Red Mosquito

spike wrote:

tree_ wrote:

spike wrote:

tree_ wrote:Does anybody else wonder about camera angles poorly capturing the game as you're watching it? With TVs being as HUGE and HIDEF as they are these days, why not make the ratio extra wide-screen/elongated so you can see more action downfield, instead of whipping the camera back and forth? You can't see what's going on downfield at all until the ball is in the air.

Some broadcasters are better at this than others.

yeah but a wider aspect ratio, ya know, with the black bars on top and bottom, would make much more sense for the sport.. so you can see more of what's going on to the left and right of the screen. it would make up for even poorer broadcasting

Black bars? Like the score?

You want a wider frame, not a taller one, due to the side-view angle of the broadcast. just show more of the field. if the aspect ratio is wider than the TV's natural one, there would be black bars on the top and bottom of the screen

i bet even if they made extra wide screen tvs specifically for football people would buy them.. welcome to the future

What if they went full-madden-mode and used the sky cam from behind the QB as the standard angle?

sometimes they tried that on some prime time games i remember, and it's not a great angle for some reason for real live football either. i just think my idea is a good one they should try some day

That's why I prefer going to a game versus watching it on TV if given the choice.

Monkey_Driven wrote:That's why I prefer going to a game versus watching it on TV if given the choice.

It’s become too much of a hassle to me, and especially not worth it if you have mediocre or worse seats

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:That's why I prefer going to a game versus watching it on TV if given the choice.

It’s become too much of a hassle to me, and especially not worth it if you have mediocre or worse seats

Be the fan of a mediocre team. Lots of seats available and plenty of room to stretch out and make yourself comfortable.

Monkey_Driven wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:That's why I prefer going to a game versus watching it on TV if given the choice.

It’s become too much of a hassle to me, and especially not worth it if you have mediocre or worse seats

Be the fan of a mediocre team. Lots of seats available and plenty of room to stretch out and make yourself comfortable.

I'm working on it.

I missed the Ravens signing DeSean.

I hate the Ravens.

But I think I love Ricard.

I neutral the Ravens. But I like Marlon Humphrey.

That's a made up name and therefore a wrong answer, Lenny.

elliseamos wrote:That's a made up name and therefore a wrong answer, Lenny.

No no no I assure you it's real.

tree_ wrote:Does anybody else wonder about camera angles poorly capturing the game as you're watching it? With TVs being as HUGE and HIDEF as they are these days, why not make the ratio extra wide-screen/elongated so you can see more action downfield, instead of whipping the camera back and forth? You can't see what's going on downfield at all until the ball is in the air.

I read somewhere once an opinion that the NFL deliberately does not want this - because people at home would see how many missed open receivers, wrong routes, mistakes, etc. there are every play

it would make it more evident the quality of the product is not as good

NFL wants to portray a good quality product

so they deliberately hone in on the QB/line of scrimmage and prevent people from seeing / experiencing the frustration of missed open receivers on most plays

96583UP wrote:

tree_ wrote:Does anybody else wonder about camera angles poorly capturing the game as you're watching it? With TVs being as HUGE and HIDEF as they are these days, why not make the ratio extra wide-screen/elongated so you can see more action downfield, instead of whipping the camera back and forth? You can't see what's going on downfield at all until the ball is in the air.

I read somewhere once an opinion that the NFL deliberately does not want this - because people at home would see how many missed open receivers, wrong routes, mistakes, etc. there are every play

it would make it more evident the quality of the product is not as good

NFL wants to portray a good quality product

so they deliberately hone in on the QB/line of scrimmage and prevent people from seeing / experiencing the frustration of missed open receivers on most plays

That's a silly opinion. What about all of the people in the stadium, at the game? How do they hide it from them? Also, all-22 film is available to all after the games have ended.

i don't buy that either. they hone in on the qb b/c he has the ball. it's also easier to film from the sidelines

I'm thinking futuristically, with ultra-wide technology, you could have the same level of zoom on your QB and then be able to look way to your left and right to see what else is going on, on the field. I just don't know why this isn't already available. Seems like a million dollar idea to me.

warehouse wrote:i don't buy that either. they hone in on the qb b/c he has the ball. it's also easier to film from the sidelines

*home in

I have Lamar Jackson on bye this week and missed picking up fields b/c my record is awesome. now i have no starting qb. best free agent available is russell wilson. i just sent an offer for a qb to every team in the league lol.

warehouse wrote:I have Lamar Jackson on bye this week and missed picking up fields b/c my record is awesome. now i have no starting qb. best free agent available is russell wilson. i just sent an offer for a qb to every team in the league lol.

Nice work. I had this weird issue last week where I had no TE and didn't want to drop a valuable asset, so I did a trade instead. Great way to go.