Helmet Comms for non-CFP Bowl Games Approved

Submitted by lilpenny1316 on November 8th, 2023 at 1:12 PM

That's the big headline. The very relevant part comes in the body of the article.

The Big Ten proposed the addition of helmet communications prior to this season, which the NCAA rules committee did not approve for the regular season.

However, it is going to allow them on a trial basis during non-CFP bowl games in order to determine the possible effects of helmet communications. If only one conference had access to them in-season, it could create an unfair playing field.

I wonder if the CFP has to give the OK for them to be used in their games, but I find it very interesting that the B1G actually pushed for this.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/2023/11/08/sign-stealing-ncaa-helmet-communications-sideline-tablets-in-college-football-bowl-games/71501460007/

Shorty the Bea…

November 8th, 2023 at 1:14 PM ^

Possible effects?????

Like what??? Nacho cheese oozing out of players' heads????

There's only one effect. No chance at sign stealing!!!

Except for the team who hires Signals Stalions Sign Stealers Inc...

mGrowOld

November 8th, 2023 at 1:16 PM ^

NCAA needs to validate that the technology the NFL has been successfully using for 29 years still works I guess.

One of the best suggestions I've heard regarding this entire nonsensical affair was that the B1G should simply fine Michigan whatever the cost of implementing helmet communication league-wide will cost and call it a day.  

Don

November 8th, 2023 at 1:26 PM ^

That the NCAA is already doing this supports my contention that regardless of what happens to Michigan or Harbaugh, the NCAA will within a year or two quietly rescind the 1994 rule against in-person scouting.

Just two years ago the NCAA itself actively considered rescinding the rule, as it concluded that in-person scouting conferred "minimal competitive advantage" relative to the cost of trying to enforce it.

Given that the rule was initially put into place not because of some high-minded moral or ethical imperative about the sanctity of college football but as a cost-saving rule for those programs that didn't want to spend the money on hiring professional video people, it doesn't make any sense for the rule to last much longer now that the NCAA is beginning to approve helmet communications that make sign-stealing largely irrelevant.

Blau

November 8th, 2023 at 1:16 PM ^

So there is a solution?

I was wondering how coaches were going to communicate with players now that signaling from the sidelines is detrimental and obsolete. I was going to suggest carrier pigeons but helmet radio communication does seem easier.

mGrowOld

November 8th, 2023 at 1:21 PM ^

1. The NFL has been using this technology since 1994 

2. There is a metric shit-ton more money involved in the NFL than any random college game so if these communications were easily hackable my guess is somebody would've successfully done it in the past 29 years.

brad

November 8th, 2023 at 1:19 PM ^

The Big Ten ladies and gentlemen!  Unwind a pointless and valueless rule, but be sure to skewer Michigan with it once before we toss the rule aside.

robpollard

November 8th, 2023 at 1:19 PM ^

It's good to highlight this amidst the torrent of "news", as I'm not sure people were aware the Big Ten proposed this, but this helmet com in bowls has been in stories for a couple weeks now.

Just highlights that if sign stealing was actually a "player safety" issue and act of perversion SO profound and disgusting that decorum prohibits listing them here, it could be fixed in a few weeks.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38743559/lsu-brian-kelly-lack-headset-communication-silly