March 16th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^

To me, it's going to be all about the in-state rates, if and when I get around to sending apple-cheeked youngsters to college.  That said, when you leave the Ohio Union and cross High Street, there is a tattoo parlor and a drug paraphernalia shop within sight of the Union and off-campus housing, so there's that.


March 16th, 2011 at 11:55 AM ^

I've walked by Stairway to Heaven a few times.  But there are two differences: one, the shops are literally 100 feet away from the Ohio Union.  Stairway is all the way up by North University avenue.  Two, these shops had fairly explicit ads on their windows, and Stairway disguises its entrance pretty well.  There's also an extensive sex-and-drug-paraphernalia  shop on High Street near the Wexner Center with window ads and "Must be 21 To Enter" signs.

kevin holt

March 16th, 2011 at 2:41 AM ^

Lucky for me, as I plan to go to Michigan Law and am from MI. If I don't get into NYU and can also suppress my natural instinct to stay in AA for another 3 years, which I probably will not be able to because I love this town and Michigan in general (read: sports). NYC ain't bad either though.


March 16th, 2011 at 11:27 AM ^

Very interesti8ng stuff.  To add to the discussion I would like to comment that I began watching BSG on Netflix about 3 weeks ago.  Next episode is "scar" from season 2.5...  It is probably the greatest show I've ever seen.  Even my girlfriend enjoys watching it with me and this is a big deal considering she's more an American Idol/Bachelor person.  Amazing show. 


March 16th, 2011 at 2:36 PM ^

BSG will haunt you the rest of your life.  When you're done with it, you'll be so exhilirated and emotionally crushed (that it's done) that no other TV will replace it.  Completely sucks.  The whiplashing of ups and downs is going to get worse, emotionally... it truly is a show by itself.  How some fraking crap like "Boston Legal" could be nominated for an Emmy but not BSG, there is no rational explanation.  That said, in the very final 6 episodes, they start getting a little heavy on the talking and not enough action, but they were saving their $$$ for the finale.  They were going anti-Sopranno on the ending -- wanted a show to blow you out of the water.  They do that.  The denoument (explanation for everything) is, well, controversial.  Some of us loved it, it puts the show on ANOTHER level that NO SHOW has ever done.  Others, like Brian Our Fearless Leader, hated it.  But don't say you weren't warned how it would end, they have been telling you the explanation for everything since "33."

BTW Scar is maybe top5, if you count some of the multi-episode shows as one.  E.g., Pegasus / Resurrection Ship I / Resurrection Ship II.




March 16th, 2011 at 9:40 AM ^

I believe most Harvard law students hate Yale b/c they are mad their school isnt as good an experience.  Yale is harder to get into (compare the sizes of the schools -- Yale is one of the smallest and Harvard one of the largest).  Plus the environments are way, way different.  If you've been on both law campuses, Yale is like an English castle, whereas Harvard is like 5 high schools built in different generations thrown together and connected by a cramped, steamy underground tunnel system.  Harvard Law is SUPER competitive, whereas, Yale Law doesn't even have grades.  The experiences are not even close.  No kidding Harvard Law students are taught to hate Yale.

Of course, as a Stanford Law grad, I can honestly say Yale and Harvard students are ALL jealous of Stanford.  Smallest law school in the country (of competitive schools), plus California weather, plus "Club Med" law school experience, plus California undergrads (seriously -- tossing frisbees in bikinis in September on the lawn right outside the law school) (not that they talked to law students) (and frankly, the hottest girl I met at SLS was a grad student in Med -- who was a Sparty undergrad) (and yet, Stanford did admit her) (dude, if you met Laura, you'd admit her too, ifyaknowwhatImean).  I think I'm rambling.


March 16th, 2011 at 10:07 AM ^

Ok, valid points about Yale, but I was accepted at Yale also so I don't know about the jealousy part. BTW, more students = larger alumni base = more friends when you get into the working world. Go check the major manhattan firms and see where most of the heavy hitters went. Also, to the guy who said MIT is the best, I have an MA from MIT and I still take classes there. Most Harvard students take classes and MIT and vice versa.


March 16th, 2011 at 10:21 AM ^

I chose Harvard Law over Stanford Law.  I was waitlisted by Yale Law.  Neither I nor anyone I know from HLS hates Yale or Stanford.  I work for the US Government, with a lot of HLS and YLS grads; I have never seen or heard any anymosity expressed between the two alumni bases; it just doesn't matter.  I haven't worked with many Stanford Law grads, but the few I have known do seem to have an overinflated sense of what other people think of Stanford.  Stanford Law students are the law school equivalent of Duke undergrads.    (    (That


March 16th, 2011 at 10:47 AM ^

I have worked with a ton of YLS grads during the last 6 years as a government attorney, and I can honestly say that the "rivalry" has rarely, if ever, come up.  For the most part, everyone is just focused on the mission.  Once you've been out a few years, the importance of where you went to law school diminishes while the importance of other factors -- experience, ability to work with others, ability to deliver an effective closing argument, etc. -- increases.  I can see this being more of an issue while you're in school, e.g., when you're competing with YLS students for summer jobs and clerkships, because your education is usually the centerpiece of your resume. 

Now, I can't say this is true when it comes to football schools.  There is always a lot of trash-talking between graduates of football schools.  Usually, it's pretty good natured, even when it's heated.  However, I did work at a private law firm dominated by ND grads.  They seemed to take it seriously, and I think it affected their hiring decisions.  That was weird to me.


March 16th, 2011 at 11:53 AM ^

I'll admit that maybe I'm looking at this through slightly rose-colored glasses.  I just talked to my co-worker, who was an HLS classmate (and a ND grad; we talk a lot of smack; I also learned for the first time that he, too, chose HLS over Stanford), for a reality check.  He didn't necessarily disagree with me, but he doesn't feel quite as strongly as I do.  But I stand by my point.  You are always going to get immediate respect because you went to HLS (or Yale, or Stanford, or Michigan), but I don't think the "rivalry" matters as much once your resume fills up with other things.  Speaking of which, I should probably get back to the task of filling my resume with work accomplishments.  Go Blue and good luck!


March 16th, 2011 at 11:12 AM ^

ND alums are unto themselves when it comes to parochialism in business decisions.  There are two economies in the United States:  the national economy, and the Notre Dame economy.  ND alums hire ND accountants, ND lawyers, ND vendors, have ND customers, etc....  It affects their hiring decisions, buying decisions, consultant decisions, etc. 

Wolverine 73

March 16th, 2011 at 12:09 PM ^

For over 10 years, I have served on my law firm's hiring committee.  No one on the committee seems to favor any potential hire based on where he attended school--other than a couple Buckeye law grads, who always try to lobby for their people.  It sort of amuses the rest of use, and probably works against their candidates at the margins.  Talk about an inferiority complex.


March 16th, 2011 at 2:18 AM ^

Not to start a grammar war on these here boards, but I think "me" is correct here, since it's being used as the object of a preposition.  You wouldn't say "There isn't a bigger Michigan fan around I."  


For the record, my dad taught me that in the Harvard - Yale rivalry, it was always MIT that got the last laugh.


March 16th, 2011 at 8:57 AM ^

I agree that "than me" is correct.  I often see/hear the overcorrection of using "I" instead of "me" for the object of sentence way too often.  It makes me crazy.

Meanwhile, I am glad my Law School is doing well (JD '87), but I like to think of them in the top 3 or 4, where I think Michigan Law belongs.  Its biggest problem is the ability to draw faculty these days because of the need to find employment for faculty spouses (male or female).  Schools in or near larger cities are more likely to have options for the brainiac spouses that law professors (or any professors) seem to have.  Ann Arbor is a great place -- the greatest place -- but the rise of dual professional couples have made it harder to recruit into the stereotypical college town.


March 16th, 2011 at 9:23 AM ^

It's not an object here.  It sounds strange, but if you follow through with these types of sentence, it makes sense.  (My grandmother drilled this into me).  Example:  "He is taller than I am tall." vs. "He is taller than me am tall."  Hence, "He is taller than I" is correct.

And for the record, I am a graduate of U of M (LSA) and Harvard Law.  I agree with the above:  Michigan, always Michigan.


March 16th, 2011 at 10:04 AM ^

reminds me of an episode of The Office, where they were debating whether whoever or whomever was correct.  Great stuff.  I feel like the blog is coming back to normalty when these are the discussions taking place.

Edit: Dialogue

Ryan: You know what I really want? What I really want is for you to know (the computer system) so you can communicate it to your people here, to your clients, to whomever ...

Michael: (Snort) OK.

Ryan: What?

Michael: It's whoever not whomever.

Ryan: It's whomever.

Michael: No. Whomever is actually never right.

Jim: Well, sometimes it's right.

Creed: Michael is right. It's a made-up word used to trick students.

Andy: No. Actually, whomever is the formal version of the word.

Oscar: Obviously, it's a real word, but I don't know when to use it correctly.

Michael (to camera): Not a native speaker.

Kevin: I know what's right. But I'm not going say, because you're all jerks who didn't come to see my band last night.

Ryan: Do you really know which one is correct?

Kevin: I don't know.

Pam: It's whom when it's the object of a sentence and who when it's the subject.

Phyllis: That sounds right.

Michael: Sounds right, but is it right?

Stanley: How did Ryan use it, as an object or a subject?

Ryan: As an object.

Kelly: Ryan used me as an object.

Stanley: Is he right about that ... ?

Toby: It was: Ryan wanted Michael, as the subject, to explain the computer system, the object, to whomever, meaning us, the indirect object, which is the correct usage of the word.


March 16th, 2011 at 10:07 AM ^

I think "whomever" is for talking about the object and "whoever" is for talking about the subject of the sentence.  I'm probably wrong but that rule's helped me decide whether or not to stick in the extra "m" a few times so it might come in handy for you.


March 16th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^

But me can be the object in this case since than functions as the preposition.

You can make the case that I is also technically correct, but I think me is more correct. Plus it's way more in line with idiomatic American English.

Also, your example can run into all sorts of goofy situations:

"He has several more boats than I (have a boat)." Not good.

But hey, I only want to a lowly state university (Michigan), so what do I know.