But the point I'm advocating is that how well you do at your undergrad can depend on where you go. For example, if you could rate students like you could rate Madden players, a 96 math major at Harvard might get a 3.6, while her counterpart in an alternate world who goes to Eastern Michigan gets a 4.0. Don't the adcomms do more to address this?
Otherwise, wouldn't law schools be inadvertently encouraging students to go to fluff undergrad schools and come out four years later having done little work but with a rose-smelling 4.0?
This question might have already been answered, but please forgive me in my dewy newbiedom and answer it again.