NFL moving closer to replacing chain gang with new technology to measure line to gain
- Thread starter PappyK
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2003
- Messages
- 17,541
- Reaction score
- 47,973
They're actually taught to do it this way, and the coaches understand that this is how it works...
JamesWsenior
Club Member
They did mention in the story the back ups remain on the sidelines.
Someone will hack the system IMO
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2019
- Messages
- 23,435
- Reaction score
- 120,211
- Location
- you tell me and we will both know
Why the NFL still uses chains — an outdated technology — to measure first downs
The NFL still uses chains, but they have several good reasons for doing so.
www.businessinsider.com
bit dated but most still applies.
That place is so gross
And they will be on the new England staffThey did mention in the story the back ups remain on the sidelines.
Someone will hack the system IMO
mrhankey81701
Active Roster
Not a fan of this decision and I know I'm probably in the minority here. As mentioned earlier tennis has largely moved away from umpires into electronic calls for whether a ball lands out of bounds. I'm just not a fan of taking the human element out of sports. Part of what makes sports so great is the human element, and yes mistakes are part of that.
How will they determine where the ball was when the "knee was down"?
Aspiring orange post holders around the country our pounding their fists on the table.....actually, doesn't sound like a bad gig....dammit!
PappyK
Club Member
During preseason they will test this out. The refs are still in charge of determining the ball placement. The only thing this is doing, for now, is letting the ref know, as soon as they place the ball, it's a first down or not. I'm wanting ball tracking implementation personally. You can also do sensors on the players.. gloves.. shoes.. helmets etc
Highzenga
Active Roster
AI cameras can totally do this.
Zero.
I don't believe in that world wide interweb thing either...
This makes absolutely zero sense. You’re championing wrong outcomes, and at a more frequent rate, simply because a human is involved in the officiating?
Umpires costing pitchers perfect games is not “great”. Referees costing a team a chance of a Superbowl, NBA Finals, or World Series appearance or championship is not “great”.
The human element is only supposed to be part of the game when it comes to the active participants, not those mediating/officiating the action.
These sports/games have evolved in a myriad of ways. With ever-developing technology the games have been made safer. Very few complain about that. But making sure it’s more equal, fair, and most of all, accurate is somehow a bad thing?
I’m sorry, but I find this opinion just ridiculously silly. Because you’re essentially saying “yeah, I know the outcome was wrong, but since it was a human that made the mistake I’m more than willing to let it stand and reward the lesser team/player that didn’t earn it”.
Just out of curiosity, are you also ok with wrongful convictions and also of the belief that we shouldn’t seek to improve that situation if it was somehow possible?
And before you minimize and trivialize the difference between being found guilty in a court of law versus grownups playing a kids game — I acknowledge that the former is more serious and important than the latter. But we’re still talking about people’s careers and livelihoods and lifelong, relentless hard work being negatively affected when it can mostly be avoided.
Something tells me if you spent your entire life trying to achieve something to then have it ripped away from you due to the “human element” that could have been removed (or mostly removed) from the equation — you’d suddenly have a much different POV on this.
Last edited:
But how much is due to teams not really caring how the ball is spotted until it’s a crucial situation. I’ve always felt that the spot was a bit nonchalant until a key moment. Is there any basis to this?