What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Best part of Fog Bowl 2.0? Camera angle. (1 Viewer)

massraider

massraider

Footballguy
How do we let the NFL know the behind-QB camera angle is the best?

Al Michaels apologizing for having to use the better camera angle made me want to scream.  

Yes, Al, it was terrible seeing what the QB sees, the routes develop, and the pass rushers up close. So terrible!!

 
Looks like I'm in the minority, but not sure I like it from an evaluation standpoint, especially on certain plays.

Maybe I'm just not used to it.

 
Football Jones said:
Looks like I'm in the minority, but not sure I like it from an evaluation standpoint, especially on certain plays.

Maybe I'm just not used to it.
Click to expand...
Unpack this. I think evaluating QB and RB it might be better. Can't tell from classic if RB hits the hole correctly, we just see him disappear into the line, and either pop out or not.

 
It was okay, wouldn't want it all game. Biggest drawback for me was it made it difficult to see how many yards a RB was picking up on a play. 

 
the nbc.com broadcast usually has multiple different angles I think, possibly including this view.

Also, watchespn app on roku usually has a couple of broadcasts of college games on each week that show exclusively this view (usually the bigger matchups).

 
Football Jones said:
Looks like I'm in the minority, but not sure I like it from an evaluation standpoint, especially on certain plays.

Maybe I'm just not used to it.
Click to expand...
Got it. You don't like it from behind.

But you could maybe get used to it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What struck me most from that angle was the speed of the game and how quick decisions have to be made.

 
Football Jones said:
Looks like I'm in the minority, but not sure I like it from an evaluation standpoint, especially on certain plays.

Maybe I'm just not used to it.
Click to expand...
I could see someone arguing they don't like it from an enjoyment perspective because it's harder to tell how many yards are being gained, but from an evaluation standpoint?  It's 1000x better from an evaluation standpoint.  You can see what the RB sees and if he's hitting the right hole, you can see what the QB sees and how the routes develop.  It's a no brainer from an evaluation standpoint.

I agree with the OP, I loved it.

It also gave some great insight into how wide open the Pats WRs are running around.  They really know how to draw up plays over there.

 
I greatly dislike this camera angle. Basketball played with it a long time ago and it drove me nuts. I don't know if they still do, I don't watch much basketball except for College. 

I prefer the side angle. But whatever, to each their own. 

I agree with FreeBagel, it's harder to see the entire field and plays develop, how much yards are gained, etc. From an evaluation standpoint, it's awesome. It's neat to see what actually happens in the pocket and at the LOS. I just don't like the view for down-field plays. Less enjoyable. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
massraider said:
I could see a future where smart TVs allow you to choose the angle to watch during broadcasts. 
Click to expand...
In the future we will have 3D holograms of games on our coffee tables. Then you can just sit at the end of the table and scream your ### off at the tiny RB that hits the wrong hole.

 
Pros and cons with everything, including this angle, and we could nit it to death, but in general I really liked the angle -- absolutely picked up some interesting parts about the way the blocks and routes unfold that get lost in a side angle. While it's true that you lose some depth perception --specifically around how far downfield a back has scampered -- seemed like they tried to add in both scrimmage and first down lines. Not perfect, but definitely helped.

I wish the shot was actually a little wider, too, so we can see how wide-outs split out on either side develop their routes from scrimmage as well. This angle is like one of the All-22 Coach's Film that NFL (sporadically, it seems) provides in their app. I really like it, maybe even as the primary angle, but would also like other angles mixed in as well. 

Football is a chess match and a game of inches, and this angle seems to showcase that aspect really well. 

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I could see someone arguing they don't like it from an enjoyment perspective because it's harder to tell how many yards are being gained, but from an evaluation standpoint?  It's 1000x better from an evaluation standpoint.  You can see what the RB sees and if he's hitting the right hole, you can see what the QB sees and how the routes develop.  It's a no brainer from an evaluation standpoint.

I agree with the OP, I loved it.

It also gave some great insight into how wide open the Pats WRs are running around.  They really know how to draw up plays over there.
Click to expand...
I very much agree with this. There was a play where Brandin Cooks lined up on the left side of the line, and you could clearly see a straight line ahead with noone to cover him for 30 yards. There was a guy 10 yards TO THE SIDE, but with Cook's speed no way he could get to him. I watched fascinated and sure enough Atlanta didn't adjust, and sure enough Brady hit him going straight up the seam, and they got a 30-yard pass play.  That was really amazing to see.  

 
Kwai Chang Caine said:
I loved it! But I wouldn't want it 100% of the time. Be nice though if they mixed it in 33% maybe?
Click to expand...
bring in the fog machines!

i personally would have like to seen snow as well, do we have this technology?

 
LawFitz said:
In the future we will have 3D holograms of games on our coffee tables. Then you can just sit at the end of the table and scream your ### off at the tiny RB that hits the wrong hole.
Click to expand...
In the not so distant future you will be able to put on glasses or sit in a room and you will be front row or where ever you want to be. 

Eventually it will be so realistic that it will pointless to actually play the game. 

 
The Boston Herald interviewed the    Executive Producer from NBC, who sounded like they were not all that interested in using those cameras and those angles very often. Apparently they are moved with joysticks and are hard to operate. He was also concerned that it would pose problems in reviews and challenges. Didn't sound like they were entertaining using that option more. 

 
LOVED that angle.

My biggest pet peeve while watching football is how the camera only shows the line of scrimmage and pocket after the snap.

We have NO IDEA what is happening 10 yds / 25 yds  down the field. 

This QB POV angle showed the WR's / TE and DB's and you could see the WR's come open .... or why the QB had to eat the ball or throw it into the bench area.

HOW COULD ANYONE WHO LOVES FOOTBALL NOT LIKE THIS? 

They're broadcasting as if we're all still watching games on 19" tube tv's and they need to give us the "close up" of the QB in the pocket ... when in reality we can fit the entire field on our 65" LCD if they would just give it to us. Time to evolve people.

I contacted NBC Sports by filling out this comment form with my thoughts:

http://nbcsportsgrouppressbox.com/contact-us/

Maybe if enough people do the same they will consider making a change.

 
I loved the heavy dose of Skycam. I hope we continue to see it more.

Nate Burleson was talking about it and said it really shows the chaos that happens every play that the usual sideline angle doesn't show.

Side angle = pretty

Skycam = reality

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wingnut said:
I loved the heavy dose of Skycam. I hope we continue to see it more.

Nate Burleson was talking about it and said it really shows the chaos that happens every play that the usual sideline angle doesn't show.

Side angle = pretty

Skycam = reality
Click to expand...
Much easier to see running lanes than the sideline angle, and Skycam is better than All 22 showing pass plays (higher & wider.) Hope it gets widespread use.

 
I definitely like the angle from above as it gives a great sense of how the QB surveys the D and makes adjustments, and of course how things like run blocking, blitz shows and attacks and pickups work, and how the D line stunts and their attack develops.

It’s also good to see how a downfield play develops from a QB perspective.

That said, there is still the maxim that you can have too much of a good thing. It tended to be overdone last night, and I missed the lack of depth the angle provides when teams are trying to get a first down - from above and behind, you lose the sense of whether a team got the first or how far they were from it.

Moderation is key. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NREC34 said:
I for one think it sucks. 

There's a reason sideline tickets cost more than end zone. 
Click to expand...
When you're sitting in the stadium on the sideline you can see the whole field.  "That guy is open!".

Objectively if we step back and think about it, the zoomed in sideline view we get on TV is pretty silly.  We sit there and watch a QB stand in the pocket with no idea what's going on downfield.  No route development, no idea what coverage the secondary is running, no idea if the QB is standing there like a doofus because no one is open or because he doesn't see the open guys.  Yep, there he is, standing in the pocket.  This is exciting.  Then he winds up and throws to god knows what, which we don't even see until the last second.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NREC34 said:
I for one think it sucks. 

There's a reason sideline tickets cost more than end zone. 
Click to expand...
Boom.  :goodposting:

Hated it. There is no depth perception... so you see guys bouncing off each other while waiting for the analyst to tell you if that run went for 1 yard or 6.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NREC34 said:
I for one think it sucks. 

There's a reason sideline tickets cost more than end zone. 
Click to expand...
Sideline tickets are more because they have the best stationary view.

Skycam is like Endzone seats that let you stand on the field behind the offense from both ends of the field.

Skycam rules and it's here to stay.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not a fan.  Doesn't even seem like I could get used to it.  

I am gonna predict that no, it is NOT here to stay other than for occasional usage or optional usage if that were to ever happen.

 
ghostguy123 said:
Not a fan.  Doesn't even seem like I could get used to it.  

I am gonna predict that no, it is NOT here to stay other than for occasional usage or optional usage if that were to ever happen.
Click to expand...
I mean its not going anywhere. It wont be used as heavily as it was last night but I think we will see it sprinkled out throughout every game now...if it was used for instant replay most of the time - we'd see the live play from the usual sideline angle, and then the Skycam replay so we can see how the play developed - I'd be fine with that.

 
NREC34 said:
I for one think it sucks. 

There's a reason sideline tickets cost more than end zone. 
Click to expand...
Aparantly you've never been to a game.

When I go to a game ... and pay a premium for a sideline seat (vs end zone), I can still watch the WR's / DB's down field. Can't see that on tv with the traditional sideline camera.

Sideline camera angle SUCKS vs actually being at the game. I've been clamoring for years that they should broadcast the all 22 ... but this angle from behind the QB is even better.

People who want to see more than just the QB holding the ball in the pocket should prefer the QB view camera.

The casual NFL fan may not appreciate the QB view but the hardcore fan certainly should.

With this angle you see the blocking, the LB's, the WR's and DB's down field. You see the holes open up for the RB.

If you appreciate the details away from the ball, how could you not prefer this angle? 

 
The new camera angle is never going to gain widespread acceptance, but I could see them continuing to use it occasionally.

I can put up with it every once in awhile.

 
ghostguy123 said:
Not a fan.  Doesn't even seem like I could get used to it.  

I am gonna predict that no, it is NOT here to stay other than for occasional usage or optional usage if that were to ever happen.
Click to expand...
Yeah, having it as an option is the way to go for people who like it.

Not sure we'll ever see it happen (the option) or of it's even practical from the network's viewpoint (maybe if there's a charge), but it's a good idea.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Travdogg's FA/1st round predictions
2
Replies
82
Views
3K
Ray_T
R
creepythinman
True League Winners - Upgrading the Playoff Roster
Replies
25
Views
2K
creepythinman
creepythinman
Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
1K
zamboni
zamboni

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top