Telefootball

The notion of telemedicine, in its various forms, is quickly taking shape wherever you look. It encompasses a wide range of shapes and forms. Among them is the concept that certain medical conditions can be monitored from a distant location. For example, the idea of remote electrocardiogram (EKG) monitoring has been in place for years (so that medical providers can effectively keep track of people with arrhythmias and become immediately notified if anything is awry). I'd like to propose a somewhat novel approach (see reference #1), along similar lines, to dealing with many of football's ills. Lets call it Telefootball.

Recently, as discussed in my first blog entry, the NFL has come under scrutiny for not properly addressing the rise in player concussions (and subsequent dementia later in life). We have come to discover that it's not only the big hits (with a subsequent concussion) that cause serious damage - but brain damage can also results from many, many small hits. Many examples of pathologists taking biopsies of brain tissue from longtime "casual" football players (individuals that never came close to playing professional football - and never reported any concussion) show that football-related brain damage can occur from seemingly benign impact (see reference #2). I'd like to propose inserting into the players' helmets and padding small sensors that can continually monitor (by assessing the force associated with any impact) the total number of collisions. In this way, we can know, real-time, how much potential damage these players have been exposed to and whether to limit their playing time. If we see that a certain player has withstood, for example, a threshold of 1000 Newtons of force maybe we decide to pull him from the game and limit the damage (similar to how radiologists keep a monitor on them to ensure they don't get exposed to too much radiation). These sensors, in addition to ensuring player safety, may potentially be able to do a wider variety of things. Firstly, they can potentially monitor player's actions to assess their running patterns and determine whether the player is effectively moving according to their pre-assigned routes, how fast they're moving and whether there's any correlation between changes in their route-running and the type of play they've designed. Secondly many football arguments come down to poor referee decision-making - perhaps these sensors can aid in referee decisions. For example, in some cases its unclear whether or not a player has successfully crossed into the endzone (to score a touchdown) - with sensors located on their body we can potentially monitor their location and evaluate whether the player has adequately crossed the end zone.

The idea of monitoring and transferring information wirelessly is not novel. It's been done in across many different fields and endeavors. However, the ability to intelligently synthesize that data in order to better inform decision-making is not a concept that has gained much traction in the world of football. Hopefully, this will soon change.

References
1) Sauser B. Analyzing Hard Hits on the Football Field. MIT Tech Review. Oct 1, 2010. Retrieved online from http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/26425/?a=f 

2) Gelston D. University of Pennsylvania Football Player had signs of trauma-induced brain disease. Huffington Post. Sep 14, 2010. Retrieved online from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/14/owen-thomas-autopsy-revea_n_715878.html

Alas, Vertical Integration Works

Over the last few decades, a general consensus has been building that the vertical integration model doesn’t really apply anymore. There seem to be two general trends driving corporations to move production away from a vertical model. Firstly, more and better information technology creates specialized firms that encourage outsourcing and additional layers within an organization to handle these complex processes. Secondly, globalization makes cheaper production facilities more easily accessible abroad. The NFL presently seems to be grappling with this issue in their stance towards their Thursday Night Football telecast. I believe that despite, the widespread criticism, their decision to wrest control over the television distribution of their games was a sound business decision.

Starting in 2006, the NFL decided to launch a slate of eight weekly games that would be aired on the last eight Thursdays of the season. This ignited quite a bit of controversy at the time because football games are traditionally played on Sundays (with one game reserved for the revered Monday Night Football telecast). Fans saw this additional game as a "cash-grab" by the league and players saw it as a terrible inconvenience for them (since they are generally accustomed to having a week to rest their aches and bruises between games).

Why was the NFL so intent on ensuring that Thursday Night Football survived? The only conceivable reason, despite the criticism, had to do with injecting the NFL’s then-fledgling TV channel (aptly titled the NFL Network) with a shot in the arm. The league had launched the channel in 2003 to exclusively cover the league’s teams and its players. They found it wasn't difficult to attract their hardcore fans to the network but they wanted the channel to be more ubiquitous. As it stood then, an individual had to request access to the channel from their cable provider and pay an additional monthly fee to their cable provider (these channels were not part of the regular cable package that customers purchase). So, in 2006, they decided to independently start broadcasting their own games. In no time, people that hadn't necessarily cared about getting access to the network began to start caring. Fans wanted to be able to watch whatever game they so pleased – as they had grown accustomed to. Customers voiced their displeasure (to cable companies) and the cable companies were forced to acquiesce and make the NFL network part of their regular programming package. Those additional costs were ultimately borne by the customer – as everyone was forced to pay an additional 50 cents or so (regardless of whether they’d ever watch or even cared about the NFL). The NFL Network’s reach expanded exponentially. In the process, the NFL figured out how to create profits from what seemed like a moribund business model. They used the seemingly-antiquated idea of vertical integration – and presided over every part of the television delivery of their games – to create true value. Other industries and businesses are now officially on notice.

References

Hensley J. Ray Lewis: 99 percent of players would vote against Thursday games. Baltimore Sun. Nov 8, 2010. Retrieved from http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/blog/2010/11/ray_lewis_99_percent_of_players_would_vote_against_thursday.html

Osegowitsch T, Madhok A. Vertical Integration Is Dead, or Is It? Harvard Business Review. March 15, 2003. Retrieved online from http://hbr.org/product/vertical-integration-is-dead-or-is-it/an/BH089-PDF-ENG 

Wooley S. Why the NFL Network is Using the Wrong Playbook. CNN/Money. Nov 11, 2010. Retrieved online from http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/11/11/nfl-network-thursday-night-football-based-on-old-business-assumptions/

The Ticketing Issue

Several years ago the NFL decided that - rather than allowing scalpers to charge enormous markups for their tickets - they'd like to get into the secondary market of ticket selling (in addition to the primary market, where the teams sell tickets directly to fans) themselves. By doing this, in addition to directly securing these additional profits, the NFL also gained access to important information on consumer demand (e.g. the relative demand for tickets based on seat location, team opposition, weather, etc...). They initiated this action via a website called NFL Ticket Exchange, which is operated by TicketMaster.

Nevertheless, I believe two issues still remain. Firstly, there is a glaring lack of contact between buyers and sellers in this market - as all transactions are mediated by Ticketmaster. Although this ensures there aren't really any trust issues (since Ticketmaster guarantees the authenticity of the tickets), I do think the market would be aided by allowing buyers to somehow contact or gain information about sellers. Buyers can learn how well they can see the action from where the seats are located, the types of fans that are usually situated around them, high-quality eateries that may be located nearby, etc... Secondly, many fans complain about the fact that this system encourages easy access to tickets from anyone who wants them and this disrupts the dynamic of the stadium (as many fans from the visiting teams can easily purchase tickets through secondary markets - this had previously been a lot harder to do when fans bought tickets from their own teams, as priority was assigned to to those who had a more extensive buying history). It's much more fun to go to a game when most of the fans belong to the home crowd - rather than dealing with "fair-weather" fans or those from the opposing team.

Therefore, I believe the NFL Ticket Exchange is only part of the solution, the next step is to adopt an approach similar to what is being offered by Twck.it, a social “music-ticketing” network.  Through this site, fans selling tickets can post their listings to Twck.it for free (no registration required). These sellers must then use their existing Facebook or Twitter accounts to enter the ticket information, and their listing will appear through the Twck.it network (and their price/seat information will be compiled for purchasers to easily navigate). In this way, buyers have some medium in which they can converse with sellers and gain more information about the tickets they’re buying. Furthermore, in response to fans complaining that secondary markets allow into stadiums a certain type of fan that detracts from the game experience, this initiative will encourage more group unity among fans attending the game (since they will probably restrict purchases to those with like-minded interests). Lastly, Twck.it offers a free ticket marketing service to sellers, including detailed reports with extensive “activity summaries” for each of their listings (which is similar to what Ticketmaster offers – but here, in addition to being able to assess buyer tendencies, you can track buyer profiles through their publicly-provided information. 

Ultimately, this really can be something potentially beneficial for both the league and its fans. Again, I’m cautiously hopeful that real change will be enacted.

References

Kastelein R. Twck.it Launches first Social Ticketing Technology for Concerts. EU Ticket News. Oct 17, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.euticketnews.com/20101017939/twckitr-launches-first-social-ticketing-technology-for-concerts.html

Press Release. NFL Ticket Exchange by Ticketmaster Kicks off 2010 Season as the Official League-Approved Ticket Marketplace. PR Newswire. Aug 9, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nfl-ticket-exchange-by-ticketmaster-kicks-off-2010-season-as-the-official-league-approved-ticket-marketplace-100274019.html

Fennelly J. How Technology has Changed the NFL Experience. Bleacher Report. Sep 10, 2009. Retrieved from http://bleacherreport.com/articles/251693-how-technology-has-changed-the-nfl-experience

Gregory H. NFL Looking to Profit from Secondary Ticket Market. Fox DC. Aug 20, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/money/nfl-looking-to-profit-from-secondary-ticket-market-082010

The Blackout Issue

The NFL currently has a blackout policy in place where they prohibit the airing of games on local stations (anywhere within a 75-mile radius) if the city hosting the game has failed to sell out the stadium at least 72 hours prior to the initiation of the game. This policy has been in place for decades. The basic rationale for implementing a blackout seems financially sound - that consumers of football will be compelled to attend the game (and pay inordinately high prices for tickets) if they are unable to watch it from the comfort of their living room. In 2009, a record-high number of games were blacked out (8.6% in total). I'd like to argue that this approach is antiquated and in dire need of a re-assessment.

With the advent of high-definition television and the wide variety of alternative devices - that cater to viewing sports (smartphone, laptop, Slingbox, etc...) - at our disposal, sports in general is moving away from being something that necessarily needs to be seen in person. In fact, one can easily make the case that it's preferable to watch the game from home rather than attend the match itself. Just last week, I attended the Minnesota Vikings - NY Jets game at the Meadowlands in New York and, despite being a lifelong football fan, found the experience to be mostly lousy. The parking situation was atrocious (it took an hour to get to our spot and an hour to get back on the highway once the game finished), the weather was terrible (thunderstorms), the food was unspectacular and highly priced and the fans were raucous. I paid 150$ (per ticket) in order to endure that - rather than sit at home and watch the game on my sofa for free. I mention this simply to say that I do think more fans are going to soon realize, with such high-quality viewing, that it simply doesn't make sense to attend games. The NFL and the TV networks must know this as they signed deals worth over 20 Billion$ for the league's viewing rights. Additionally, the league's attendance figures have shown consistent decline over the past several years. Along these lines, the NFL needs to reassess what's most important - their TV revenues or attendance revenues. As I'm suggesting above, I think it's undoubtedly their TV revenues that should occupy primary importance - for that reason, they should care less about not being able to sell out games and more about ensuring as many people are watching their games as possible.

Additionally, in today's difficult economy, the NFL needs to be more sympathetic towards fans that are unable to afford tickets. The average ticket price rose nearly 5% in the past year to 76.47$ and fans that can't pay that price shouldn't be punished (by being unable to see the games). It may have been the case only 10-15 years ago that those fans would be simply unable to watch the game. Today, however, you likely force many of them to pursue alternate avenues for watching the game that the NFL will be unable to extract any money from - via the internet (through websites like Justin.tv) or illegal satellite. So, not only are they creating a disgruntled fan base - but they are also forcing that fan base to pursue questionable means (for watching the game) that may potentially ultimately backfire against the league.

I think the system needs to be re-evaluated. I can only hope the Commissioner's Office feels the same way and ultimately takes the necessary action to rescind this blackout policy.

References

Horrow R. "Technology: The NFL's Friend or Foe?." Businessweek Magazine. Sep 16, 2010. Retrieved online from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2010/tc20100916_068999_page_3.htm

Riley C. "NFL Ticket Prices Climb Again." CNN/Money. Sep 28, 2010. Retrieved online from http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/24/news/economy/NFL_ticket_prices/index.htmver

The Concussion Issue

In recent years, many writers - most notably Alan Schwarz of the New York Times (1) and Malcolm Gladwell of the New Yorker (2) have begun remarking on the high incidence of devastating psychiatric and neurologic disease among former football players. The reasons behind this are not very difficult to figure out. Football players, over a lifetime, endure countless blows and repetitive trauma to their head and spinal cord. And, one would think, it should only be a matter of time until the human body can no longer absorb these hits without consequence.
Despite these concerns, there is very little evidence of any sort of systematic effort to truly assess the effect of football-playing on the future risk of disease. This can be done via construction of an electronic database that would monitor these players over time. This is important to do for several reasons. Firstly, we need to understand the real magnitude of this relationship so that we can decide how important it is to intervene. For example, if we find out that one out of every four players are at increased risk for future disease, then perhaps we need to cancel the football season and immediately re-evaluate the game and how to make it safer. Secondly, there are a wide variety of potential confounders involved in the relationship between football and future psychiatric/neurological disorders that need to be addressed and accounted for. For example, football players are more likely than the average person to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes - these are both factors known to be related to an increased risk for a wide variety of neurological and psychiatric diseases. The only way to truly adjust for these relationships (in assessing the direct link between football-playing and future disease) is to construct a database so that we can engage in a formal study. Lastly, this would be useful so that we can gauge the effect of any intervention that we decide to pursue (assuming that indeed this link is real).
We must use the awesome power of information technology and storage to begin accumulating information on a wide variety of characteristics associated with every player in the NFL today as well as every retired NFL player. This idea is similar to what Sergey Brin, Co-Founder of Google, is proposing in order to better understand the risk factors associated with developing Parkinson's Disease (3). Through this we can quantitatively determine the true relationship between football-playing and future disease, as well as account for the confounders that are likely impacting this relationship.

References
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/27/sports/football/27concussion.html?_r=1&ref=alan_schwarz
2. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/19/091019fa_fact_gladwell
3. http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/06/ff_sergeys_search/

Hello Blogsphere

We're going to be discussing the many ways in which the National Football League (NFL) can be made significantly better by the adoption of a wide variety of Information Technology (IT) - based solutions. Please read on...