
Why Is the NFL Afraid of Technology? - username3
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203893404577100683039518086.html
======
Anechoic
_What makes the shifts potentially groundbreaking is that 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._

This isn't about "technophobia" it's about controlling information that may be
used for gambling purposes. For better or for worse, the NFL wants information
about player injuries/etc to be distributed through a controlled process ("xxx
has a leg injury and his return is questionable") rather then risking that
some part of the population will have the info and another part won't.

 _Anderson would consider putting a computer chip in the ball and a laser on
the goal line to replace the time-consuming debates and video reviews of
scoring._

Fans have been talking about this for year, but it's not quite that simple,
since scoring (and yardage in general) aren't just dependent on the location
of the ball, it's also dependent on if/what body part of the ball carrier is
touching the ground. It's worth investigating, but it won't be a panacea.

 _As long as opponents can't intercept the communications, he sees no reason
why all players and coaches shouldn't be connected with wireless headsets,
eliminating the need for a huddle or the quarterbacks' wristbands with plays
listed in tiny print_

Again this is something that's going to be inevitable. However, looking at
booth-to-sidelines and sidelines-to-player communications today, if the
headset system of one team breaks down, the other team isn't allowed to use
their system until the first team's system is working again. I would assume
that a similar rule would be in place for a team headset system, so that if
one player's headset breaks, the other team wouldn't be able use their system
until it got fixed. I wouldn't expect a team helmet communication system to be
implemented until the NFL can be sure that the reliability will approach 100%
which will be difficult considering the abuse the equipment may undergo, as
well as potential interference issues.

An up-tempo pace will definitely increase the conditioning requirements of
players, I'm curious as to how it will affect today's 300+ lb linemen,
especially with the limited game roster.

------
techdmn
At the least they could put G-meters in the helmets, to aid concussion
detection, or trigger more serious sideline testing.

~~~
hack_edu
They absolutely should. G-meters are already compulsory in lots of high-school
football leagues.

~~~
matwood
While the NFL is finally coming around on concussions, I think information
from G-meters might be something they would rather not know. We all know the
game is violent and NFL fans love a great hit. I don't think people want to
know just how violent it is though.

~~~
phreeza
I find that reasoning quite disturbing. Shouldn't the players health come
first?

~~~
zmanji
Did anyone care about the health of the gladiators?

~~~
slowpoke
No, but we're not in Ancient Rome anymore.

------
seanalltogether
I think this is an interesting debate, and something the olympics has to deal
with as well. Should we use technology in real world physical sports to
abstract control of the game away from the players themselves? Is watching
football more enjoyable when the players turn into pawns? When does the NFL
start poaching starcraft players to help direct the field of play?

------
jerf
A lot of people are quoted in that article as saying "Technology is changing
and _the game must keep up_." as if it simply goes without saying that it
must.

But... must it? Why? Expand the "obvious" for me. Because I can't actually see
why _the game_ must keep up. And I can provide a good reason why it mustn't
keep up, which is that we don't really want games won or lost on the quality
of software that one side or the other has at game time. It's not the question
we're interested in, it's not what we want to watch.

I italicized "the game" above because I am strictly talking about the game.
Tech for safety gear or medical treatments? Bring it on. Mandate it. Go nuts.
But who cares if the coach is calling plays from a tablet? What matters is a
level playing field, not what level the playing field is on.

~~~
jgorham
I agree with you that there's no real imperative for a sports league to need
to "keep up" with technology.

But one possible way to look at this is as a regulation on what technology
coaches can or cannot use currently as they please. E.g., defenses playing
against teams who run no-huddle offenses usually have no time to call plays or
change the defensive scheme, and thus allowing the defensive captain to update
and change plays at the line could be a huge plus for teams that _wanted_ to
do this but currently cannot.

Forcing coaches to use iPads on the sideline for the hell of it is silly;
prohibiting teams who want to analyze film in realtime on the sideline or
instantly communicate plays on the fly who wish to do so is a bit different.

~~~
anamax
> defenses playing against teams who run no-huddle offenses usually have no
> time to call plays or change the defensive scheme, and thus allowing the
> defensive captain to update and change plays at the line could be a huge
> plus for teams that _wanted_ to do this but currently cannot.

Allowing such communication changes the tradeoffs of such a strategy. How are
you concluding that one set of tradeoffs is "correct"?

------
pkulak
I think we have to keep in mind that sports are games of people vs people.
Adding computers is giving people tools, but that kind of thing has always
been tightly regulated in sports. Would we allow the quarterback to use a
giant Chuckit thrower just because someone made one that launches footballs
instead of tennis balls? Why should we allow coaches to use computers?

EDIT: And no huddle because of headsets? Then were exactly is my incentive to
scream my freakin' head off?

------
pmarsh
I can't wait to have coaches using tablets and other gadgets! It's going to be
great to watch the first iPad launched into orbit when it doesn't react
properly.

That and I'd imagine using a touch screen in sub-zero weather might not be the
easiest thing either.

Changes will be slow and deliberate.

------
localhost3000
anything they can do to limit the frequency of coach challenges and replay
reviews is a good thing in my book. i'm blown away that we still use three or
four oft-poor camera angles to try and determine whether or not a ball crossed
a straight line.

other than that, i still think football should be played on a grass
(preferably muddy) field with the outcome determined by grit, determination,
chance, and physical ability - not robots picking from a statistically optimal
playbook. That being said, it will be pretty funny to see the geeks take over
the NFL.

~~~
Anechoic
_i still think football should be played on a grass (preferably muddy) field_

As someone who had football-related knee-reconstruction surgery, I
respectfully disagree. Yeah, there's something nostalgic about 22 players
slogging their way through a mud-covered field, but it just results in way too
many ankle, knee and hip injuries. We have field turf, let's stick with it.

------
darasen
Not mentioned in this article but FIFA is just as bad. Fans have been asking
for goal line technology for some time.

