. Forum

[Tanicius]

This is not funny. This is infuriating on every level imaginable.

Fucking amen. Complete and total lies published in order to make a profit. You can't just use the "well, smart people should do research" line when you are actively taking efforts to discredit that research. It's a lie, and it's going to trick people into paying for their tuition.

[TaipeiMort]

http://www.cooley.edu/rankings/nfl_analogy.html

My favorite Cooley article.

When was the last time Notre Dame (Joe Montana?) or USC (um.....maybe Carson Palmer) or Oregon (i'm a huge fan, trust me never) had a reputation for producing quality quarterbacks?

Stupid analogy. Players improve over college recruiting stock through quality training, physical development, or manifest in-game intangibles. Law school admissions is largely based on a factor that can't be improved: intelligence.

I wish there was a way to crowd source the end of Cooley. Unfortunately, I don't think that decreasing market demand will do much-- I know people at CA unaccredited schools that failed to get into Cooley, or were cut during the year one purge.

[stuckinthemiddle]

[jetsfan1]

Stupid analogy. Players improve over college recruiting stock through quality training, physical development, or manifest in-game intangibles. Law school admissions is largely based on a factor that can't be improved: intelligence.

Agreed. Slightly off topic, but since football was brought up, and qbs in particular...

There's a pretty crebible theory out there (at least in my eyes, and it would serve to explain this phenomenon, cause it is a bit curious- cant remember where I heard it though) that qbs that play in college with less talent around them tend to develop better and their skills translate to the pro game better than those at the elite schools. It works like this. If you are a WR who attends a top school, every week you are going up in direct competition against the best that CFB has to offer. WR vs. DB. OL vs. DL. RB vs. top Ds, etc. Sure, as a WR your stats are somewhat dependant on the quality of your QB, but in developing a skill set, you are pretty independant from the QB.

For QBs its different. You play with the best, there is more room for error. Your throws can be a bit off bc your wrs are better at adjusting. You have more time in the pocket bc your OL is better. Sure, this is somewhat offset by the fact that you are playing against the best competition as well- its not like your getting worse. Its just that you dont develop as much as a smaller school qb who is clearly the best player on the field and needs to be perfect every game, every down, for his team to be successful. There is something about having less room for error that drives the need for perfection and helps development.

It also helps that CFB, at the very top, is completely dominated by running teams. Think about it. The 'Bama teams from the past few years. Florida w/Tebow. Even Oregon, with their flashy quick spread runs the ball a vast majority of the time. Passing, pro style qbs arent winning/playing in national titles. And as it relates to Cooley, this theory puts a pretty big hole in their argument. Not only are they comparing apples and oranges with football and law school, but theyre using an outcome that stems from the nature of a team environment and applying it too an individual pursuit, the law. I forget what basketball legend said it, but he said growing up and playing pickup he'd pick the worst kids for his team bc it made him a better player. Picking the worst school to study law with doesnt have the same effect.