Slashdot Mirror
NFL: National Football Luddites?
theodp writes "The National Football League has been brainstorming with tech and communications companies on how to bring the NFL into the 21st century. Major-league sports are famously technophobic — the NFL outlaws computers and PDAs on the sidelines, in the locker room and in press-box coaching booths within 90 minutes of kickoff. But that may be about to change, which the WSJ's Matthew Futterman speculates could mean: 'Coaches selecting plays from tablet computers. Quarterbacks and defensive captains wired to every player on the field and calling plays without a huddle. Digital video on the sidelines so coaches can review plays instantly. Officials carrying hand-held screens for replays. Computer chips embedded in the ball and in the shoulder pads (or mouth guards) that track every move players make and measure their speed, the impact of their hits, even their rate of fatigue.' Part of the impetus for the changes is the chance for a windfall — the NFL's sponsorship deals with Motorola and IBM will expire after this season, and the NFL will be seeking more technology (and presumably cash) from its next technology partner(s)."
I don't watch pro sports because I can't relate to it. It's not interesting. Now college and lower are really interesting. There are huge differences in the athletes and you can see it. Mistakes happen so you can compare perfection to imperfection. Coaches matter too. And everyone is having fun. Pro just kills it. If they are going to go pro I'd like to see them go all the way and allow super modified cyborg humans compete.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I'd say the NFL is probably one of the least "luddite" of the major sports--compare them to soccer or basketball for example...
substance abuse in professional sports is so high that it is not entirely accurate to consider the sports a display of human skill--although not super-modified-cyborg-humans, they're as close as they can be without being detected by drug screenings
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
MLB's At Bat app for the iPhone and other phones is one of the best sports apps I've ever seen. Players have adopted iPads as a scouting aid. I don't know where the author makes the claim that sports are technophobic; perhaps a better way of putting it is that they're slow to adopt, but that's not the same thing as Luddism.
Dog is my co-pilot.
. . .why are any of these technologies necessary or beneficial to NFL football? The sole benefit I could imagine is the ability to better protect players from injury, or after an injury has occurred. Other than that, I want to see athleticism, strategy and luck, not dweebs huddled around techno-baubles.
First, any call regarding location could be decided electronically and instantly. Every time they position the ball after a tackle, determine a first down, out of bounds, touchdown ... no reason not to use sensors and make instant, accurate calls. No more errors, no more wasting time on replays.
You could use sensors to decide issues of contact:Determine pass interference -- was the hit before the play? Facemasking ... roughing the kicker ... helmet-to-helmet ... sensors in receivers gloves, in the ball, and in the field to determine possession on catches ...
Sure, sensors won't be perfect, and probably some application would turn out to be impractical, but take the refs errors out of the game, spend less time referreeing and more time playing.
If computers were allowed, it might have far-reaching effects. A computer could know the entire state of the game, and look through every game in history to determine the outcomes of each choice a coach has at a particular moment. It could present to the coach a list of choices along with the expected outcomes given the probabilities in the past. In a way, it would eliminate some choices of the coach.
I think baseball would be affected much more than football. Baseball has ten times the games per year as the NFL, so statistical analysis would be more effective.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
There is a huge focus now on scoring plays. Every time there is a scoring play, the play is reviewed to make sure the player wasn't down and that the ball actually crossed to goal line. I've always thought they could make it a lot easier on the referees, for both scoring and spotting the ball, if they put RFID or similar chips inside the balls, then put sensors at every yard line to determine where the ball was at a given point. As a football official myself, let me tell you, there is a lot of inaccuracies regarding ball spotting. A lot of the time, especially if it is an out of bounds play, they will simply spot the ball on the closest yard line (unless of course it is right by the other team's bench, then they have to be much or accurate".
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
A current NFL quarterback solved two of the Clay Millennium million-dollar prizes while in undergraduate school. Goes to show that stereotypes don't always fit!
Given the NFL's record, I don't think that anyone having been sacked a bunch of times will be able to do much more than count change when they're done.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
Before they start giving quarterbacks iPads, try letting the refs use the cameras to make more informed decisions. I don't even keep up with football, but I hear constant complaints from friends and family that do about referees making "bad calls" that you can totally see on the instant replay, but apparently they aren't allowed to use that.
(I am quite possibly completely misinformed, here - as I said, this is a problem I know exists only at second hand)
I don't care at all for NFL. or any "major league" sport for that matter.
I don't see the bad side of more money being invested in technology though.
I think that it's quite silly to try to go stupid with the permitting or disallowing technology. Soccer tries to make it as accessible as possible by not allowing any technology, and their reasoning is that they don't want to play a different game to that which a lot of kids and adults play in the park. I think that's a reasonable approach, but the football i mostly watch, rugby (league and union), in particular NRL, they use video refereeing mostly for legitimate scoring purposes, which in top tier games, is somewhat reasonable as well, however the main referee, though, has to make the decision to consult the video ref.
Using stuff like radios and tablets i think will be silly, the tech should be used to help with making the game fairer, that's about it
I've seen this story before. NASCAR infamously has been trying to integrate technology, yet they can't track the speed or position of any of the 42 cars on the track at a specific moment in time...they rely on 100 year old radio wave transponder technology and timing loops. "Math" consists of dividing the length of the track by the time to complete one lap to determine a car's speed. "Telemetry" consists of how far the throttle is depressed (um all the way usually) and how far to the left the wheel has been turned.
This would be so great for the sport. I am a huge football fan, and for the most part, I feel that NFL referees do a decent job of officiating the game considering the phenomenal pace at which these athletes are moving (flying) around the field. Use of HD-Replay allows them to "get it right" with a rather high percentage.
Think of the potential for this: With just a few modifications, a football can have a chip to detect where it is on the field, at any given timestamp. This can be used to practically guarantee correct calls on scoring plays. Why not take it a step further and have the ship calculate how much pressure is being exerted on the ball from the player holding it (to determine if someone has "possession")?
However, while I feel that technological advances for the sport in general are good (sensors in the ball and on the field, referees with better access to information), I am concerned about what happens if each TEAM gets to use increasingly complex technology because then the league has to provide the same tech to every team in every game. Obviously, if one team has access to superior information/technology that the others don't it is game-breaking. You can't give one coach a live, continuous HD feed from the sky viewing all players on each player (the coveted "All 22" shot) if every coach doesn't have it.
(I just feel the need to soap box here and point out that NBA is a completely different story, as I'm almost certain that [playoff] NBA officiating is absolutely rigged and has been for the last decade.)
Anderson talking to Graff about his new job.
"Though after years of watching those children flying, football is like watching slugs bash into each other."
- Ender's Game
my associative arrays can kick your hash - TCL
Old rich fucks with brain damage that glided their way though school find technology scary
In UK several teams use tracking devices on players, multiple gadgets , multiple maps , so far the best result i have seen was on a software that predicted the player effort and could determine with a good accuracy is next injury, so the effort on that player could be managed. knowing that on premier players rate from 10M each it is for sure a good investment.
As for the game rules.... we use to say , a referee that doesn't score a penalty by mistake or incopetence, as the same guilt as a striker that failed an easy goal, the referee has the right to be wrong sometimes.
nothing mentioned in the summary sounds as though it would improve the game of football from a fan's perspective. At all. Quarterbacks wired to every player and calling plays without a huddle? Really? How does that make the game more fun to watch?
Who would that be?
Only one of the Clay Millennium prize has been solved and that was by a reclusive Russian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Prize_Problems
While the game might be better than a pro game to watch, it was definitely set up to make money and draw TV viewers in.
I'm not a huge football fan, but I would always enjoy seeing what went on to produce a college bowl game, from the way media were handled on the sidelines, to parachuters (or helicopters) flying into the stadium, to the halftime show, to what went on during the commercial breaks, and there were TONS of commercial breaks. The audience's attention would shift (and immediately) from the field to the end zone screens during every commercial break. If you looked down at the field or sidelines, it was as if the players, coaches and everyone else involved in the production were robots being suddenly switched off while all our eyes were diverted to the big screens.
I always found that really fascinating. The few times I've been to a pro game, the slickness of it all wasn't anywhere near what the Fiesta Bowl was.
This is so true, take last week's GB vs. Oakland: where there was a challenge - but the instant reply gizmo was broken - so the ruling on the field had to stand, even though it was clear from the audience camera that the ruling was wrong. Something has been lost, re: officiating in the electronics age, and adding more gadgets to the mix will only make it worse...
I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
Banning technology is the accommodation that the league makes for allowing networks to broadcast every time a player or coach farts on the sidelines. You can't combine that kind of access with instantaneous contact with the outside world. Honestly, they should just stop the sideline bimbos from shoving mikes into every conversation between a coach and a player, but that'll never happen.
On top of that, there's a wink-nudge system of players and coaches tipping off members of the sports media to game plans so that sportscasters can sound smart, insightful, and observant during games. You tell your former coach-turned-color-commentator that you're going to run zone blitzes all day, who then tells the audience that he "notices" lots of zone blitzing packages, then you can't very well have opposing staff members watching at home and firing off texts to their offensive coordinator.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Background: I have had multiple conversations about "athletic endeavors". I have settled on the following taxonomy.
***Athletic Competitions*** --- Competitions requiring athletes to physically demonstrate their athletic and applicable mental capabilities (often to their fullest extent).
Races (human-powered): Running, Cycling, Rowing, etc.
Sports (directly competitive scoring): Basketball, Football, etc.
Sports (indirectly competitive scoring): Hammer-throw
Athletic Competitions (subjective scoring): Gymnastics
***Non-Athletic Competitions*** -- Competitions that may or may not require athleticism for general health/well-being, but do not require the fullest extent of athletic performance in competition.
Races (non-human-powered): NASCAR, Formula 1, Horse Racing, Yacht Racing, etc.
Non-Athletic Competition: Sharpshooting, Competitive Drum Corp, Jazz Dance
Non-Athletic Game: Board games, Gambling
Many will undoubtedly argue that "you need to be in great physical shape to be a formula 1 driver" or the "formula 1 drivers are athletes", and that may be true, but in the end, formula 1 is a competition of technology, not human capability.
Back on topic, I think that football is best without the aid of computers at the sidelines. The sport is supposed to be a competition of team power, coordination, and thinking capability. Computers on the sideline dilute the need for thinking capability. The ability to judge the probability of a defensive formation working well against an offensive play is a measure of human decision-making skills based on the ability to "feel out a game" or even do his/her own math. If computers are allowed on the sidelines, then we may as well start prepping the cyborg football league.
Major-league sports are famously technophobic — the NFL outlaws computers and PDAs on the sidelines,
It's not because they're technophobic. Their IT guys won't let them connect their "toys" to the network.
I was going to mod the parent down, but instead I will reply.
What a radical concept! ;-)
(For the humor impaired: I am not criticizing zbobet2012. I am commenting ironically on the tendency of people to use the moderation system as a discussion system, which is wrong.)
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
The main reasons cited are that replays etc would interrupt the game, and since it's a free-flowing sport ... this would change the game fundamentally.
I hate that excuse. Soccer/football is not a non-stop sport. Play stops all the time -- for injuries, throw-ins, corner kicks, etc. It's just the clock doesn't stop. This "play never stops" thing is the biggest dellusion in soccer, and I think it hurts sometimes, such as the World Cup's inability to admit it's not 1932 anymore.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
I look forward to the day when, at the beginning of the match, the coaches will whip out laptops (or is it tablets?), type furiously, then one of them will look up and say, "you win".
There was a gag in The Jetsons a lot like that. Technically the coaches were controlling robots, but otherwise it was as you describe.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
As opposed to back in the 40s when such mistakes were only known to the players and probably not even all of them. On the whole the technology has made it a lot easier to find problem officials and deal with them than in the past. Granted the mistakes are still left unfixed in most cases.
This is so true, take last week's GB vs. Oakland: where there was a challenge - but the instant reply gizmo was broken - so the ruling on the field had to stand, even though it was clear from the audience camera that the ruling was wrong. Something has been lost, re: officiating in the electronics age, and adding more gadgets to the mix will only make it worse...
The problem is, you're not going to be able to stuff that genie back into the bottle. With modern televised sports, you're always going to have great instant replay. And camera coverage is only going to increase. (And think ahead a few decades to when people have implanted vision augmentation tech!) If you just ignore the tech, you just piss off everyone, who can clearly see a call was bad.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Say a guy up in the booth or even on the sidelines could place the opposing players formation on a virtual field. He could then punch in the receivers routes, ball handoffs, etc. and name the play. Or if the play was already in, that information would spring up and the information could be relayed to the defense. I don't see how that would be much different from the Patriots scandal.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
You have to be kidding. Fans around here get loud enough that the players can't hear the call when the QB's trying to relay it to the players. And that most certainly does have an impact beyond what the current technology can solve. Well, without giving every single player a noise cancelling headset.
Be sure to change your password before playing the Patriots. I'm waiting for the DDOS attack on their Watson powered play maker.
Many will undoubtedly argue that "you need to be in great physical shape to be a formula 1 driver" or the "formula 1 drivers are athletes", and that may be true, but in the end, formula 1 is a competition of technology, not human capability.
Funny, the first thing that came to mind from your list wasn't Formula 1, but Jazz Dance. Competitive dance looks like it requires gymnastics-lite as the cost of entry before you can even begin evaluating on skill and form.
after reading the intro, why have players at all? if you suggest that there is something WRONG with not having hi-tech in sport, then you may need to rethink the core point of the game, humans vs. humans, not wired vs. wired.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
'roids were a factor in the home run explosion, but not the only one
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
not to underrate the problem, but roids weren't the only factor in the home run explosion
i suppose the roots of other factors go way back to the end of the dead-ball era
advances in "vitamin supplements, diets planned by professional nutritionists, sports drink, specially designed running shoes, etc. Who cares? If it's not "fair" just allow everyone to take steroids" as well as advances in PED technology (contrast to Ruth's gluttony)
ballparks with closer fences = easier to hit the ball out of
diluted pitcher talent and longer seasons due to expansion (note that Maris got an asterisk on his 62 due to playing a longer season)
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
fun things can become work when taken to that level of seriousness. those at the top are still ridiculously well paid though
though I'd agree that some fans take it way too seriously
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
there's a reason those tickets aren't selling
I'm not particularly interested in watching any more craptacular performances by the Buffalo Bills this season...
blackouts (or blackout threats) are a big issue for them, not sure how it is elsewhere.
sometimes teams pull tricks (including but not limited to discount tickets) in order to sell the remainder
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
FOX Sports made a shambles of hockey with their lazer light highlighting of the puck for people too lazy to pay attention to the game.
Maybe they can have the football leave tracers now, too. :p
Technology has no place in some arenas, and playing games is one of them. Games should not be such a serious business. They're games.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
football is also stretched out
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281204575002852055561406.html
also note how little you miss and how much faster the game is via DVR
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
in the early days of American football, those on the field weren't aware of the timekeeper's exact number - hence the two-minute warning, a tradition carried over even with clock info available
yeah, why doesn't soccer stop the clock if the ref is just going to add extra time anyways?
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
You could just let the guys crush each other, watch it, and enjoy the mayhem.
You know, entertainment and all that?
Seriously, some of these posts sound more like doctoral research projects rather than a sports game. Pressure sensors in cleats, proximity sensors in receivers' gloves, GPS tracking on the football (is Russia gonna steal it?). There is nerd level and then there is "whacking off to his new GPU board" level.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
I agree 100%. Next thing you know, we'll have iPads at chess tournaments to make them "more high tech". Just because we have technology, does not mean we need to apply it. WTF?
In 2015, Skybowl became self-aware...
It'll be interesting to see how they manage to implement new technologies while still maintaining the same broadcast length. The reason the NFL pulls in $9billion/year is because millions of rabid fans are glued to game broadcasts (and thus advertisements) for 3 hours blocks at a time. If they put sensors in the ball to tell you where it was every time and wireless communication to eliminate huddles, that'll cut the broadcast time down significantly, thus reducing revenue. The average football broadcast contains 11 minutes of total new football action. The rest is all replays, huddles, measurements, timeouts, challanges etc. If you had to replace all of that with an ad, their revenue might jump for a bit but I'd imagine it would fall off drastically as people got wise.
...they're jocks, not nerds? ;)
Why not? It's not like they're really sporting events anyway. It's just another form of entertainment. Who cares if the players are cyborgs? Their job is to injure themselves in order to amuse people.
Proverbs 21:19
Professional athletes have an exploitable advantage in life. They are more physically fit and graceful than the average person. They use this to play a game and are compensated much higher than the average person.
I do not have this advantage. I do however have the ability to break down and solve complex technical problems. I exploit this to my advantage. I make more than the average person as well. I do not make as much as a professional athlete yet I enjoy what I do.
You can call it fair or unfair, but in the end we all take advantage of the talents and skills that we possess naturally and/or develop through practice.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
I am sure they are "Crying" all the way to the bank. Get over it, there are way too many people who enjoy professional sports and a large market that I am sure Albert is just whining about some Anonymous Coward hates that he is making 22 million a year playing a sport where he bashes a ball past a fence.
If you paid to go see your local chess masters at work, or paid to see a slashdotter present, then maybe they will get the 22 million instead of someone else.
Btw, are you also saying Performance Drugs should be disallowed? How many of you drink Caffeine or do some 5 hour energy drink just to pass some test in school. Should we ban you from doing your chosen profession?
Nope, not an Anonymous coward here.
I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
Except that at least they are competitive. Unless you are consistent, you don't pull the big salaries. You must dedicate your entire life. Explain to me the millions Johnny Depp makes for playing make believe. He can go off an do crappy low budget art movies. The only time you see a pitcher do anything like that, it's a charity golf tournament.
And unless you're Jackie Chan, there's not much danger of a permanent or life threatening injury.
I8-D
The only thing that could possibly improve the NFL is the introduction of edged weapons. Football, basketball, baseball are all sports that require one ball. Auto racing however, requires...
It's not about getting pissed off at home. It's about players and coaches not interfering with the game to dispute every play.
So don't let the players and coaches dispute anything. Place the technology under the control of the officials.
Football has two non-stop 45 minutes half-times.
Soccer/football is not a non-stop sport. Play stops all the time -- for injuries, throw-ins, corner kicks, etc. It's just the clock doesn't stop. This "play never stops" thing is the biggest dellusion in soccer, and I think it hurts sometimes, such as FIFA's inability to admit it's not 1932 anymore.
if the player wastes too much time "preparing" the play he can get a yellow warning card or a red expulsion card).
Can, but often doesn't. At least, not in the Cup matches I've seen.
Simply because not all football is televised, and you can't have a set of rules for "major leagues" and another for "amateurs".
Why not?
Simple. Because here in Argentina (and many other countries) the system allows any team to play in "major leagues".
That still doesn't explain why technology must be forbidden. I'm not talking about changing game mechanics. Just allowing for things like goal detection or honoring of replay evidence. With modern technology you can replay something in a matter of seconds. If this was under the control of an off-field official they could signal the referee if they saw something. You don't off to stop play unless there's an infraction. Similar to how the linesmen work. Add in two-way hands-free radios to make communication easier.
American football is a completely different game.
I'm not talking about US football here.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.