Cameras at First Down and End Zone Lines NOW! (1 Viewer)

[TDorBust]

I don't understand how a multi-billion dollar organization doesn't have a total of 96 extra cameras (6 per stadium) each in place around the league.

I find each week there is multiple calls where you don't have an accurate view of where the ball is. This week the big play is the Graham missed TD but every week it seems to be a key first down or TD that the Refs are really unable to make an accurate call in replay.

Solution:

Place 6 cameras

2 Cameras on each goal line on opposite sides of the field for a total of 4 cameras

2 Cameras on tracks that can move to directly behind the first down markers on opposite sides of the field

Idea of cost:

http://www.camcorderchris.com/what-cameras-are-used-in-the-nfl/

For.a FT-ONE 4k Camera - $90k (marked up not as cost NFL would likely get)

Total Cost Roughly- $8 Million
I don't see how we can go into 2015 without this solution in place for the NFL. You would think if the NFL truly cared about the integrity they would have this in place in time for the postseason. I just hope my Packers don't lose out because of a missed call.

Also one other option would be to put in ball tracking software that would be able to verify exactly where the ball is on the field at all times.

http://www.hawkeyeinnovations.co.uk/page/sports-officiating/tennis

Just so you know the Hawkeye technology is what the English Premier League uses for its goal line technology to determine if the soccer ball crossed the goal line or not. As a note soccer has a lot of the same issues as the NFL with multiple players in the way, a goal keeper potentially touching the ball, and one added issue of a goal actually being in the way as well.

Seems like a pretty simple solution to help with the lack of ability for the Refs to accurately gauge first down and TD replays.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

100% onboard with this. It's ridiculous how often these plays come up with all of the camera angles being diagonal and of no help.

 

[lod01]

With today's technology, you would think that there would be chips implanted in the footballs and along to goalline.

 

[CR69]

With today's technology, you would think that there would be chips implanted in the footballs and along to goalline.

They're actually testing that with a few teams right now. RF chips in the ball and on players iirc.

 

[steveski]

With today's technology, you would think that there would be chips implanted in the footballs and along to goalline.

They're actually testing that with a few teams right now. RF chips in the ball and on players iirc.

Didn't some people complain that they could tell a difference? Or am I thinking about basketball when they tried to do something similar?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

With today's technology, you would think that there would be chips implanted in the footballs and along to goalline.

Even soccer, which is so resistant to new technology that they still don't stop the clock for play stoppages, does this now. Kind of ridiculous that the NFL doesn't.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

The National Football League's desire to bring technology to the game may be exciting to techie sports fans, but a recent report claiming that the league wants to put microchips into its footballs to increase referee accuracy could cause significant debate between the purists who welcome human error and those who want every call to be right.

According to Reuters, a German chip company called Cairos Technologies is currently in talks with the NFL to bring its microchip technology to footballs. The technology, which was originally designed for soccer balls, helps referees know when the ball has crossed a line. In soccer, the technology is used to help referees determine if a ball did, in fact, pass the goal line.

In American football, Cairos Technologies' technology would have a similar function. In an interview with Reuters, the company's sales director, Mario Hanus, said the chip could be especially useful for those times when a referee must determine if a ball crossed the first-down marker or goal line. If the ball does, in fact, pass the first-down or goal line, an alert would be sent from the microchip to the referee's watch. The idea is to take the element of human error out of the equation.

http://www.cnet.com/news/microchips-making-their-way-into-nfl-footballs/

ORLANDO, Fla. – Patriots coach Bill Belichick gave his usual short, understated answers Tuesday morning at the NFL owners meetings when asked about his players and the issues surrounding the Patriots.

He was also asked about the cost of adding extra cameras to the sidelines to ensure full coverage for instant replay, one of the four rules changes he has proposed for these league meetings.

“Maybe we could have a bake sale, raise some money for the cameras. We could do a car wash,” he joked. “We just spent however many million dollars on the replay system. I mean, there’s a thousand cameras in every stadium, so if somebody spills a beer on somebody we have it on record, right?”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/03/25/bill-belichick-shows-lighter-side-owners-meetings/lEapNJ4OZuBJ9bV3F6ninN/story.html

 

[ShamrockPride]

S.TFU with that purists and human error crap. That's baseball. Go watch that s***, enjoy your nap. Bye.

I'm good with chips. I just wonder how they'd implement them in the ball. Do you have 2, one on each end? Do you have just one dead in the center, where the threshold then essentially becomes you need to get 50% of the ball over the goal line?

 

[massraider]

I just want to be able to watch the game from that camera behind the QB. That's the best.

 

[mrmits]

This week the big play is the Graham missed TD

Chase Ford called out at the 2 when he was clearly in bounds before he went in the end zone....the other problem is the reviews...if you're not going to overturn an obvious call...why bother do the replay in the first place?

"the play stands as called" is just too easy as an out

 

[Run It Up]

People called me crazy for wanting to put cameras over the goal posts.

 

[msommer]

S.TFU with that purists and human error crap. That's baseball. Go watch that s***, enjoy your nap. Bye.

I'm good with chips. I just wonder how they'd implement them in the ball. Do you have 2, one on each end? Do you have just one dead in the center, where the threshold then essentially becomes you need to get 50% of the ball over the goal line?

One in each end wouls also mean that the ball would retain the same centre of mass, which is a good thing

 

[TDorBust]

Well they could use some right now in the Lions/Cowboys game.

 

[TDorBust]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12507975/significant-replay-rules-changes-proposed-owners-meetings-next-week

"Also to be discussed in Phoenix will be a proposal by the New England Patriots to place fixed cameras on all boundary lines. That would guarantee coverage of those lines regardless of where network cameras are positioned."

Good to see the NFL might get cameras on all fixed boundary lines.

 

[Spin]

If we put chips in the footballs to tell when it crosses the goal line, how will we be able to tell if it crosses before or after a RBs knee touches the ground? Do we then cross reference GPS position with the exact timestamp the refs claim the player is down via replay?

 

[TDorBust]

If we put chips in the footballs to tell when it crosses the goal line, how will we be able to tell if it crosses before or after a RBs knee touches the ground? Do we then cross reference GPS position with the exact timestamp the refs claim the player is down via replay?

Thats different than what the NFL is looking at now but pretty simply.... yes.

It would be fairly easy to have a little dot in the upper right hand corner of the screen that turns green when the balls crosses the end line. You just move the footage until the knee is down and if the light is green before that happens TD and you move on to the next play.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

If we put chips in the footballs to tell when it crosses the goal line, how will we be able to tell if it crosses before or after a RBs knee touches the ground? Do we then cross reference GPS position with the exact timestamp the refs claim the player is down via replay?

put chips in their knees

 

[Old Smiley]

mmm chips

 

[voiceofunreason]

Instant replays are awful and kill games. They have almost zero important overturns and probably 10 times as many screw ups (Dez, Calvin, Tuck play). People need to relax and get over small mistakes. It's part of the game.

 

[dickey moe]

mmm chips

... and with Victor Cruz you get salsa!

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

It's part of the game.

right or wrong is not the goal i think, even if they get it right 100% of the time thanks to technology, half of the fan base will be happy and the other half won't. so why put the chain gang out of a job?

 

[ShamrockPride]

Are some people really okay with incorrect calls to cut just 5-7 real time minutes off a broadcast?

 

[imjackdupp]

Are some people really okay with incorrect calls to cut just 5-7 real time minutes off a broadcast?

You obviously mean per review.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Are some people really okay with incorrect calls to cut just 5-7 real time minutes off a broadcast?

You obviously mean per review.

Of course, but even at that, how many are there a game most of the time? 3, maybe 4 occasionally. Sounds like something somebody would have an official number on: average reviews per game. Anybody? Anybody?

 

[GregR]

Are some people really okay with incorrect calls to cut just 5-7 real time minutes off a broadcast?

You obviously mean per review.

Of course, but even at that, how many are there a game most of the time? 3, maybe 4 occasionally. Sounds like something somebody would have an official number on: average reviews per game. Anybody? Anybody?

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/64441086/nfl-statistical-analysis-average-nfl-game

There will be 8.9 penalties and 1.6 reviews and about 55 percent will come from the replay booth. Of the reviews triggered by the replay booth, 58 percent will be upheld. Coach's challenges will be more successful, as just less than half will be upheld. These reviews will take a total of 3 minutes and 30 seconds, or 2:08 per review (this data comes from my own timing of 48 reviews this year).

 

[GregR]

I imagine they could probably cut at least 1/3 of the time out of the review if they let the booth handle the actual review, as college does.

Also, I don't know if that number is only from reviews the broadcast didn't cut away or not. Going to games in person, you'll see the ref is often done with the review and standing around for awhile waiting for the sideline guy with the orange oven mits to indicate the broadcast has come back from commercial.

I am guessing they have a limit on commercial breaks in number and/or length. If they keep to that regardless of reviews it would help.

 

[Faust]

Did New England Patriots' Bill Belichick go on a profane rant at NFL meetings?

Oh well, it had the desired outcome:

NFL to begin research on adding cameras to stadiums

 

[Dragon1952]

Determining the accuracy of TD calls at the goal line should be the absolute, most important priority that there could possibly be. I can't even fathom the number of replays I saw last year that were inconclusive due to the fact that there wasn't a straight line shot down the goalline. Absolutely ludicrous and I can see why an owner would go ballistic when

it was abvious to him that no one else agreed.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Is there a particular owner that's leading the charge against this? It would be great to know so I can root for them to get knocked out of the playoffs by an inconclusive call on the goaline.

 

[TDorBust]

Are some people really okay with incorrect calls to cut just 5-7 real time minutes off a broadcast?

You obviously mean per review.

Of course, but even at that, how many are there a game most of the time? 3, maybe 4 occasionally. Sounds like something somebody would have an official number on: average reviews per game. Anybody? Anybody?

They could eliminate that if they just had an official in New York that did all replays and sent the word back to the stadium. Why does the guy on the field have to make the overturn? It would speed up the game if New York was just reviewing all the plays on the fly and then if the red flag is thrown it could be a much quicker turn around. Plus if New York was in charge of it that "team" of officials would get extremely fast due to repetition that a normal sunday crew doesn't have I would guess.

 

[Bojang0301]

Is there a particular owner that's leading the charge against this? It would be great to know so I can root for them to get knocked out of the playoffs by an inconclusive call on the goaline.

Mara recently said that is was too expensive. GoPro's are a couple hundred bucks and duck tape is only a few dollars... Problem solved.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Too expensive is laughable. That should never be an excuse for the NFL. Even if you got a high-end broadcast camera which is about $100k per, that comes to $25.6m to cover both end zones with 4 cameras each in 32 stadiums. That can be covered with just 7 Super Bowl commercials (in 2014 a 30 second spot was $4m). The NFL talking about not being able to afford things is rather offensive to me.

 

[VikingFrog]

Too expensive is laughable. That should never be an excuse for the NFL. Even if you got a high-end broadcast camera which is about $100k per, that comes to $25.6m to cover both end zones with 4 cameras each in 32 stadiums. That can be covered with just 7 Super Bowl commercials (in 2014 a 30 second spot was $4m). The NFL talking about not being able to afford things is rather offensive to me.

The NFL isn't the one charging for Super Bowl commercials. Your logic is flawed.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Too expensive is laughable. That should never be an excuse for the NFL. Even if you got a high-end broadcast camera which is about $100k per, that comes to $25.6m to cover both end zones with 4 cameras each in 32 stadiums. That can be covered with just 7 Super Bowl commercials (in 2014 a 30 second spot was $4m). The NFL talking about not being able to afford things is rather offensive to me.

The NFL isn't the one charging for Super Bowl commercials. Your logic is flawed.

Point taken, my mistake. How about any other tiny portion that does go to the NFL. Regardless, affordability isn't an issue in this case.

 

[VikingFrog]

Too expensive is laughable. That should never be an excuse for the NFL. Even if you got a high-end broadcast camera which is about $100k per, that comes to $25.6m to cover both end zones with 4 cameras each in 32 stadiums. That can be covered with just 7 Super Bowl commercials (in 2014 a 30 second spot was $4m). The NFL talking about not being able to afford things is rather offensive to me.

The NFL isn't the one charging for Super Bowl commercials. Your logic is flawed.

Point taken, my mistake. How about any other tiny portion that does go to the NFL. Regardless, affordability isn't an issue in this case.

I won't argue with you there. Between the TV networks, NFL owners, and NFL, someone can afford it.

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

Is there a particular owner that's leading the charge against this? It would be great to know so I can root for them to get knocked out of the playoffs by an inconclusive call on the goaline.

Mara recently said that is was too expensive. GoPro's are a couple hundred bucks and duck tape is only a few dollars... Problem solved.

Mara only has to pay for 1 endzone too since he shares a stadium.

 

[msommer]

Is there a particular owner that's leading the charge against this? It would be great to know so I can root for them to get knocked out of the playoffs by an inconclusive call on the goaline.

Mara recently said that is was too expensive. GoPro's are a couple hundred bucks and duck tape is only a few dollars... Problem solved.

Mara only has to pay for 1 endzone too since he shares a stadium.

And likely the reason for why the Chargers and Raiders are looking to share a stadium in LA

 

[Bojang0301]

Is it even the NFL that would have to pay for the cameras? Wouldn't it be easy to strong arm the networks? Does the league pay for the network cameras being used right now? They strong arm everyone else so I don't see how this isn't an option and quite frankly the sitting on hands of ownership and Goodell is getting quite tiresome. Even during the owners meetings avoiding handing out the Browns/Falcons punishments so none of those con men have to comment on TV.

 

[GregR]

Something from a John Clayton mailbag:

Q: Would it be feasible to place cameras in the end zone pylons directed both down the goal line and sideline? It seems to me if your alarm company can allow you to see comings and goings in your home with your smart phone, the league can do something with wireless video.

Keith in Upper Marlboro, Maryland

A: And that's why I think the league will eventually put the cameras in place. The question is going to be when. After the NFL owners meeting, the league started an intense study into the right ways to do it. Each stadium is different, so location in the stadium had to be analyzed. And player safety has to be considered as well. I think too many people dwelled on the league worrying about the costs. I'm sure the NFL could find a sponsor if necessary. Remember, the NFL didn't say no to the camera idea. It wanted to do it the right way, and that takes time.

I think I agree with Clayton here. If the proposal was just a proposal that it be done, without including details like what is required at each stadium, how you do it minimizing the cameras being destroyed by players and possibly players being hurt if they run into them, etc, then all of those questions have to be answered before they could implement anything anyway. If they had approved it in March and then had to commission a study to figure out how to do it, or commission the study and then vote once you see what it takes, it isn't really much difference. It would seem to make sense to say, let's go get the answers and then vote on it.

Also agree with his point they could get a sponsor to help offset any cost, same as they do with the first down line technology.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

If we put chips in the footballs to tell when it crosses the goal line, how will we be able to tell if it crosses before or after a RBs knee touches the ground? Do we then cross reference GPS position with the exact timestamp the refs claim the player is down via replay?

Thats different than what the NFL is looking at now but pretty simply.... yes.It would be fairly easy to have a little dot in the upper right hand corner of the screen that turns green when the balls crosses the end line. You just move the footage until the knee is down and if the light is green before that happens TD and you move on to the next play.

Yeah but then u gotta make sure the refs aren't red/green colorblind

 

[msommer]

How come the leaue can investigate cameras on sidelines in two months for 32 stadiums but it takes more than three months to find out how come some balls were deflated in one game?

 

[IHEARTFF]

Amazing that the owners are going cheap on this one. Do these guys realize they light money on fire for awful free agents all the time? Whereas this money would actually show a positive return.

 

[TDorBust]

Something from a John Clayton mailbag:

Q: Would it be feasible to place cameras in the end zone pylons directed both down the goal line and sideline? It seems to me if your alarm company can allow you to see comings and goings in your home with your smart phone, the league can do something with wireless video.

Keith in Upper Marlboro, Maryland

A: And that's why I think the league will eventually put the cameras in place. The question is going to be when. After the NFL owners meeting, the league started an intense study into the right ways to do it. Each stadium is different, so location in the stadium had to be analyzed. And player safety has to be considered as well. I think too many people dwelled on the league worrying about the costs. I'm sure the NFL could find a sponsor if necessary. Remember, the NFL didn't say no to the camera idea. It wanted to do it the right way, and that takes time.

I think I agree with Clayton here. If the proposal was just a proposal that it be done, without including details like what is required at each stadium, how you do it minimizing the cameras being destroyed by players and possibly players being hurt if they run into them, etc, then all of those questions have to be answered before they could implement anything anyway. If they had approved it in March and then had to commission a study to figure out how to do it, or commission the study and then vote once you see what it takes, it isn't really much difference. It would seem to make sense to say, let's go get the answers and then vote on it.

Also agree with his point they could get a sponsor to help offset any cost, same as they do with the first down line technology.

I dont agree with Clayton or the NFL owners who want to do this the "right" way.

How about just getting the cameras for the stadiums bolt them to the upper deck and see how it works. Once you have the cameras moving the location is something you can do between games. As they said each stadium is different and as long as the head of officials is in charge of okaying the placement of cameras its not like a team can use it as a home field advantage know which cameras are placed correctly.

Its fine if they want to do a study but they should be doing the study with the cameras already in place and then choose to move them later. Have a video expert from one of the networks or outside contractor place all the cameras the first year. The military can have a sit-rep up in the middle of the jungle in some 3rd world country and find a rebel leader in 30 mins but it takes the NFL 1-2 years to do a study on where to place a camera to watch a goal line....