Law School Discussion

3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #40 on: March 10, 2009, 02:53:19 PM »
OP, I haven't read all of this thread, so I don't know if I'm bringing up a subject that is completely over, but I do know from experience that the GRE is much easier than the LSAT. It was also not really a big part of the admissions process for my master's program. There is a lot of math and you can't use a calculator, but it was, like, algebra at worst.

Of course, that might not help you as it looks like you would want an MBA instead of an MA, but if you think you can go that route, it is a much easier test. I wish I knew more about the GMAT, but I got an MA, not an MBA, so I never took it.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2009, 10:21:21 PM »
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.


I missed these new posts to the thread, but I had to definitely laugh at the bolded.  Maybe you just don't understand the argument because it's over your head?

Before you start speaking on topics about which you're unfamiliar, UCLA as a university has the most national championships of any other school (more than 100 and counting).  Sports is a tremendously huge subculture at the university.  Women's water polo won its fourth consecutive national championship and sixth NCAA championship in the sport last May.  Besides that program being very successful, as HB has already tried to tell you, athletes tend to stick together and bond in a way that is different than the way that non-athletes connect with athletes.  At UCLA, this can start as early as orientation where there's an entire session where athletes are advised specifically to attend.  Oftentimes they move onto campus a few weeks earlier than the rest of the school and so that becomes the primary social network.  They share athletic facilities, separate academic counseling staff, and are roommates with teammates.  Athletes are strongly encouraged to support other UCLA sports teams by attending their matches. 

If you don't believe that someone who participated in a major D-1 school's athletic program in any sport would be better off than someone who is a slightly above average sports marketing grad, it's a demonstration of how little you know about the industry.  Slightly above average sports marketing grads are a dime a dozen.  Athletes are not.  Moreover, athletes who have connections to other premier athletes from premier programs are even more valuable.

FFS.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2009, 10:35:13 PM »
I have to add two cents to this discussion. D-1 athletes have daily contact with other athletes, many of who will go on to the Olympics or compete at the professional level and make millions of dollars. They also meet advertisers, agents and sponsors, do promotional ads and, through their dealings with their coaches, learn the inner-workings of a major sports organization: the D-1 athletic department. By their nature, they tend to be very competitive, which is why corporations tend to love athletes, and Donald Trump favors them on his show, The Apprentice.

The knowledge they gain allows them to segwey into coaching or university athletic administration, or even just university administration. Thus, provided that they are good students, they tend to be qualified for many things that, on the surface, may not be apparently so.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2009, 10:38:33 PM »

Thank you for your comments however some of the most high profile agents have not accomplished law school. If I do not get in to a top law school that does not necessarily set me back in competing with others for a job in this field. This industry requires determination, ruthlessness, and a no quit attitude. Getting started in this field will result in years of being rejected and turned down by potential clients. However, you just need to be persistent and not quit.

Im not going to change my career choice. That WILL NOT happen. This is what I am set on doing and this is what I believe I was born to do. How could I possibly live with myself for the rest of my life if I dont settle for the best and what I want to do? Am I suppose to just live my life and do some job that I really dont love much? If I come off as rude, well im sorry, its because I dont want someone to tell me I should maybe reconsider. Im so passionate about this. This stupid damn LSAT or potentially not getting into law school will not stop me from doing what I want.

You only live once, you should do what will make you happy.

Thank you to everyone else with the advice I will definitely check into everything. I really appreciate all of this. It means a lot.

I appreciate your enthusiasm and drive to pursue the career you want. Nobody is telling you not to strive to become a sports agent. I think what some of us are urging you to consider are to (1) be aware of your limitations and to (2) consider your practical alternatives IF becoming a sports agent does not work out.

First, I think your "I won't settle for less" attitude is refreshing and I hope you're able to hold onto that attitude as time progresses. But to be frank, having a chip on your shoulder was, in all likelihood, not enough to get you into an ABA accredited school. 

Even if you were to get into an T4 school, the idea of taking out $100-150K in loans with NO desire to practice law just to have the chance of becoming a sports agent is not a wise financial or professional decision. IF for some reason things don't work out, you're now saddled with $1,000+ a month in loan payments, potentially forced into a career that you don't want.

I think you'd be far better off trying to work in some capacity for a sports agency and pursue a Masters in sports management or an MBA. If you find the right employer, you can get them to pay a chunk of your tuition. It would be a far cheaper and probably easier prerequisite to becoming a sports agent. I wish you luck in whatever course of action you decide.

Agreed. Besides, one can become a sports agent w/o a law degree.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #44 on: March 16, 2009, 01:20:34 AM »
I have to add two cents to this discussion. D-1 athletes have daily contact with other athletes, many of who will go on to the Olympics or compete at the professional level and make millions of dollars. They also meet advertisers, agents and sponsors, do promotional ads and, through their dealings with their coaches, learn the inner-workings of a major sports organization: the D-1 athletic department. By their nature, they tend to be very competitive, which is why corporations tend to love athletes, and Donald Trump favors them on his show, The Apprentice.

The knowledge they gain allows them to segwey into coaching or university athletic administration, or even just university administration. Thus, provided that they are good students, they tend to be qualified for many things that, on the surface, may not be apparently so.

Yep, in fact, here come some athletes now.


Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #45 on: March 16, 2009, 07:27:24 AM »
I hate to say it but there is a reason admissions committees tend not to accept those who score 140's on the LSAT. The arguments, dense reading, and logical problems found on the LSAT are related to the type of thinking required of lawyers and law students.  This doesn't mean you wouldn't be great at something else but if you've taken classes AND prepped hard like you say and still can barely crack 140 then you may not want to go to law school in the first place. There is a reason this test is given...not just for fun, trust me.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #46 on: March 16, 2009, 09:04:10 AM »
Kennedy makes a great point.  Even if you DO manage to get into one of the T100 schools, will you be able to graduate?  It's not just a matter of working harder than everyone else, because everybody else will be working ridiculously hard too.  There is a certain level of competency and logical reasoning required for law school, and there's no shame if you're not up to that task...But don't plop down 40k for something you may not be able to finish.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #47 on: March 16, 2009, 04:42:49 PM »
Kennedy makes a great point.  Even if you DO manage to get into one of the T100 schools, will you be able to graduate?  It's not just a matter of working harder than everyone else, because everybody else will be working ridiculously hard too.  There is a certain level of competency and logical reasoning required for law school, and there's no shame if you're not up to that task...But don't plop down 40k for something you may not be able to finish.

And to expound on what Netopalis said, I'm not knocking your intelligence at all. There are just divergent breeds of intelligence. I know people who are now in med school that couldn't string together a decent essay to save their lives but obviously are incredibly intelligent people. Maybe this just isn't your thing.

Re: 3.2 GPA and 140 LSAT....lets try this again
« Reply #48 on: March 16, 2009, 11:21:31 PM »
Kennedy makes a great point.  Even if you DO manage to get into one of the T100 schools, will you be able to graduate?  It's not just a matter of working harder than everyone else, because everybody else will be working ridiculously hard too.  There is a certain level of competency and logical reasoning required for law school, and there's no shame if you're not up to that task...But don't plop down 40k for something you may not be able to finish.

And to expound on what Netopalis said, I'm not knocking your intelligence at all. There are just divergent breeds of intelligence. I know people who are now in med school that couldn't string together a decent essay to save their lives but obviously are incredibly intelligent people. Maybe this just isn't your thing.

That is a good post. One, I keep saying this. The LSAT is not an "intelligence test", b/c there are different types of intelligence. Moreover, there are different types of intelligence, that can be used or illustrated differently. I really don't think intelligence tests exist. That said, I know a 2.7/138 who just graduated from Vermont...doing just fine, thank you. His fatal flaw? He was just a really slow reader...who could digest and retain incredible amounts of material, and who was one of the most eloquent speakers I have ever heard. so, while he could not do well on the LSAT, he did well on his exams and in moot court. He performed well in his internships and landed a good job. He's now in NY BigLaw.