Nice I really liked the response by concurring opinion. It was a rebuttal with actual facts that offered some analysis to it. Politicians and a lot of lawyers could learn from this kind of thing.
In regards to Robert's I don't think law review is really an indicator of legal education. It contains 10 to 15% of law school students. Many of them are writing on something they find interesting and law review is just one of the many things a law professor does. There may be a disconnect between legal education and the practice of law, but addressing problems with law review is not where the problem is.
Even if law review were to be a perfectly run fluid system 85% to 90% of law students would still have problems. The problem to me is that you are not required to ever hold a job of any form before attending law school or becoming a member of the bar. Furthermore, law school doesn't teach you how to be a lawyer and it seems to be a widely acknowledged fact that law school doesn't teach you to be a lawyer. Obviously it teaches you a lot, but in regards to the actual work unless you take specific classes you would not know the who, what, when, where, and why of how to file a complaint. You would not know how to prepare a proof of service, just many of the pure basics are not taught. Maybe they could at least make you specialize in something because you can put in a decent effort get through law school and pass the bar. Then still have no idea how to do the most basic thing.