bubba9497 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 from the man who posted 500 different views of the Alstott play :laugh: :laugh: Reread what I posted. The chip in the ball idea is NOT possible. For many different reasons. 1. The effect it would have on the flight of the ball in passing or kicking 2. The ability of a hacker being able to set off the detector, or player hiding a chip on his person. 3. The same problem as with the refs... how can the detectors read the chip with so much interferance from the players 4. The cost of each football would be outrageous (even if they could find a miracle way to accurately detect it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 Reread what I posted.The chip in the ball idea is NOT possible. For many different reasons. 1. The effect it would have on the flight of the ball in passing or kicking 2. The ability of a hacker being able to set off the detector, or player hiding a chip on his person. 3. The same problem as with the refs... how can the detectors read the chip with so much interferance from the players 4. The cost of each football would be outrageous (even if they could find a miracle way to accurately detect it) It is very clear you do not understand the level of technology we have, and it would not be expensive at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunBunch7 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 I don't think they are ever going to adapt the 2 pre season games/18 regular season games rule for a couple reasons... 1. 2 pre season games are just as valuable "financially" as 2 regular season games as far as the owners are concerned. 2. The players would want more money for "playing" in 2 more regular season games...they each get paid once a week...so if a player makes $1.6 million per year, his gross check is $100,000 per week. But if you add 2 more weeks without raising his salary, his gross check would be "only" $88,888 per week. Trust me, the players would want more $$$$$$$$$ 3. It's not realy needed...why would I want to watch the 4-12 Saints become the 4-14 Saints? 4. Record books! This happened very subtly when we went from 14 games to 16 games. OJ got his 2,000 season in just 14 games, but Dickerson broke his record in a 16 game season. There are single season stats/records and career stats/records that would be greatly affected. Don't get me wrong...I hate the pre season and would love more games in the regular season...I just don't think there is a snow balls chance of it happening. Heck, the fantasy season would be longer too which would be awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 it is just a matter of time before this is changed Actually it will be at least another 5 years before any cable company can bid on the Sunday Ticket. Fox News Corp., the owners of Directv, resigned a five year deal, earlier this year, for around 5 billion dollars. It was a separte deal from FOX's NFC deal that was also resigned for 5 years, done the same time as NBC's and ESPN's new deals. Comcast, the largest cable provider, never made a real push for exclusive Sunday Ticket rights and the NFL would have lost money by allowing a joint service of the Sunday Ticket with Fox News Corp., for example the NBA or MLB packages are on both services. At the growth rate of the NFL, the growth rate of Directv, then add in the factor of 65% of Directv users ordering the Sunday Ticket, Fox News Corp. is going to do everything in their power to keep the Sunday Ticket exclusive, and anyone that knows, knows the Rupert Murdoch is not affraid to spend a ton of money. Factor in the rising Verizon DSL and FIOS I-Net subscribers the new FCC law that allows Verizon to now carry cable signals, and in a year or two Comcast will not only be in a I-Net provider battle with Verizon but a cable company battle with a larger company. :dallasuck :gaintsuck :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 i disagree, plus when the wind blows hard we get to keep our picture and if we move we can give back our box very easily I've never had a problem with dish. I dumped digital cable because I was always having problems with my provider #cough# Comcast #cough#. Yes, the wind can blow very hard in the Central Valley of California. When we finally do sale our house and move to the east, Dish Network will take our equipment and move it to Georgia and put it on our new house. Now on King, the only thing that he said that was worth reading is that they shouldn't mess with the number of playoff teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowland Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Reread what I posted.The chip in the ball idea is NOT possible. For many different reasons. 1. The effect it would have on the flight of the ball in passing or kicking 2. The ability of a hacker being able to set off the detector, or player hiding a chip on his person. 3. The same problem as with the refs... how can the detectors read the chip with so much interferance from the players 4. The cost of each football would be outrageous (even if they could find a miracle way to accurately detect it) 1. These chips weigh next to nothing. 2. You watch too much TV. 3. You may have a point. 4. I put a ID chip in my dog for $50. I'm sure it's less to put a chip in a football. And the NFL will just fine the players more for throwing them in the stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Reread what I posted.The chip in the ball idea is NOT possible. For many different reasons. 1. The effect it would have on the flight of the ball in passing or kicking 2. The ability of a hacker being able to set off the detector, or player hiding a chip on his person. 3. The same problem as with the refs... how can the detectors read the chip with so much interferance from the players 4. The cost of each football would be outrageous (even if they could find a miracle way to accurately detect it) 1- All depends on what kind they use. Some are as small as a grain of rice and wouldn't do much to the ball in flight if placed correctly and securely. 2- Hackers would only be a concern if they wired the goal line to some sort of network accessible from the outside and allowed it to be remotely triggered. They wouldn't becuase it would take more work to do that with no plus side. A player could hide the chip on his person but that could easily be stopped and detected. 3- Wire running under the goal line or similar set up to read when the ball passes over it. Assuming the players aren't wearing lead sheilding they wouldn't present much of an obsticle. But it would all depend on the set up. 3- The NFL has plenty of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunBunch7 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Reread what I posted.The chip in the ball idea is NOT possible. For many different reasons. 1. The effect it would have on the flight of the ball in passing or kicking 2. The ability of a hacker being able to set off the detector, or player hiding a chip on his person. 3. The same problem as with the refs... how can the detectors read the chip with so much interferance from the players 4. The cost of each football would be outrageous (even if they could find a miracle way to accurately detect it) This is a corny idea, but what about and X-ray vision machine on the goal line. In the Mike Alstott 2pt play, they could not over turn the call because there were too many bodies in the way to see his knee, the ball, etc. But if there was some type of X-ray machine, may, just maybe they could detect his knee and the flight of the ball. Okay, I'm getting Sci-Fi here but I would have done anything to have that over turned. Even with a chip in the ball, it may still be impossible to see where someone's knee is in a pile of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 It is very clear you do not understand the level of technology we have, and it would not be expensive at all. I understand the technology very well, jbooma, this idea had been tried repeatedly over the years in baseball and football... it is not possible. even the smallest of chips, has a huge effect on the flight of the ball... that alone nixs any attempt. as in any form of technology, there are people who can and will find a way to cheat. even places like las vegas that spend billions a year in security, get hacked all the time. you don't think some computer geek fan wouldn't figure out a way to trip the detector? and again, the simple task of clearly detecting the ball is near impossible without a huge cost factor (and doubtful then) and then you go back to the hacker. Even a player stealing a chip out of a ball on the sidelines, and stashing it in an arm pad or helmet, to trip the dector. it is not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 1. These chips weigh next to nothing. 2. You watch too much TV. 3. You may have a point. 4. I put a ID chip in my dog for $50. I'm sure it's less to put a chip in a football. And the NFL will just fine the players more for throwing them in the stands. :laugh: :laugh: The chip would signal a light like they have in the NBA when time runs out so EVERYONE in the stands can see. Yes he does watch to much TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Even with a chip in the ball, it may still be impossible to see where someone's knee is in a pile of players. True but you would know WHEN the ball reached the goal line. Watch the video to see where the knee is and when the light turns on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 I understand the technology very well,jbooma, this idea had been tried repeatedly over the years in baseball and football... it is not possible. even the smallest of chips, has a huge effect on the flight of the ball... that alone nixs any attempt. as in any form of technology, there are people who can and will find a way to cheat. even places like las vegas that spend billions a year in security, get hacked all the time. you don't think some computer geek fan wouldn't figure out a way to trip the detector? and again, the simple task of clearly detecting the ball is near impossible without a huge cost factor (and doubtful then) and then you go back to the hacker. Even a player stealing a chip out of a ball on the sidelines, and stashing it in an arm pad or helmet, to trip the dector. it is not possible. Bubba it is, the problem is the NFL does not want to show their refs that they can not do the job, that is the main issue here, the refs are the one who will fight this. The technology is there, and it will have no impact on ball flight since these chips are so small and have basically no weight, remember the chip does not have to be on the outside of the ball, it can be inside the leather, which would work, attached to the stiching on the tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 The only way a hacker can hack into something is if the file is on the I-Net. If the goal of the chip is to signal a light and neither are on-line then how can it be hacked? :dallasuck :gaintsuck :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsNation Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Damn, what a moron....Especially the last part, Digital Cable is the same quality as Digital Satellite dish, he just has never experienced the latter and thus has his preformed opinion about such and won't change, exactly like his opinion of Art Monk.... ****. I wouldnt know....people like me who live in highrise condo's in DC & any other city cant get dish's. Condominium complex's have more bylaws than a miller lite commercial. The one "King Rule" i dont like is making it an 18 game season. In theory yes but the NFL is so good right now...im not saying its fragile by any means but adding 2 games would be weird considering how it would skew statistics for the rest of eternity. As for the rest. I like them - some more than others....Peter King may get bashed but all these changes are very welcomed in my book....except dont make it a "5 year no move rule" for the Saints...make it a lifetime rule. New Orleans needs a team...regardless of anything Katrina related...they need a team. New Orleans is a great city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Damn, what a moron....Especially the last part, Digital Cable is the same quality as Digital Satellite dish, he just has never experienced the latter and thus has his preformed opinion about such and won't change, exactly like his opinion of Art Monk.... ****. ... whered he say that? He just said put NFL ticket on digital cable, which I and many other digital cable subscribers would love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 I hate the 4 point field goal idea. Teams would actually have reason to NOT drive down the field at the end of close games. That idea sucks. Also 16 games is plenty and teams have a hard enough time keeping their stars healthy as it is. Expanding the roster would help teams get through two more games but create an inferior product on the field with backups getting more playing time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunBunch7 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 How about this...a coach can have unlimited challenges throgh out the game. Why should a coach be "penalized" and "forced" to use his only challenge when it is an obvious error to everyone but the ref who, ofcourse, is watching the game at full speed and doesn't have the benefit of replay until the challenge. And it should NOT have to be "inconclusive" to over turn the call. If it "look" like a fumble, it's a fumble...if it looked like the guy "probably" stepped out of bounds, he's out. I think the limit on challenges and the "inconclusive to over turn" rule are what should be changed. Computer chips, and the goal post lighting up aren't in the cards just yet...heck, I can't even stop telemarketers from calling my house and you all want computer chips, lit up goal posts and rulings from God if it was a touch down or not???? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 I think the NFL has an out in their Deal with Direct TV, think of how much money they can make, and even by reducing the package to say $150, and then let in all the cable users in!!! It will happen soon, watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 I understand the technology very well,jbooma, this idea had been tried repeatedly over the years in baseball and football... it is not possible. even the smallest of chips, has a huge effect on the flight of the ball... that alone nixs any attempt. as in any form of technology, there are people who can and will find a way to cheat. even places like las vegas that spend billions a year in security, get hacked all the time. you don't think some computer geek fan wouldn't figure out a way to trip the detector? and again, the simple task of clearly detecting the ball is near impossible without a huge cost factor (and doubtful then) and then you go back to the hacker. Even a player stealing a chip out of a ball on the sidelines, and stashing it in an arm pad or helmet, to trip the dector. it is not possible. ... what about hockey? Seems to work fine there. Admittingly I don't know how that works, but I dont see why it couldnt be done similarly in the NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 even the smallest of chips, has a huge effect on the flight of the ball... that alone nixs any attempt. actually they could put something in there with the consistency of a postage stamp. - That wouldn't affect the ball at all. ...One thing I've been saying for years. - the NFL is always looking for ways to make the games more exciting - why not allow teams to dress all 53 on game day? - It would allow more specialists for special teams and goal line situations, there fore potentially higher scoring games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunBunch7 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 How about no more fair catches on punt returns. That was one good thing about the XFL. Just give the 5 yard "hailo" around the return man and then, well, hope that hsi mother can still reckognize him after wards. And if a player kneels down in the end zone on a kick off, his team gets the ball at the 10 yard line. But if the kick sails through the back of the end zone, they get it at the 20. Here is an Arena Football rule that is interresting: Near the end of the game when tryiong to run out the clock, if the offensive team doesn't make possitive yardage on the play, then the clock stops. This prevent them from being able to kneel down. Just a few ideas that other leagues have tried that "might' work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 How about this...a coach can have unlimited challenges throgh out the game. because it'd be.... need a timeout? challenge a play. - They should adjust the current system, that if you have an unlimited amount if you're always right. - 2 wrong and you're out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunBunch7 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 because it'd be.... need a timeout? challenge a play. - They should adjust the current system, that if you have an unlimited amount if you're always right. - 2 wrong and you're out. Yeah, you got a point there. But as long as they kept it to side line plays, end zone plays, and possession plays there wouldn't be the abuse of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 How about this...a coach can have unlimited challenges throgh out the game.Why should a coach be "penalized" and "forced" to use his only challenge when it is an obvious error to everyone but the ref who, ofcourse, is watching the game at full speed and doesn't have the benefit of replay until the challenge. And it should NOT have to be "inconclusive" to over turn the call. If it "look" like a fumble, it's a fumble...if it looked like the guy "probably" stepped out of bounds, he's out. I think the limit on challenges and the "inconclusive to over turn" rule are what should be changed. How about take the coaches out of the equation entirely. I liked the system back in the late 1980s/early 1990s: An official up in the booth signaled down to the field officials if they wanted to review a play. Period. It's the same system they employ in the last 2 minutes of every half now. Sure, they stopped the game more often than they do now...but so what? Are any football fans really going to complain if 20 minutes is added to a game? We wait all week for the games to come on, why are we in such a hurry to get them overwith? If you can increase the chances of getting more calls right, do it. I LOVED the old IR system, it gave them the best shot at getting as many calls right as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 I think the NFL has an out in their Deal with Direct TV, think of how much money they can make, and even by reducing the package to say $150, and then let in all the cable users in!!! It will happen soon, watch. Usually with TV contracts there are no "out's", and I doubt the NFL wants to return money to get out of a contract. The NFL is paid by the service provider not by how money fans subscribe to the service. The NFL does not make money on the commercials that air during the games on Sunday Ticket the networks do. All NFL games are aired by the networks of every market regardless of size and 95% of the air time sold for commercials are by the actual network, not the local station broadcasting your local network signal. Thus FOX, CBS, and NBC networks are making 95% profit of the commercials that air, if the local station is actually owned by the network, and not a second party, then it is 100% profit. In other words FOX doesn't care if you are watching the Giants-Cowgurls game via Sunday Ticket because they are getting there money regardless. So I'm not sure how the NFL stands to make more money when they signed the best financial deal that was on the table. :dallasuck :gaintsuck :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.