Why not embrace technology?? - New England Patriots Forums

fumbrunner · 09-12-2007, 12:36 PM

I dont understand why the league is so slow to embrace technology that only helps to enhance the game. Instant replay has been so instrumental in making sure the right decision is made by refs, but it took the league eons to implement it (and they just made it a permanent change).

Now, we have the issue about not having the ability to communicate with defensive players (which has led to the signalgate mess). The offense has radio communication. Why not the defense? How did only 22 owners vote for this?

Technology is there to improve the game and those that embrace it have only benefited from it. Reading "Patriots Reign", I have no doubt that part of the Pats success this decade has to do with the ability to use sophisticated technology to break down games.

Now, PFT is quoting sources that the Pats are mic'ing Dlinemen to capture audibles and line calls to inform their half time adjustments. I say, big deal. More power to them.

These antiquated owners, GMs and coaches need to get their heads out of their asses.

njpatsfan · 09-12-2007, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fumbrunner

Now, we have the issue about not having the ability to communicate with defensive players (which has led to the signalgate mess). The offense has radio communication. Why not the defense? How did only 22 owners vote for this?

Because miking only the offense and not the defense helps only the offense. Polian and others who are on the competition committee, would never do anything to help defenses - only things that help offenses.

PatsChick87 · 09-12-2007, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njpatsfan

Because miking only the offense and not the defense helps only the offense. Polian and others who are on the competition committee, would never do anything to help defenses - only things that help offenses.

Actually in looking for info on the vote for defensive headsets I came across the facts that the competition committee was 8-0 for defensive headsets. It was defeated by 10 votes, missing by just two votes in being passed. Mike Holgrem was against it and quoted later that he couldn't see how it would work to have one designated defensive guy with a headset as many defensive players are in and out of groupings and they also are injured more frequently than the QB's. Good points, actually.

loosebearing · 09-12-2007, 01:13 PM

why not embrace technology

cus then about 28 of the teams would never have a chance of winning again.

Remember the Golden Rule

Leave no child behind

primetime · 09-12-2007, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsChick87

Actually in looking for info on the vote for defensive headsets I came across the facts that the competition committee was 8-0 for defensive headsets. It was defeated by 10 votes, missing by just two votes in being passed. Mike Holgrem was against it and quoted later that he couldn't see how it would work to have one designated defensive guy with a headset as many defensive players are in and out of groupings and they also are injured more frequently than the QB's. Good points, actually.

There's one player that's nearly always on the field for any given team, though. Vrabel for the Patriots, or Reed for the Ravens, or Polamalu for the Steelers, or Sanders for the Colts. I could go on, but you get the gist.