law school grades

[bigs5068]

I love the defense of your school, but I think everybody else is making good points. I will again go to a basketball analogy that I have made before. Going to Harvard is like being 7'0 and going to Boyd is like being 6'6. Both schools are solid and both of those heights are well tall people. However, a 7'0 guy just does not come along that often and there are only so many Harvard Grads. There are plenty of people that graduated from quality schools like Boyd, Hastings, Santa Clara, etc who finish highly. Still Harvard is going to get the upper hand and almost all 7'0 guys get a scholarship somewhere. Not all 7'0 foot guys are good at basketball, . but they will get the first look and still even if they are not good in high school based on POTENTIAL they will get into a school and possibly a scholarship. It doesn't even have to do with the 6'6 guy being better than the 7'0 guy. The 7'0 guy is 7'0 and that is an attention getter there are plenty of 6'6 guys out there, but the 7'0 guy has more potential. There are probably as  many 7'0 guys at any given time as there are Harvard, Stanford, Yale law school grads and most if not all of them will get an offer based on potential that they may or may not live up to.

A couple of professors went to Harvard and well they are SMART. Most people that go there are.  Just as many 7'0 guys are at least decent at basketball. Of course Plenty of 6'6 guys make it and in fact the best player in history Michael Jordan was 6'6 and so is Kobe.  There are plenty of Boyd and Santa Clara alumni that becomes superlawers, but Kobe and the grads from Boyd that really make it WORKED THEIR ASSES OFF to get. Shaq never put in a day of work into basketball in his life, but he is 7'1 and god only knows how much he actually ways and can move. He didn't have to work at it he just was set. Most people that get into Harvard, Stanford etc are in the same boat and are just brilliant.

 I have a friend that I grew up with who went to Stanford for undergrad and for law school and he was always the smartest guy in the room. Granted now we are learning the same thing from the same textbooks, but even with that fact if I was hiring someone I would choose him over me. He is just that much smarter than me what can I say. Of course I would love to litigate case against him one day it would be entertaining and I would give it everything I had and who knows maybe I would win, but if Vegas was going to put odds on the winner of that I would be the underdog.

[kenpostudent]

It is very possible that the average Boyd admit is weaker than the average Harvard grad upon admission, but ends up equal to or stronger than the average Harvard grad at graduation because of a more rigourous legal writing program.

This is hilarious.  You can take all the legal writing courses you want, but there is simply no substitute for hard work, brainpower, and the ability to reason properly.  Most HLS students have, or are capable of utilizing, all three.  HLS doesn't have to put undue emphasis on legal writing because their students are expected to know basic grammatical rules and how to write in an organized manner prior to attending the school.


By the way, don't rely on specialty rankings.  They're a joke and no one takes them seriously.  When you graduate and take on a real case, you'll quickly learn that general knowledge of a particular field of law will rarely give you the "upper hand" on an opponent.  Cases boil down to issues.  Someone that has no general knowledge on a particular area of the law can skip all of the useless knowledge by narrowing down the issues and focusing only on those issues. 

*Caveat - There are some areas of the law where the law is so complex (i.e., bankruptcy) that a general knowledge of the field is virtually required.  "Gaming law", as well as a host of other USNWR "specialties",  do not fall into that category.

I'm glad you find it funny. Because I have represented REAL clients, as a CPA, and worked with both Ivy League grads from both law school and business schools, I think I know what I'm talking about. Coming out of an Ivy League school doesn't make you great. Some of the WORST advice I've every seen given to a client came from a Harvard attorney working on Wall Street. He was a well-educated moron who didn't know his a$$ from a hole in the ground. Of course, this is not indicative of all attorneys who graduate from Ivy League schools. However, I've worked with at least 30 different attorneys from a variety of different schools on a variety of different clients. In my experience, the best did not come from Ivy League or T14 schools.

I'll put my knowledge, experience, and background against any 2L or 3L anywhere on earth! I may not be stronger in every instance but there is no one who is hands down going to mop the floor with me. If you don't believe, I hope I see you in court someday.

I don't believe the ink on your degree defines you. I also don't believe that simply because someone chose to go to a particular school or even because they are smarter in certain respects, that they are better. That is very ignorant. Big used a basketball analogy. I'll use a fighting analogy because I am a fighter. NO ONE thought Matt Sera could beat GSP, who has the much better fighting pedigree. GSP got KTFO. NO ONE gave Buster Douglas a chance against Mike Tyson. Tyson got KTFO. NO ONE gave Ali a chance against Foreman. Foreman got KTFO. Oh, I also love football. The 1972 Dolphins had not one superstar on their defense. Yet, they are still the only team with a truly perfect season. Oh, and the Minnesota Vikings that same year had one of the best defensive front-lines in history. They never one even on Super Bowl with the Purple Peaple Eaters. Pedigree doesn't always matter. Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th Round. Ryan Lief, Todd Marinovich, Tim Couch, Jamarcus Russell, Andre Ware, Tim Tebow, Matt Leinart, and Alex Smith were all first round picks. Every last one of them are busters... not fit to play in the NFL.... all with decent or even great pedigrees.

I could go on and on. But I'll quit. Pedigree can be deceiving.

[john4040]

I'll use a fighting analogy because I am a fighter. NO ONE thought Matt Sera could beat GSP, who has the much better fighting pedigree. GSP got KTFO. NO ONE gave Buster Douglas a chance against Mike Tyson. Tyson got KTFO. NO ONE gave Ali a chance against Foreman. Foreman got KTFO. Oh, I also love football. The 1972 Dolphins had not one superstar on their defense. Yet, they are still the only team with a truly perfect season. Oh, and the Minnesota Vikings that same year had one of the best defensive front-lines in history. They never one even on Super Bowl with the Purple Peaple Eaters. Pedigree doesn't always matter. Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th Round. Ryan Lief, Todd Marinovich, Tim Couch, Jamarcus Russell, Andre Ware, Tim Tebow, Matt Leinart, and Alex Smith were all first round picks. Every last one of them are busters... not fit to play in the NFL.... all with decent or even great pedigrees.

I could go on and on. But I'll quit. Pedigree can be deceiving.

I attacked your assertion that a Boyd graduate "ends up equal to or stronger than the average Harvard grad at graduation because of a more rigourous legal writing program."  I also criticized your reliance on USNWR "specialty rankings."  You give me an anecdotal listing of  extreme outliers to prove that you do not believe that the "ink on your degree defines you." 

There are so many things wrong with this.  You'll have to step up your reading comprehension skills in order to compete with those Harvard grads.  Care to try again?

[marcus-aurelius]

I'll assume that that are by far more hall of famers/all pros from the 1st round of the NFL draft than the 6th round.  I am too lazy to search for evidence.  Let me know if you find that I am wrong.

[smartandunique]

You can be tall, good at basketball and not want to be in the NBA.Some guys are awesome but either go to the wrong school or aren't fortunate enough to know the right people to join the NBA.
What does Harvard's student profile look like? Haw many of their undergrads went to IVY league schools as undergraduates and prep schools before then?
I agree Harvard lawyers are in a better position than most lawyers but that doesn't mean they are better lawyers.

[bigs5068]

My friend went to a huge public high school with me and played basketball he had no pedigree prior to that. He was just really smart I also worked with a guy this summer who went to a public school in Vegas who also went to Stanford. I think the misconception that Harvard and Ivy League Grads are spoiled rich white kids is as unfounded as the people who say all these terrible things about lower ranked schools. The people I have met that go to Stanford and Berkley often did not come from money or anything they were either brilliant or worked their asses off. Of course there are some people that fit the rich, spoiled, white kid stereotype. However, generally speaking that is not the case at least from what I have seen from my friend from Stanford and his friends. They were all pretty well rounded people who just happened to get outstanding SAT/LSAT scores. Good for them.

I always hear people at my school saying I would do so much better than a Stanford Grad in an interview blah blah. All I want to say is probably not many Stanford and Berkley people are quite well rounded that is how they got their in the first place. There are also some very socially awkward people at my less than prestigious school. As Marcus said there are more 1st round picks that are hall of famers than 6th round picks. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick so it CAN and DOES happen, but you can't honestly tell me that if when you were applying that Harvard, Stanford, or Yale was going to let you in that you wouldn't have attended. Tom Brady would have rather been picked number 1 opposed to 224. He made the best of it and Jamarcuss Russel the number one pick did not. That kind of stuff does happen, but again if I was going to bet between a person from Boyd or Harvard having a more successful legal career I would bet on the Harvard Grad. If I was going to bet on two basketball players having a successful NBA career I would choose the guy that played at UNC over a guy that played for Virginia Union. There are players that are busts from UNC and Duke and Ben Wallace went to Virginia Union it happens, but again the odds are somewhat stacked against you. 

Boyd is not Harvard. GGU is not Stanford. The list goes on and on. You can have a successful or awful legal career no matter what school you go to, but Harvard gives you a leg up in most circumstances. Of course there can be some exceptions where a Harvard Degree might actually hurt you, but 98% of the time it is going to help you.

[kenpostudent]

My friend went to a huge public high school with me and played basketball he had no pedigree prior to that. He was just really smart I also worked with a guy this summer who went to a public school in Vegas who also went to Stanford. I think the misconception that Harvard and Ivy League Grads are spoiled rich white kids is as unfounded as the people who say all these terrible things about lower ranked schools. The people I have met that go to Stanford and Berkley often did not come from money or anything they were either brilliant or worked their asses off. Of course there are some people that fit the rich, spoiled, white kid stereotype. However, generally speaking that is not the case at least from what I have seen from my friend from Stanford and his friends. They were all pretty well rounded people who just happened to get outstanding SAT/LSAT scores. Good for them.

I always hear people at my school saying I would do so much better than a Stanford Grad in an interview blah blah. All I want to say is probably not many Stanford and Berkley people are quite well rounded that is how they got their in the first place. There are also some very socially awkward people at my less than prestigious school. As Marcus said there are more 1st round picks that are hall of famers than 6th round picks. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick so it CAN and DOES happen, but you can't honestly tell me that if when you were applying that Harvard, Stanford, or Yale was going to let you in that you wouldn't have attended. Tom Brady would have rather been picked number 1 opposed to 224. He made the best of it and Jamarcuss Russel the number one pick did not. That kind of stuff does happen, but again if I was going to bet between a person from Boyd or Harvard having a more successful legal career I would bet on the Harvard Grad. If I was going to bet on two basketball players having a successful NBA career I would choose the guy that played at UNC over a guy that played for Virginia Union. There are players that are busts from UNC and Duke and Ben Wallace went to Virginia Union it happens, but again the odds are somewhat stacked against you. 

Boyd is not Harvard. GGU is not Stanford. The list goes on and on. You can have a successful or awful legal career no matter what school you go to, but Harvard gives you a leg up in most circumstances. Of course there can be some exceptions where a Harvard Degree might actually hurt you, but 98% of the time it is going to help you.

I would not have attended Harvard or Yale. I hate cold weather. I would attend Stanford, but I would not pay for Stanford. So, if the choice were between a free education at Boyd and paying full price at Stanford, I would choose Boyd.

[kenpostudent]

I'll assume that that are by far more hall of famers/all pros from the 1st round of the NFL draft than the 6th round.  I am too lazy to search for evidence.  Let me know if you find that I am wrong.

Maybe, but many also went in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th Rounds. 1st round picks are often defined by a team's needs. In the NBA, your assertion would be more true. In the NFL, a team may need a defensive lineman more than a running back, so they choose the DL in the 1st round while their second round choice ends up being a Hall of Famer ten years later.

A better analogy is that NFL Hall of Famers come from a variety of colleges and conferences: some Division 1, others Division 1A. Some come from the Pac-10, others from the SEC, others from the Mountain West, others from the WAC (even the Weak A$$ Conference). I used my analogy only to say that the scouts' and coaches' assessment of even individual players (for whom they have video evidence and first-hand knowledge of) is often wrong. How much more are the assessments of Big Law partners of a prospective associate's potential as an attorney when based only what is on paper? Most hiring decisions are based upon personality, anyway. Your paper attributes get you to the interview. Yet, resumes or transcripts don't always tell the full story. I'm not suggesting that Big Law should start selecting people from a T4 with a 2.5 GPA. I am suggesting that their biases are not always accurate.

[smartandunique]

Harvard can't accept everyone who is qualified and some people  with numbers to get into Harvard don't apply or were rejected. They went somewhere.Maybe another top law school,maybe Boyd or GGU.
Maybe someone should define better because I don't think having a degree from Harvard makes u smarter. It is a better funded school,has a better reputation,etc. Because of that some of their students have a halo effect.
I think it's insulting to students at other schools ,as well as presumptious to say Harvard is better.
I'm impressed with the degree/brand but I wouldn't be intimidated.
I apologize if this is a duplicate-my computer is having problems.

[kenpostudent]

I'll use a fighting analogy because I am a fighter. NO ONE thought Matt Sera could beat GSP, who has the much better fighting pedigree. GSP got KTFO. NO ONE gave Buster Douglas a chance against Mike Tyson. Tyson got KTFO. NO ONE gave Ali a chance against Foreman. Foreman got KTFO. Oh, I also love football. The 1972 Dolphins had not one superstar on their defense. Yet, they are still the only team with a truly perfect season. Oh, and the Minnesota Vikings that same year had one of the best defensive front-lines in history. They never one even on Super Bowl with the Purple Peaple Eaters. Pedigree doesn't always matter. Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th Round. Ryan Lief, Todd Marinovich, Tim Couch, Jamarcus Russell, Andre Ware, Tim Tebow, Matt Leinart, and Alex Smith were all first round picks. Every last one of them are busters... not fit to play in the NFL.... all with decent or even great pedigrees.

I could go on and on. But I'll quit. Pedigree can be deceiving.

I attacked your assertion that a Boyd graduate "ends up equal to or stronger than the average Harvard grad at graduation because of a more rigourous legal writing program."  I also criticized your reliance on USNWR "specialty rankings."  You give me an anecdotal listing of  extreme outliers to prove that you do not believe that the "ink on your degree defines you." 

There are so many things wrong with this.  You'll have to step up your reading comprehension skills in order to compete with those Harvard grads.  Care to try again?

Sure, why not? My argument is that pedigree is not the best indication of future performance, even when those who assess a candidates potential are experts or should be experts in doing so.

I did not say that "all Boyd grads are better legal writers than all Harvard grads." Nor did I say that "most" or even that "many Boyd grads are better legal writers than all or most Harvard grads." That is your failure in reading comprehension, Mr. Federal Clerk. Maybe reading all those complicated federal cases has fried your brain or fatigued your eyes. I did say that it is possible that a Boyd grad could be as good or better of a legal writer than a Harvard grad if Boyd's legal writing curriculum is more rigorous than Harvard's. I express an opinion that Boyd's legal writing curriculum is more demanding because increased requirements for graduation, although I offer no opinion on the quality of their program. So, if Harvard's program is equal in quality to Boyd's program, but we have more required classes and a writing requirement, it is POSSIBLE that the Harvard grad may have started law school as a better writer than the Boyd grad but end up at the same level upon graduation. I didn't even say that this is true in every case because I've seen terrible writers at Boyd. I only argue possibility. Although, I do argue that I will bet that I can compete with many Harvard writers. I bet many of my classmates can, as well.

Our legal writing writing courses are not just about grammar, as you have stated, or even mechanics. We learn how to write succinctly, accurately, objectively and persuasively. One focus is how to incorporate metaphor and narrative into legal writing into a context that paints a picture for a judge, using case law or policy (where policy is appropriate - issues of first impression or when seeking a ruling in derogation of common law or conflicting precedent). We also have specialized writing courses in Litigation (taking a case alll the way from complaint to motion for summary judgment), judicial writing (writing several types of opinions on cased argued before the 9th Circuit prior to opinion, we then compare our opinions to the court's opinion when published), Legislative and statutory interpretation, or transactional legal drafting. Every student must take one of those specialized writing courses to graduate (in addition to legal writing 1 & 2 and the scholarly writing requirement). The scholarly requirement must be either published or publishable or the student does not graduate... period. Even if you get a 4.0, you cannot graduate from Boyd until a tenured professor attests to the publishable quality of the scholarly thesis. Students have not taken the Bar because a professor refused to sign off on that requirement.

So, I believe that many Boyd students may be better writers than some Harvard grads.