End of JEAPU?

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by Publius

I envision the NCAA setting some year as a cutoff. After that, they don't care if you're Tony Thompson, Jim Schaly, Jon Bible or Perry Costello--do their training or you can't be considered for post-season play.

I'd be happier if they made the rules test closed-book, and assignors actually used the results as one indicator of who knows WTF they're doing. A vast majority of the people I partner with during the year (I don't work D1) get together and take it as a group. That probably helps explain why I have to bail out so many of them during the year when they screw up rulings.

On the flip-side, I've seen numerous people in my profession that aced the entrance exam but sucked rocks in doing the job.

Book smart doesn't always equal street smart. To truly see how well they handle the situation, have them do it on the field. You don't have four choices in those situations.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by yawetag

On the flip-side, I've seen numerous people in my profession that aced the entrance exam but sucked rocks in doing the job.

Book smart doesn't always equal street smart. To truly see how well they handle the situation, have them do it on the field. You don't have four choices in those situations.

That's true, but it isn't really the flip side. How many people have you seen suck on the test--where it's multiple choice, open book, and unlimited time--then go out on the field and be really good at rules application? For me, the answer is zero.

Some, though, suck at rules but have great judgment, great people skills, great presence, and handle situations fabulously. Arguably, those are better umpires than those with superior rules knowledge but who lack those other characteristics. I'd rather have them as partners, because together, we make a better crew.