IPAD on the Bench

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Weight rooms are not inherently an advantage as the game of basketball requires more than a weight room to be a good and players and coaches would have to do more to be a good player than lift weights.

Actually, a good fitness room, when used properly, can be a big advantage to conditioning, when use properly. Still, as been stated by others, this is about what's used during the game.

Once again, all things technological are tools, nothing more, nothing less. A coach's tool could be many things: clipboards, spiral notebooks, dry-erase board, BlackBerry, etc. It seems that some have a fear of certain tools, just because they're electronic or can shoot video.

What are we afraid of here, really? That certain schools have better resources than others? That already goes for many things, during the game. That only the rich schools can afford such tools? Again, these tools are far more affordable than before. That players/coaches can look at video right there on the bench? So what if they can? What's wrong with a little ingenuity to perform better, regardless of the task?

[Adam]

For whatever reason, that's how the committee wants it and has always wanted it. You may as well ask why a shot from 20 feet away is counted as 3 points.

[Camron Rust]

Perhaps they want the players to prepare before the game and perform during the game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Actually, a good fitness room, when used properly, can be a big advantage to conditioning, when use properly. Still, as been stated by others, this is about what's used during the game.

I do not want to get into a huge debate over this, but I can get in great fitness without fancy weights or a fancy room. And considering that basketball is about size and quickness, those rooms mean little or nothing to me working on those things. I also cannot teach size. Ever heard of P90X? That program does not need a machine or fancy weights to accomplish those goals.

Originally Posted by bainsey

Once again, all things technological are tools, nothing more, nothing less. A coach's tool could be many things: clipboards, spiral notebooks, dry-erase board, BlackBerry, etc. It seems that some have a fear of certain tools, just because they're electronic or can shoot video.

No one is afraid of tools. It is just a reality that a rural or inner-city school for example that may not have adequete computers normally now could compete against a private or suburban school that has more resources and use those things. That is a completly different.

Originally Posted by bainsey

What are we afraid of here, really? That certain schools have better resources than others? That already goes for many things, during the game. That only the rich schools can afford such tools? Again, these tools are far more affordable than before. That players/coaches can look at video right there on the bench? So what if they can? What's wrong with a little ingenuity to perform better, regardless of the task?

Again you really need to stop with the hyperbole. No one said anything about being afraid. I think competition should be equal during the game and not using technology to get a clear advantage. If you can coach you can identify things without a computer. And you certainly should not have others not on the bench giving you information from some other point of the gym which is why many of these devices are outlawed. I do not think that is too much to ask.

Peace

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you can coach you can identify things without a computer. And you certainly should not have others not on the bench giving you information from some other point of the gym which is why many of these devices are outlawed. I do not think that is too much to ask.
Peace

Nailed it.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Ever heard of P90X?

Just started last week. Damn plyometrics had me sore for days!

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is just a reality that a rural or inner-city school for example that may not have adequete computers normally now could compete against a private or suburban school that has more resources and use those things.

Here are some more realities: We're not talking about servers here. There are far more expensive things today that teams must deal with than handheld devices. And, schools must find a way to afford PCs in order to prepare our youth for the 21st century world. Since handheld devices are affordable for all, that argument of the haves and have-nots is simply antequated. I've dealt with very rural schools, and they're certainly not without technology.

Again you really need to stop with the hyperbole. No one said anything about being afraid.

That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.

I think competition should be equal during the game and not using technology to get a clear advantage.

The competition would only be unequal if one team was allowed to use a device, and the other team wasn't. Let the coaches decide what devices they want to use to do their jobs. One team almost always has advantages over another, and that's just life. This realm should be no different.

[CoachP]

Pretty sure if there are iPad's on the bench, "the school" did not buy it for the coach.

I admit, we have a tech advantage at our school. Only one scoreboard, and it's in our frontcourt for the second half.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Just started last week. Damn plyometrics had me sore for days!

Then you know what the hell I am talking about.

Originally Posted by bainsey

Here are some more realities: We're not talking about servers here. There are far more expensive things today that teams must deal with than handheld devices. And, schools must find a way to afford PCs in order to prepare our youth for the 21st century world. Since handheld devices are affordable for all, that argument of the haves and have-nots is simply antequated. I've dealt with very rural schools, and they're certainly not without technology.

An IPad cost right now about $500 or more based on the hard drive (can be nearly $850 in the right places). I personally cannot afford that now based on other bills and priorities in my life, you really think schools can afford multiple of these devices and be able to pay for fixing them or replacing them for either damage or theft.

I grew up in a rural area and went to a rural school. A lot of this depends on your state and population and financial situation of the state and districts. A lot of rural schools cannot afford a lot of things and have less money for athletics. We argue over what we are paid and if schools can afford a 3rd official and now we expect schools to compete in an activity that many have considered dropping all together because of expenses and we want to allow schools to use things based on a technology advantage? You act like all schools have similar resources which if you just look at the news that is extremely clear how there are the have or have nots in education in this country.

Originally Posted by bainsey

That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.

What does that have to do with what we are talking about? The NF changes rules every year and some drastic changes. This is not about change, this is about balance in competition. You will have an in-balance if you allow some schools to use technology and many host schools would provide things for their locker room and not the visiting locker room. This would be a bad idea and why I do not see a change anytime soon. And it is not about fear. If you can coach you can do so without a video for a 10 minute period.

Originally Posted by bainsey

The competition would only be unequal if one team was allowed to use a device, and the other team wasn't. Let the coaches decide what devices they want to use to do their jobs. One team almost always has advantages over another, and that's just life. This realm should be no different.

The school that can barely buy uniforms and provide adequate other equipment will not have to buy more devices to play a simple game. It is a sport, not a test of the have and have nots.

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We argue over what we are paid and if schools can afford a 3rd official and now we expect schools to compete in an activity that many have considered dropping all together because of expenses and we want to allow schools to use things based on a technology advantage?

I want to allow schools and coaches the choice of using such devices. No-one says they have to.

Besides, you could be a better coach without such devices or a substandard coach with them. I may not need a clipboard or any other tool to coach. Ultimately, it should be up to the individuals using them.

The school that can barely buy uniforms and provide adequate other equipment will not have to buy more devices to play a simple game. It is a sport, not a test of the have and have nots.

Reality check, Rut: Often times, sports is indeed a test between the haves and have nots. Consistently, those towns with better youth programs result in more victories in middle and high school. Sports is a microcosm of life, and one thing that life teaches us is that it isn't always fair. (Just ask the kid upon whom you called that foul.) If you're saying that no-one should have something that some cannot afford, that's hardly preparing anyone for life.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I want to allow schools and coaches the choice of using such devices. No-one says they have to.

Besides, you could be a better coach without such devices or a substandard coach with them. I may not need a clipboard or any other tool to coach. Ultimately, it should be up to the individuals using them.

If those devices only were used to diagram plays then yes that would be one thing, but you can get text messages, video and talk to someone directly. This is more than diagramming a play. We have video capability for years and we do not allow the camera to be used at the bench and by rule you cannot use any video and review a play during the game. Also not everyone understands how to use those things so you will have another advantage based on technology and not coaching the sport. If that is the case why not allow shoes that make you jump higher too? That is technology, who has the best should be allowed too right?

Originally Posted by bainsey

Reality check, Rut: Often times, sports is indeed a test between the haves and have nots. Consistently, those towns with better youth programs result in more victories in middle and high school. Sports is a microcosm of life, and one thing that life teaches us is that it isn't always fair. (Just ask the kid upon whom you called that foul.) If you're saying that no-one should have something that some cannot afford, that's hardly preparing anyone for life.

Well the rules are created to make an equal playing field or court so that all participants can play with the same advantages and disadvantages. You make it only about technology, and then the game would not allow for that to take place. You can disagree all you like, but this is likely why the rule is in place and will not change. Now I could see some rules allowing for IPad to be used for scorekeeping or keeping records, but not to aid you in coaching or using video. And the same reason it is outlawed in other sports as well. Even in the pros they have rules as to how video can be used, but they have a standardized system that must be used, not every available technology is allowed. I think the Patriots in the NFL got in a little trouble as there was video to review signals, not the playing action. It is against the rules in MLB to use video to use or other devices to call steal signals other than someone on the field witnessing those signals. If the pros put limits on the use of technology used during and even before or after games, why should the NF lift their ban? Oh, because of life right?

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Also not everyone understands how to use those things so you will have another advantage based on technology and not coaching the sport.

Who says the two can't go hand-in-hand? Besides, if one coach knows more about something than the other coach, then yes, that's life, too.

If the pros put limits on the use of technology used during and even before or after games, why should the NF lift their ban?

It's not often that the NF would look at the pros as a blueprint for anything. The pros, of course, address very specific areas that can and cannot be videoed, and those areas are far more detailed than I understand. Are there parallels? Probably. We'd have to look at what exactly those pro rules entail, as they rely on video more than high schools do to keep their jobs.

If that is the case why not allow shoes that make you jump higher too? That is technology, who has the best should be allowed too right?

I'd imagine rocket shoes would be nixed pretty quickly, based on safety issues alone.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bainsey

...


That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.

....

No, that's called an opinion.

The rulesmakers have deemed certain electronic devices create an unfair advantage or don't belong in the game.

Doesn't mean people fear anything.

That's a mighty big leap in logic.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Just started last week. Damn plyometrics had me sore for days!


Here are some more realities: We're not talking about servers here. There are far more expensive things today that teams must deal with than handheld devices. And, schools must find a way to afford PCs in order to prepare our youth for the 21st century world. Since handheld devices are affordable for all, that argument of the haves and have-nots is simply antequated. I've dealt with very rural schools, and they're certainly not without technology.


That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.


The competition would only be unequal if one team was allowed to use a device, and the other team wasn't. Let the coaches decide what devices they want to use to do their jobs. One team almost always has advantages over another, and that's just life. This realm should be no different.

Coaches do make the rules. Just sayin

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Coaches do make the rules. Just sayin

You can't say that. People here get very upset because some guy that they once know that one time officiated is on the committee.

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Coaches do make the rules. Just sayin

Hmmmm.....

"Hey coach, don't blame me. Your guys made the rules!"