Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again  (Read 15565 times)

Netopalis

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
    • AOL Instant Messenger - troop85eagle
    • View Profile
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2009, 06:43:33 PM »
It's also important to note that Case is ranked around 40, I believe - they're far from fourth tier and VERY far from unaccredited.
Mercer University School of Law '12

SamE397

  • Guest
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #31 on: March 07, 2009, 10:15:10 PM »
It's also important to note that Case is ranked around 40, I believe - they're far from fourth tier and VERY far from unaccredited.
It's ranked 63rd but presumably if you were going to a school with an arguably toxic reputation(I.E Cooley, Nova Southern) and doing verily well you could transfer to a t-2 school like Case. From what I understand it's difficult to do but not the pipe dream that transferring to a school like Michigan or Georgetown is.   

Netopalis

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
    • AOL Instant Messenger - troop85eagle
    • View Profile
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #32 on: March 07, 2009, 10:27:21 PM »
Ah, 63, sorry 'bout that, I knew it was somewhere in the middle....Anyway, transfers are a long shot as less than 25 people transfer per school per year on average.  Generally speaking, it's a bad idea to count on a transfer when going to law school, as they rarely work out.  I stand by my earlier assertion - don't go to law school unless you're happy with ending up as a lawyer.
Mercer University School of Law '12

SamE397

  • Guest
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #33 on: March 07, 2009, 10:32:58 PM »
I actually looked over those sites and of the handful of people profiled there were some who went to top schools(UCLA, Yale, Boalt, and Michigan) but there were also people listed who either had unimpressive academic backgrounds or who went to non-elite schools(McGeorge, Case Western, and Chapman).

I don't doubt that becoming a successful sport's agent is very hard but if the profiles listed are any indication of how difficult it is; it doesn't appear to be significantly harder if you're not in a T-25.

Yes, and if you'll also notice, the woman (Diana Day from the Landmark Agency) who went to Chapman was also a high level Division I athlete and Scott Boras is a former professional baseball player -- which is why I qualified my remarks regarding NCAA athletics or professional athletics.  I'm not sure about the others, but they're 2 of the ones I remember off the top of my head.  If the OP has participated in either of the aforementioned, this conversation is a wrap.  However, I suspect he hasn't or else it would have already been mentioned.

But you're right.  It's not impossible to come from a low ranked school to become an agent.  However, the chances are extremely unlikely.  Case Western guy: merit scholar and Law Review.  If that can happen, then more power to the OP.  However, the odds are not in his favor.

Eh granted she was a national champion but even so does women's Water Polo really qualify as 'high level division 1 athletics'? Maybe, I just don't understand very much about water polo but I have a hard time believing that a water polo champion would be substantially more well connected in or knowledgeable about the sport's industry than say a slightly above average sports marketing grad.  

I'm not saying your wrong just that IMO you're doing a poor job selling your case.


SamE397

  • Guest
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #34 on: March 07, 2009, 10:45:06 PM »
Ah, 63, sorry 'bout that, I knew it was somewhere in the middle....Anyway, transfers are a long shot as less than 25 people transfer per school per year on average.  Generally speaking, it's a bad idea to count on a transfer when going to law school, as they rarely work out.  I stand by my earlier assertion - don't go to law school unless you're happy with ending up as a lawyer.
I agree the point was just that getting into Case or a similarly ranked school is hardly impossible. Also, it maybe true that 25 is the average but many schools have hardly any transfer outs and some schools like Cooley have an insanely high number of transfer outs(188).

heartbreaker

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3817
    • View Profile
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #35 on: March 07, 2009, 11:58:18 PM »
I actually looked over those sites and of the handful of people profiled there were some who went to top schools(UCLA, Yale, Boalt, and Michigan) but there were also people listed who either had unimpressive academic backgrounds or who went to non-elite schools(McGeorge, Case Western, and Chapman).

I don't doubt that becoming a successful sport's agent is very hard but if the profiles listed are any indication of how difficult it is; it doesn't appear to be significantly harder if you're not in a T-25.

Yes, and if you'll also notice, the woman (Diana Day from the Landmark Agency) who went to Chapman was also a high level Division I athlete and Scott Boras is a former professional baseball player -- which is why I qualified my remarks regarding NCAA athletics or professional athletics.  I'm not sure about the others, but they're 2 of the ones I remember off the top of my head.  If the OP has participated in either of the aforementioned, this conversation is a wrap.  However, I suspect he hasn't or else it would have already been mentioned.

But you're right.  It's not impossible to come from a low ranked school to become an agent.  However, the chances are extremely unlikely.  Case Western guy: merit scholar and Law Review.  If that can happen, then more power to the OP.  However, the odds are not in his favor.

Eh granted she was a national champion but even so does women's Water Polo really qualify as 'high level division 1 athletics'? Maybe, I just don't understand very much about water polo but I have a hard time believing that a water polo champion would be substantially more well connected in or knowledgeable about the sport's industry than say a slightly above average sports marketing grad.  

I'm not saying your wrong just that IMO you're doing a poor job selling your case.



She went to UCLA. If you know anything about Division I college athletics, you know that athletes have strong connections, even cross sports. (Even at my sports-apathetic UG, all the athletes know each other. There's just a different athletic subculture within the university.) My bet would be that she leveraged those connections she made with her former UCLA athlete network, which is huge.

SamE397

  • Guest
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #36 on: March 08, 2009, 09:23:19 AM »
I actually looked over those sites and of the handful of people profiled there were some who went to top schools(UCLA, Yale, Boalt, and Michigan) but there were also people listed who either had unimpressive academic backgrounds or who went to non-elite schools(McGeorge, Case Western, and Chapman).

I don't doubt that becoming a successful sport's agent is very hard but if the profiles listed are any indication of how difficult it is; it doesn't appear to be significantly harder if you're not in a T-25.

Yes, and if you'll also notice, the woman (Diana Day from the Landmark Agency) who went to Chapman was also a high level Division I athlete and Scott Boras is a former professional baseball player -- which is why I qualified my remarks regarding NCAA athletics or professional athletics.  I'm not sure about the others, but they're 2 of the ones I remember off the top of my head.  If the OP has participated in either of the aforementioned, this conversation is a wrap.  However, I suspect he hasn't or else it would have already been mentioned.

But you're right.  It's not impossible to come from a low ranked school to become an agent.  However, the chances are extremely unlikely.  Case Western guy: merit scholar and Law Review.  If that can happen, then more power to the OP.  However, the odds are not in his favor.

Eh granted she was a national champion but even so does women's Water Polo really qualify as 'high level division 1 athletics'? Maybe, I just don't understand very much about water polo but I have a hard time believing that a water polo champion would be substantially more well connected in or knowledgeable about the sport's industry than say a slightly above average sports marketing grad.  

I'm not saying your wrong just that IMO you're doing a poor job selling your case.



She went to UCLA. If you know anything about Division I college athletics, you know that athletes have strong connections, even cross sports. (Even at my sports-apathetic UG, all the athletes know each other. There's just a different athletic subculture within the university.) My bet would be that she leveraged those connections she made with her former UCLA athlete network, which is huge.
That's all true but what I don't understand though  is this, is it really that unlikely for someone not in athletics to make those same connections? I'm sure it would be more difficult but I have a hard time believing it's as improbable as some people think.

heartbreaker

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3817
    • View Profile
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #37 on: March 08, 2009, 11:08:44 AM »
I actually looked over those sites and of the handful of people profiled there were some who went to top schools(UCLA, Yale, Boalt, and Michigan) but there were also people listed who either had unimpressive academic backgrounds or who went to non-elite schools(McGeorge, Case Western, and Chapman).

I don't doubt that becoming a successful sport's agent is very hard but if the profiles listed are any indication of how difficult it is; it doesn't appear to be significantly harder if you're not in a T-25.

Yes, and if you'll also notice, the woman (Diana Day from the Landmark Agency) who went to Chapman was also a high level Division I athlete and Scott Boras is a former professional baseball player -- which is why I qualified my remarks regarding NCAA athletics or professional athletics.  I'm not sure about the others, but they're 2 of the ones I remember off the top of my head.  If the OP has participated in either of the aforementioned, this conversation is a wrap.  However, I suspect he hasn't or else it would have already been mentioned.

But you're right.  It's not impossible to come from a low ranked school to become an agent.  However, the chances are extremely unlikely.  Case Western guy: merit scholar and Law Review.  If that can happen, then more power to the OP.  However, the odds are not in his favor.

Eh granted she was a national champion but even so does women's Water Polo really qualify as 'high level division 1 athletics'? Maybe, I just don't understand very much about water polo but I have a hard time believing that a water polo champion would be substantially more well connected in or knowledgeable about the sport's industry than say a slightly above average sports marketing grad.  

I'm not saying your wrong just that IMO you're doing a poor job selling your case.



She went to UCLA. If you know anything about Division I college athletics, you know that athletes have strong connections, even cross sports. (Even at my sports-apathetic UG, all the athletes know each other. There's just a different athletic subculture within the university.) My bet would be that she leveraged those connections she made with her former UCLA athlete network, which is huge.
That's all true but what I don't understand though  is this, is it really that unlikely for someone not in athletics to make those same connections? I'm sure it would be more difficult but I have a hard time believing it's as improbable as some people think.


Because it's a field that's all about who you know and how well you can leverage those connections. If you're from a top law school, you leverage your alumni network and your brand name degree and try to angle for a job with one of these agencies. If you're not, where do you plan on getting clients? You have to have some sort of connections with athletes.

I wish people would stop thinking that success is only about how smart you are and how hard you work. Plenty of smart, hard-working people have failed miserably.

dekocards

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
    • stats
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #38 on: March 08, 2009, 11:37:30 AM »
Because it's a field that's all about who you know and how well you can leverage those connections. If you're from a top law school, you leverage your alumni network and your brand name degree and try to angle for a job with one of these agencies. If you're not, where do you plan on getting clients? You have to have some sort of connections with athletes.

I wish people would stop thinking that success is only about how smart you are and how hard you work. Plenty of smart, hard-working people have failed miserably.

She obviously hates America...

Billy Mays here FOREVER!

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2129
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #39 on: March 10, 2009, 05:36:42 PM »
I admire the OP's determination.

That said, from his posts, it seems like he's the kind of kid that just doesn't get it. There's an immaturity there. I can't quite put my finger on it but he seems a bit... off.




Nah theres no immaturity there and Im not a bit....off. Just a determined person that knows what they want to do in life. Of course I know there is always a chance of things not happening how they should. I know in 5 years I could be doing something TOTALLY different. But Im not going to settle for not doing what I truly want if I can help that.

So if law school doesnt work, I have back up plans. Such as getting my masters, taking the weekend seminar with the NFLPA and passing that exam so I can get licensed. Then I work with an agency and go from there. Eventually to the point of going on my own because that is the only way you truly make the good money.

So sorry man your definitely wrong.

I hope when you say "getting your masters" that it is a backup plan to going to law school,not going to a crappy school, having no prospects in your career and then getting your masters. another 30k on top of 150 in loans wouldn't be the best plan