Editor’s note: This is part of a series of stories about innovation and change in college football throughout the 2023 season.
When the news broke an investigation into allegations of sign theft and in-person testing rule violations in MichiganThe initial reaction from many coaches was obvious: why doesn’t college football just use headset communication like NFL?
“I think we would solve a lot of these problems if we did the same thing in college football,” Nick Saban told The Pat McAfee Show.
“This needs to be done, especially in Power 5,” said North Carolina head coach Mack Brown, who added that he has seen UNC signs stolen before. “This is something that should be done and should be done as soon as possible.”
Now it’s happening. At least temporarily. In December, the teams will be allowed to use communications technology in non-college football playoff bowl games. They will also be allowed to use the game’s video technology, such as tablets, on the sidelines. Use of each will require the agreement of both participating teams and their respective conference offices.
The NCAA Football Rules Committee approved the communications technology experiment this summer, after a request from the Big Ten to allow communications and secondary technology in games this season. The use of video technology in bowls was just approved last week.
“This has been a topic that has been the focus of the rules committee for the last couple of years,” said NCAA National Coordinator of Officials Steve Shaw. “There is a lot of momentum towards opening this file. We would like to have very good feedback on the playoffs.
The conversation highlighted how college football is behind in gaming technology. Along with headset communication, the NFL has used secondary tablets since 2014. Major League Baseball added the PitchCom communications system last year. College baseball and softball now use communication and dugout technology in games. Even high school football allows secondary video in most states. Where is college football?
“There are high schools across the country that are much more advanced in terms of technology,” Nebraska athletic director Trev Alberts said. “Just think about how crazy some of our games are, all those big posters. It seems like it’s time to take a look at it and delve into some of the technologies available.
Helmets
Cost is no longer the biggest barrier to communicating with a headset, even though it was for a long time. The NFL has had in-helmet communication since 1994 and added a device for defensive players in 2008. The times have changed.
At least two companies are ready. GSC produces NFL coach-player communication and baseball technology and has tested its product in college football practices. CoachComm produces the training headsets for nearly every Division I program and also provides baseball and softball technology at the collegiate level. CoachComm created an in-helmet football communications system that was tested by Grambling and Southern in a 2021 game, thanks to a waiver from the rules committee. Both teams said THE Athletic the test went off without a hitch. CoachComm provided the system to the XFL this spring, and it has been used by FBS teams in practice.
“I’m not going to lie, it was perfect,” Grambling quarterback Elijah Walker said. Athleticism Last year. “It helped me be more of a coach on the field, speed up the game and communicate better.”
But legal questions about how the technology would affect helmet warranties remain a major hurdle. Everyone wonders who would be liable if someone was sued for head injuries and there was a third-party device in the helmet. The NFL does its own testing with helmet manufacturers and has a collective bargaining agreement with players, unlike college football. CoachComm hired independent testers and found almost no difference in results with the CoachComm in-helmet player system. But the manufacturers haven’t moved yet, said CoachComm owner Peter Amos.
It is possible that schools will eventually decide to take this risk. FBS schools that have tested the CoachComm system in practice include Oklahoma State, Houston and others, according to the company.
“The pressure is increasing so much that some teams are considering doing it anyway because they are tired of waiting,” Amos said. “They all want to experiment with the technology to make sure it’s worth making the headsets do it.”
Wearable devices
Another option for coach-player communication is wearable technology, such as wristbands or belt displays. They would get around the liability issue, be cheaper, and allow more than a few players to wear a device. An FBS conference sports administrator granted anonymity to discuss an ongoing decision-making process. Athleticism that handheld devices could be the most likely option for next month’s bowling games because of these benefits.
Go Rout and Armilla are among the leading companies in this field. Go Rout has worked with high schools and colleges in several sports for years, including football programs like Auburn, Washington, Waking up forest And Freedom. It won a 2017 NFL Startup Award for athlete communications technology and was used in the Big 33 Football Classic high school game in February.
“Our defensive (reconnaissance) team uses it a lot and we love it,” Liberty head coach Jamey Chadwell said. “These guys, as soon as a piece is finished, they turn it over and look at it very quickly. This has allowed us in recent years to obtain both quality and quantity of repetitions. Our offensive players have pointed out how many extra reps we get because of this. I like this because players don’t have to come back as a group.
In this system, coaches upload a game plan into the software and send the play via a tablet to the players’ screens, which will be no larger than a business card. The screen can display a play call or the diagram of the play itself.
“Most gamers today haven’t spent a significant portion of their lives without an iPhone or tablet in hand,” said Mike Rolih, founder and CEO of Go Rout. “The ideal starting point was scout teams (in football). This is simply the biggest problem for teams and coaches every week during the season. We learned how to help coaches and players communicate visually.
Go Rout has also partnered with Verizon, which runs the NFL’s headset communications network, with plans to set up similar networks at bowling venues for games that use it. Partnerships Manager Drew Robinson said the system is affordable from sports to Western Michigans.
“This immediately addresses all the issues identified by the coaches,” Rolih said. “If you only talk to one or two people on one side of the ball, you still have to huddle or signal. It’s not going to eliminate that. This solves these problems up front.
Hourly
The schools are ready and the technology is ready, but sports are quickly becoming pressed for time. The rules committee approved the use of technology in bowl games this summer, but conferences only recently approved some protocols, and there may be more to come. Bowl game announcements are less than a month away.
Can one team use technology if the other team chooses not to? Should they both use the same type of technology? It will be up to the teams and conferences to decide.
But also: will they have enough time to train beforehand? This is not a rental. This is a major investment. Companies need to know a timeline for developing their products. Robinson said Go Rout plans to be on campuses within three days of the bowl announcement to begin onboarding, but businesses need to know the specific rules.
“The details are going to change everything,” Amos said. “The longer they wait to establish these rules, the more difficult it is to provide equipment in time for training. No one wants to use it for the first time in their bowl games. (I’m worried) what’s going to end up happening is they’re going to get very little data, which is the point of all this.
The FBS conference’s sports administrator said it’s possible that sideline tablets are more prevalent in bowl games than communications technology.
Shaw said the rules committee does not control what happens in bowl games. It is also neutral towards different technology companies, without favoring one over the other. The group is just waiting to get feedback to see how it all goes. If all goes well, the technology could be widespread in college football as early as next year. This may be similar to instant replay, which was tested by the Big Ten in 2004, used by nearly all FBS conferences in 2005, and officially codified in 2006. The Big Ten and ACC were the conferences pushing the most in favor of technological advances, even before The news from Michigan broke.
The rules committee actually approved the use of electronic and video devices in 2016, but it was rescinded a month later after commissioners said more time was needed to develop more guidelines. Shaw said there were concerns about opening up the technology too quickly without considering all the possible misuses. (For example: While tablets are allowed in the field, a staff member cannot use them to break down film in real time in an office, a prohibited practice called remote coaching.)
But almost every other sport has already opened the door to technology. MichiganThe alleged sign-stealing scheme brings the issue to the forefront, a controversy that could have been avoided if college football had kept up with the times. The pieces are in place. Sport must adapt.
“Over the next five years, more than 20 million athletes across the United States will wear some form of coach-player communication during practices and games, which is just standard procedure,” Rolih said. “Whether it happens now or in a few months, I don’t think you’re going to slow this train down. It happens. This happens in every other sport around us.
The Innovation & Change series is part of a partnership with Invesco.
The Athletic maintains complete editorial independence. Partners have no control over or input into the reporting or editing process and do not review articles before publication.
(Top photo: Robin Alam/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
