picture of what hiring will be like for a while. I'm just calling out Emory muppet for using your opinion as somehow authoritative with little or no understanding of what your opinion is actually based on, and why that opinion is the way it is.

Btw, a couple of caveats - biglaw is now at 135k in Atlanta (except for Paul Hastings and Jones Day, which are at 150k, and Fish/Finnegan, which still do the NYC pay scale). And Atlanta's cost of living is low enough that 135k goes a lot farther here than 160k in NYC does .

[Chippy]

Emory is a disgusting toilet and has terrible employment numbers.

Check this site:
http://emorylawstudent.com/

The upside of emory is that it appears to provide opportunities in the coveted international super spy law practice area:
http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/ilan-gra ... in-powers/

[JFo]

I am an Emory graduate (undergrad, grad) and have worked in the Atlanta legal market at two separate legal entities (vague enough ). If I had wanted to stay in Atlanta/GA for the next 7-10 years, I would have chosen UGA, and feel the OP should too, given his/her goals.

At my mid-level firm (140K starting), I saw more jobs go to UGA grads c/o 2009 than Emory grads, and 3/4 "partners" at the "legal entity" I worked at graduated from UGA.

I've been in Atlanta for 6 years, and the star of UGA in GA as a whole seems to be rising, especially compared to that of Emory, and I say the above as a (relatively...) proud Emory alum.