PDA

View Full Version : "The Footage the NFL won't show you" (Wall Street Journal)



Deepsepia
11-07-2011, 01:01 AM
interesting piece in today's Wall Street Journal -- surprising place for it-- on why don't see what coaching staffs see. The original article is much longer than this, but you get the idea . . .


The Footage the NFL Won't Show You
Despite Its TV Ubiquity, the League Won't Share "All-22" Footage; Second-Guessing the Coach

Every play during an NFL game is filmed from multiple angles in high definition. There are cameras hovering over the field, cameras lashed to the goalposts and cameras pointed at the coaches, who have to cover their mouths to call plays.

But for all the footage available, and despite the $4 billion or so the NFL makes every year by selling its broadcast rights, there's some footage the league keeps hidden.

If you ask the league to see the footage that was taken from on high to show the entire field and what all 22 players did on every play, the response will be emphatic. "NO ONE gets that," NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy wrote in an email. This footage, added fellow league spokesman Greg Aiello, "is regarded at this point as proprietary NFL coaching information."

For decades, NFL TV broadcasts have relied most heavily on one view: the shot from a sideline camera that follows the progress of the ball. Anyone who wants to analyze the game, however, prefers to see the pulled-back camera angle known as the "All 22."

While this shot makes the players look like stick figures, it allows students of the game to see things that are invisible to TV watchers: like what routes the receivers ran, how the defense aligned itself and who made blocks past the line of scrimmage.

By distributing this footage only to NFL teams, and rationing it out carefully to its TV partners and on its web site, the NFL has created a paradox. The most-watched sport in the U.S. is also arguably the least understood. "I don't think you can get a full understanding without watching the entirety of the game," says former head coach Bill Parcells. The zoomed-in footage on TV broadcasts, he says, only shows a "fragment" of what happens on the field.

For much of the NFL's history, seeing only part of the field wasn't a big problem. Passing wasn't as common, or complex, as it is today.

The NFL's creative geniuses were focused on the ground game and the lively run-blocking schemes that came with it. But as NFL offenses began passing more and sending more players into passing routes, they began stretching out the area in which plays are executed—making the All-22 footage more valuable. By the 1980s, when San Francisco's Bill Walsh began to perfect his pass-intensive West Coast offense, a scheme that involved moving the ball with quick, methodical throws, more of the game began to disappear beyond the edge of the television screen. Today's offenses, which routinely use four or even the maximum five receivers, have all but outgrown the traditional zoomed-in view.

Without the expanded frame, fans often have no idea why many plays turn out the way they do, or if the TV analysts are giving them correct information. On a recent Sunday, San Francisco 49ers quarterback Alex Smith threw a deep pass to tight end Delanie Walker for a 26-yard touchdown. Daryl Johnston, the Fox color man working the game, said Smith's throw was "placed perfectly" and that Tampa Bay Buccaneers safety Corey Lynch was "a little bit late getting there."

Greg Cosell, producer of the ESPN program "NFL Matchup," who is one of the few people with access to All-22 footage, said the 49ers had purposely overloaded the right side of the field so each receiver would only be covered by one defender. Lynch, the safety, wasn't late getting there, Cosell says. He was doing his job and covering somebody else. Johnston could not be reached for comment.

Frank Hawkins, a former NFL executive during the 1990s who is now a Scalar Media Partners consultant, says he remembers the NFL considering releasing the All 22. The biggest objection, he said, came from the football people.

Charley Casserly, a former general manager who was a member of the NFL's competition committee, says he voted against releasing All-22 footage because he worried that if fans had access, it would open players and teams up to a level of criticism far beyond the current hum of talk radio. Casserly believed fans would jump to conclusions after watching one or two games in the All 22, without knowing the full story.

"I was concerned about misinformation being spread about players and coaches and their ability to do their job," he said. "It becomes a distraction that you have to deal with." Now an analyst for CBS, Casserly takes an hour-and-a-half train once a week to NFL Films headquarters in Mt. Laurel, N.J. just to watch the All-22 film.

deebakes
11-07-2011, 02:09 AM
this story makes so much sense it has to be true :-k

Leefro
11-07-2011, 02:53 AM
Fuck all that how'd the jets get on

FBD
11-08-2011, 07:59 PM
Betting. That's why.

Hal-9000
11-08-2011, 08:03 PM
In Canadian football they've used that crappy wide angle shot for years :lol: Looks like high school coverage compared to American ball...

Deepsepia
11-09-2011, 12:47 AM
Betting. That's why.

Is it that more people would gamble, if they could see the game in a way that made more sense? Or that the bookmakers want an edge? Or something else?

I've always thought that in-game betting on football would be immense, billions upon billions of dollars. You could do it from your remote . . . the danger of corrupting the game is obvious, but boy, I think this is probably the single biggest "unmet demand" business I can think of.