UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k) Forum
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:39 am
UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Still waiting to hear back from a few schools, but it's looking like UT and USC are the two realistic choices for me. Even though I'm a Texas native, I'm leaning heavily toward USC. My fiancee and I would love to move to California, LA's market is huge, and I likely wouldn't have to move for a summer internship. I likely wouldn't have to move for a job either. We love Austin, but most of the biglaw jobs I'd be gunning for are in Houston or Dallas. Nothing against those cities, but we'd just rather end up in LA.
As things stand now, I'll have to take on the same student loan debt for each school (USC's tuition would be cheaper, cost of living in LA will offset most of the difference in price). I took a look at the NALP reports for both schools, and their employment statistics seem about equal, if not slightly in favor of USC.
So, is there a reason I definitely shouldn't go to USC? I've basically decided to commit to USC, but I thought I'd throw this out there and see if I've overlooked anything.
As things stand now, I'll have to take on the same student loan debt for each school (USC's tuition would be cheaper, cost of living in LA will offset most of the difference in price). I took a look at the NALP reports for both schools, and their employment statistics seem about equal, if not slightly in favor of USC.
So, is there a reason I definitely shouldn't go to USC? I've basically decided to commit to USC, but I thought I'd throw this out there and see if I've overlooked anything.
- KunAgnis
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:41 pm
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Only thing you've "overlooked" is that most people on TLS will tell you big law is not certain and you shouldn't go to law school with only that goal in mind, you should post your stats, and you should consider retaking. Just saying
- KunAgnis
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:41 pm
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Though I should add - if you're deadset on SoCal, have you considered UCLA? Or are USC and UT the most competitive schools you've received acceptances from thus far in the cycle?
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:39 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
lol au contraire. I was anticipating the first response to be someone telling me to retake. Thanks for proving me wrong!KunAgnis wrote:Only thing you've "overlooked" is that most people on TLS will tell you big law is not certain and you shouldn't go to law school with only that goal in mind, you should post your stats, and you should consider retaking. Just saying
I'm pretty set on SoCal, but, also, UT and USC are the best schools that have admitted me thus far. UCLA WL'd me, as did a handful of other schools (UM, UVA, GLUC).
I have no idea how many students UCLA lets in off the WL, but I'm assuming their scholarship award wouldn't be anywhere near USC's if they did admit me. From what I've read, UCLA and USC are basically considered peer schools in SoCal, so I would choose whichever is cheaper if given the option.
-
- Posts: 448
- Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:55 pm
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
What type of job do you want?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- KunAgnis
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:41 pm
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
FWIW, I never got off the UCLA WL either. If we can define "big law" as employers with 100 or more in size (very crude and inaccurate estimate, since there are always exceptions to this if you define big law by the pay scale; but schools publish data in firm size), then USC has 41.1% go to big law (86 out of 209) while UCLA has 36.9% go to big law (132/358). So I do agree that they're similar in terms of outcome.SAdownMAN wrote:lol au contraire. I was anticipating the first response to be someone telling me to retake. Thanks for proving me wrong!KunAgnis wrote:Only thing you've "overlooked" is that most people on TLS will tell you big law is not certain and you shouldn't go to law school with only that goal in mind, you should post your stats, and you should consider retaking. Just saying
I'm pretty set on SoCal, but, also, UT and USC are the best schools that have admitted me thus far. UCLA WL'd me, as did a handful of other schools (UM, UVA, GLUC).
I have no idea how many students UCLA lets in off the WL, but I'm assuming their scholarship award wouldn't be anywhere near USC's if they did admit me. From what I've read, UCLA and USC are basically considered peer schools in SoCal, so I would choose whichever is cheaper if given the option.
As far as USC v UT goes, I think for you USC makes more sense given your desire to stay in LA: you could network during the school year more easily and help dispel employers' doubts about your ties. If you are a Texas native and you go to UT, employers would question your sincerity in wanting to stay in LA.
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:36 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Out of the current options, USC looks like the clear move.
That being said, you are still taking around $200k in debt for a less-than-coin-flip chance of a biglaw /midlaw job.
FYI, only 20% of grads work in an actual "biglaw" (IE Cravath Scale) job from USC.
That being said, you are still taking around $200k in debt for a less-than-coin-flip chance of a biglaw /midlaw job.
FYI, only 20% of grads work in an actual "biglaw" (IE Cravath Scale) job from USC.
-
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:44 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
UT will get you much further in Texas than USC will in LA. UT dominates that sizeable market, doing particularly well in a good economy (and I’m defining doing well as more than just biglaw/fedclerk %).
USC grads, by contrast, face competition from a range of schools. Yes, the LA market is a little bit bigger (it is, right?), but I still think UT in state is a safer bet.
USC grads, by contrast, face competition from a range of schools. Yes, the LA market is a little bit bigger (it is, right?), but I still think UT in state is a safer bet.
- KunAgnis
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:41 pm
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Mind sharing where you got that statistic from? I agree on your point that it's not 41.1%, but I'm not sure it's 20% either.jsnow212 wrote:Out of the current options, USC looks like the clear move.
That being said, you are still taking around $200k in debt for a less-than-coin-flip chance of a biglaw /midlaw job.
FYI, only 20% of grads work in an actual "biglaw" (IE Cravath Scale) job from USC.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:39 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
I’m not 100 percent sure. I’m coming from a background in journalism, so USC’s Media, Entertainment and Tech Law program is attractive, and could hopefully lead to an IP law job at a sizeable firm in LA.Wubbles wrote:What type of job do you want?
This seems like a reasonable path, in my opinion. 86 of 209 grads (41 percent) in 2017 landed jobs at firms with more than 100 attorneys. And USC is known for entertainment law.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:39 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Honestly, man, that’s one of the issues holding me back from just committing to USC already (that and I’m trying to get more money from a scholarship reconsideration lol). UT Law is basically a golden ticket in Texas. But I dug into the numbers and USC actually places a greater percentage of students in biglaw than UT does (You can check this on Law School Transparency). UT, on the other hand, demolishes USC in fedclerk placement. If I were going public sector or anything like that, UT would be the call for sure.objctnyrhnr wrote:UT will get you much further in Texas than USC will in LA. UT dominates that sizeable market, doing particularly well in a good economy (and I’m defining doing well as more than just biglaw/fedclerk %).
USC grads, by contrast, face competition from a range of schools. Yes, the LA market is a little bit bigger (it is, right?), but I still think UT in state is a safer bet.
But because I’m not eager to end up in Houston or Dallas, and because USC has better biglaw stats than UT, I think I’m willing to risk the more competitive, but larger, market in LA and head out west.
-
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:44 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
UT’s fedclerk placement should tell you something...something more powerful, I think, than even biglaw placement. I have a strong opinion on this because I came about as close as one can go to UT without actually attending. And I got into both good LA schools as well. You drop UT Law in that whole region and it has real impact. You drop USC in LA and it’s like cool. My two cents.SAdownMAN wrote:Honestly, man, that’s one of the issues holding me back from just committing to USC already (that and I’m trying to get more money from a scholarship reconsideration lol). UT Law is basically a golden ticket in Texas. But I dug into the numbers and USC actually places a greater percentage of students in biglaw than UT does (You can check this on Law School Transparency). UT, on the other hand, demolishes USC in fedclerk placement. If I were going public sector or anything like that, UT would be the call for sure.objctnyrhnr wrote:UT will get you much further in Texas than USC will in LA. UT dominates that sizeable market, doing particularly well in a good economy (and I’m defining doing well as more than just biglaw/fedclerk %).
USC grads, by contrast, face competition from a range of schools. Yes, the LA market is a little bit bigger (it is, right?), but I still think UT in state is a safer bet.
But because I’m not eager to end up in Houston or Dallas, and because USC has better biglaw stats than UT, I think I’m willing to risk the more competitive, but larger, market in LA and head out west.
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:36 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
My bad, I read the LST report wrong. It's closer to 32%, which is much better. You can go under salaries and count the blocks that are >=180,000 for a good proxy.KunAgnis wrote:Mind sharing where you got that statistic from? I agree on your point that it's not 41.1%, but I'm not sure it's 20% either.jsnow212 wrote:Out of the current options, USC looks like the clear move.
That being said, you are still taking around $200k in debt for a less-than-coin-flip chance of a biglaw /midlaw job.
FYI, only 20% of grads work in an actual "biglaw" (IE Cravath Scale) job from USC.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:36 am
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
Agree with view that UT>USC in a vacuum. Even from my anecdotal experience with people from Texas, UT is pure gold-standard there. However, it seems OP and his future spouse really prefers LA to Texas.objctnyrhnr wrote:UT’s fedclerk placement should tell you something...something more powerful, I think, than even biglaw placement. I have a strong opinion on this because I came about as close as one can go to UT without actually attending. And I got into both good LA schools as well. You drop UT Law in that whole region and it has real impact. You drop USC in LA and it’s like cool. My two cents.SAdownMAN wrote:Honestly, man, that’s one of the issues holding me back from just committing to USC already (that and I’m trying to get more money from a scholarship reconsideration lol). UT Law is basically a golden ticket in Texas. But I dug into the numbers and USC actually places a greater percentage of students in biglaw than UT does (You can check this on Law School Transparency). UT, on the other hand, demolishes USC in fedclerk placement. If I were going public sector or anything like that, UT would be the call for sure.objctnyrhnr wrote:UT will get you much further in Texas than USC will in LA. UT dominates that sizeable market, doing particularly well in a good economy (and I’m defining doing well as more than just biglaw/fedclerk %).
USC grads, by contrast, face competition from a range of schools. Yes, the LA market is a little bit bigger (it is, right?), but I still think UT in state is a safer bet.
But because I’m not eager to end up in Houston or Dallas, and because USC has better biglaw stats than UT, I think I’m willing to risk the more competitive, but larger, market in LA and head out west.
-
- Posts: 448
- Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:55 pm
Re: UT (in-state) vs. USC (120k)
It is VERY hard go get into entertainment law, especially soft IP law like it seems you want. I would be wary of what you're getting yourself intoSAdownMAN wrote:I’m not 100 percent sure. I’m coming from a background in journalism, so USC’s Media, Entertainment and Tech Law program is attractive, and could hopefully lead to an IP law job at a sizeable firm in LA.Wubbles wrote:What type of job do you want?
This seems like a reasonable path, in my opinion. 86 of 209 grads (41 percent) in 2017 landed jobs at firms with more than 100 attorneys. And USC is known for entertainment law.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login