Cravath v. Debevoise v. Proskauer? Forum

[lavarman84]

IMO, lots of bad advice ITT.

1. There is no such thing as "sports law", than as a (obviously useful, see OP) marketing ploy for Proskauer. L&E is L&E, and deals are deals. I don't even think Proskauer has a disproportionate percentage of sports transactional work - most of the big sports deals are handled by (shockingly) the big deal firms - places like Cravath & S&C.

Partially wrong. "Sports Law" encompasses many different areas of the law including L&E but Proskauer does have a group that handles "Sports Law" specifically. So you are incorrect here. It's not a marketing ploy. Unfortunately, as I said, it's highly competitive so I wouldn't join the firm solely for that reason.

2. In house jobs at major sports leagues/teams are crappy jobs - uninteresting and underpaid. They are attractive to 25 year old men who don't know better. They are also not that hard to get, if you're willing to eat the (very large) pay cut compared to other in house jobs.

- an actual associate

Maybe to you. But don't assume your opinion is the only opinion.

They are not that hard to get? Don't listen to this "actual associate." They have no idea what they're talking about.

Please, continue telling all the people here how easy it is to get a NFL in-house counsel job. I'd love to hear more. Maybe you can explain to all the 25 year old men out there just how they can attain one of these easy-to-get jobs down the road.

[Anonymous User]

They have a "sports law" group. That does not mean "sports law" is a thing. Lots of lesser firms make industry groups as a marketing ploy, like you'll see firms with "healthcare M&A" or "Chinese transactional" groups. Fundamentally, they're all marketing. Big deals go to the handful of big deal firms. proskauer isn't one of those firms, cravath is and debevoise is w/r/t cap markets (but not M&A).

Look at all the recent big sports transactions. When the Rangers awent bankrupt, where was Proskauer? When he Dodgera were sold, where was Proskauer? When the Clippers were sold, when the Hawks were sold, when the recent big RSN deals were negotiated - who did those deals?

[Anonymous User]

And OP, to answer your question, I'd pick cravath because cravath has a top-tier M&A practice and I would want to preserve the option, for now, to do M&A. You'll definitely get to rotate through an M&A partner if you stay there and if you end up preferring cap markets you won't be disadvantaged compared to someone from Deb. That being said I don't think picking Deb is indefensible if Cravath gave you bad vibes.

[lavarman84]

They have a "sports law" group. That does not mean "sports law" is a thing. Lots of lesser firms make industry groups as a marketing ploy, like you'll see firms with "healthcare M&A" or "Chinese transactional" groups. Fundamentally, they're all marketing. Big deals go to the handful of big deal firms. proskauer isn't one of those firms, cravath is and debevoise is w/r/t cap markets (but not M&A).

Look at all the recent big sports transactions. When the Rangers awent bankrupt, where was Proskauer? When he Dodgera were sold, where was Proskauer? When the Clippers were sold, when the Hawks were sold, when the recent big RSN deals were negotiated - who did those deals?

And yet they're widely considered the #1 firm in that practice area (or at minimum one of the top three with Skadden and Covington). "Sports Law" is certainly a thing. It's a niche area. A practice group that focuses on legal issues in sports. And not so shockingly, a lot of people want to get involved in that.

And your analysis in the second paragraph is terribly flawed. Are you really attempting to argue that Proskauer has to have a monopoly on major legal deals in sports?

Funny you mention the Clippers...

Covington & Burling, Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger, Kirkland & Ellis and Proskauer Rose are advising on what could prove to be the most lucrative sale of a professional sports team in U.S. history in former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer's proposed $2 billion bid to acquire the National Basketball League's Los Angeles Clippers.

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120265 ... ppers-Sale

The Dodgers?

The deal requires the approval of MLB commissioner Bud Selig, who has launched his own investigation of the team's finances. MLB has turned to a team from Proskauer Rose, including litigation cochair Bradley Ruskin, sports law group cohead Howard Ganz, antitrust litigation partner Scott Cooper, and corporate partner Jon Oram for counsel on the league's negotiations with McCourt and S&C.

The two sides are currently squabbling over access to seven years of Dodgers' financial records. Proskauer, which earlier this week advised the Pac-10 Conference on a $3 billion television deal with Fox and ESPN, wants hard copies and electronic records of the files MLB has requested. But McCourt and the Dodgers want to limit Proskauer's access to a closed "data room" at Dodgers Stadium.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... score.html

The Hawks?

DLA Piper is advising Atlanta Spirit LLC—the team’s seven-member ownership group—on their sale of the Hawks, while Proskauer Rose is representing the NBA on due diligence matters.

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120272 ... y-NBA-Team

Interesting how their name just keeps popping up.

[Anonymous User]

You must be kidding me. Look at the roles they had in the deals! Are you even a practicing attorney? How clueless do you need to be to fall for the press release bullshit role gambit?

[jbagelboy]

looks like someone's summering at Proskauer.

no one denied they have a dominant sports law practice; it's just tough to get into as a junior associate and not worth betting your career on when you have superior options in the group you're actually interested in, e.g., M&A.

on that note, yea, to be fully honest I'd probably go to Cravath here if I really wanted to practice M&A (which I don't, but OP does). I don't think its the "right" answer in an absolute sense, and your life will be hellish, but at the same time, it's literally what the firm is known for. That's just me and you have to decide for yourself.

[lavarman84]

looks like someone's summering at Proskauer.

no one denied they have a dominant sports law practice; it's just tough to get into as a junior associate and not worth betting your career on when you have superior options in the group you're actually interested in, e.g., M&A.

on that note, yea, to be fully honest I'd probably go to Cravath here if I really wanted to practice M&A (which I don't, but OP does). I don't think its the "right" answer in an absolute sense, and your life will be hellish, but at the same time, it's literally what the firm is known for. That's just me and you have to decide for yourself.

Well, no, I'm not. For the exact reason you specified...which is the same thing I said earlier in this thread.

Unless you know that you are going to be able to get into Proskauer's sports practice, I wouldn't go there from that reason. I was told by a partner in the firm that it's incredibly difficult to get into their sports practice.

I just don't agree with the anonymous associate's opinions in this thread. But I don't want to hijack this thread since it's not about me. I agree with your advice. If your reason for going to Proskauer is sports law, don't do it unless you know you are going to be put in that group.

You must be kidding me. Look at the roles they had in the deals! Are you even a practicing attorney? How clueless do you need to be to fall for the press release bullshit role gambit?

Haha, okay. You asked where they were. I told you exactly where they were.

[runinthefront]

looks like someone's summering at Proskauer.

no one denied they have a dominant sports law practice; it's just tough to get into as a junior associate and not worth betting your career on when you have superior options in the group you're actually interested in, e.g., M&A.

on that note, yea, to be fully honest I'd probably go to Cravath here if I really wanted to practice M&A (which I don't, but OP does). I don't think its the "right" answer in an absolute sense, and your life will be hellish, but at the same time, it's literally what the firm is known for. That's just me and you have to decide for yourself.

Unless you've worked at both Cravath and Debevoise for more than a year, I wouldn't just go out and say life at Cravath would be hellish compared to the other options.

[smaug]

lol

"Please don't say this thing that's unverifiable by my standards but is generally accepted be true and can be corroborated by your acquaintances."

I agree to the extent that Debevoise probably works harder than some people expect.

I disagree to the extent that Cravath isn't a near guarantee for some of the worst hours. It's not a matter of it being worse than another. It's that you're guaranteed it at CSM and only likely to encounter it at other places.

[jbagelboy]

looks like someone's summering at Proskauer.

no one denied they have a dominant sports law practice; it's just tough to get into as a junior associate and not worth betting your career on when you have superior options in the group you're actually interested in, e.g., M&A.

on that note, yea, to be fully honest I'd probably go to Cravath here if I really wanted to practice M&A (which I don't, but OP does). I don't think its the "right" answer in an absolute sense, and your life will be hellish, but at the same time, it's literally what the firm is known for. That's just me and you have to decide for yourself.

Unless you've worked at both Cravath and Debevoise for more than a year, I wouldn't just go out and say life at Cravath would be hellish compared to the other options.

I didn't draw a comparison. I could try, but I didn't. I just have some sense of what I would be getting into working for an m&a partner at cravath. and I actually said I would still choose them over these firms in this circumstance, in part because I know every top tier firm would be rather hellish too.

[Anonymous User]

Assuming M&A, is there really a significant diff between "likely to get rocked" at Deb v. "certainly going to get rocked" at at Cravath?

If so what would the diff in hours really be?

[RedGiant]

The exit opps from CSM are golden. I was a corp paralegal there (many years ago, in NY and London) and associates could literally do whatever they wanted after--small firms, clerkships, investment banking, tech, other biglaw firms, in-house at banks, opening an art gallery, WHATEVER.

Do not underestimate your capacity for all-nighters if you go to CSM. I partied a ton in college and was an athlete and came from banking to CSM, and I was exhausted after two years. They are not shitting you about going home before midnight being a good night. This is not like school. Your ass will be in a chair 12-15 hours a day. It's a lot. Think about it and make sure that you can work at a very high level for those hours, because mistakes are not tolerated at CSM. Perfection is expected.

Also, CSM seemed like a cold place, but about three months in, and you've been to war with your colleagues, and being in the trenches together makes it seem like a family. The CSM partners I worked for are still amazing references and FB friends and just fantastic. I'm very grateful for my time there, and having it on my resume, even as a paralegal, has opened many doors for me in the ensuing years. (I did a bunch of other stuff and am now a 3L.)

This was me. CSM has some normal people, but in my 15 years of post-college work, I probably had more oddball colleagues there than anywhere else. Listen, if you want to go to Deb, do it. But CSM is very, very, very prestigious, and you can't go wrong with either, if, (as another poster mentioned), you can handle the hours. You will work with some socially awkward people, no doubt. LIkely true at Deb too. I also have some of my best friends EVER from there, and, as I mentioned, partners are still accessible and helpful every time I've made a job move. It's a family. I'm proud to have been part of it. I would worry way less about whether you're going to achieve your eventual dream of sports counsel and worry way more about whether you can hack it for 3-5 years in a NY biglaw environment.