Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Stretch Is Being Told the Big Screen TV Must Go...........

CloakNNNdagger

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
....................UP!

Jerry Jones doesn't want to move video board

So with a rookie slappy punter who'll undoubtedly be pumping gas in South Carolina this time next month able to send a kicked ball into the floating, four-sided drive-in movie screen at Cowboys Stadium, owner Jerry Jones will order the thing to be moved higher from the stadium floor, right?

Wrong.

"You don't need to move it," Jones said after Friday night's game between the Cowboys and the Titans, according to Paul Kuharsky and Matt Mosley of ESPN.com. "You gotta be trying to do it. The rule is very clear. You just kick it over."

Titans coach Jeff Fisher, co-chair of the league's Competition Committee, doesn't agree.

"It's an issue, yeah," Fisher said. "I'm sure the Cowboys or the league will tell you, I shouldn't have to throw a flag out there because [the officiating crew] didn't see the ball hit the scoreboard. Now, it's not necessarily their responsibility. Once a fair catch signal is given, then there are no eyes on the ball anymore. So they don't see it. So something has to get worked out. It can become a problem."

Per ESPN.com, rookie punter A.J. Trapasso and veteran Craig Hentrich struck the video board repeatedly during pre-game warmups.

"I hit it probably a dozen times in pregame," Hentrich said. "Probably somewhere around a five-second punt is going to hit it and some of the guys in the league wouldn't be able to punt here if it's not raised, they'd just be non-stop hitting it. I don't know what the people were thinking. I guess they should have tested things out before they put that thing in place. It'll have to be raised."

Cowboys punter Mat McBriar, however, said that he doesn't think it will be a problem (thus guaranteeing his employment for 2009, and likely beyond).

Meanwhile, we're still not sure what we think about the board itself. For folks at home, the thing potentially undermines the overall aesthetics. While attending a game, there's a chance that folks might spend more time watching the grossly oversized television instead of focusing on the action on the field.

So, basically, plenty of folks might end up paying good money for the ability to watch the game on a television that will often remind folks of the big tree that branced over the street and prompted endless do-overs during the days of skinned knees and periodic shouts of "Car!"
Click to expand...

LINK
 
I would just like to point out once again, for the record, that Jerry Jones is from Arkansas (or is it OK?). Either way, it ain't TX.

:D
 
From what my brother said at the McCartney concert and the game last night, the whole thing is being overblown and that in pregame they were trying to hit it. I personally think it should be raised just to make sure but we will see. It would be dumb to leave it with a chance. I've heard nothing but badass reviews of the place though. He gets 2 50 yarders for each home game and a pledge brother has a suite I'm supposed to go to....so I'm ready.
 
Last edited:
The league needs to force him to do so. You DO NOT change the game for a giant screen. It is a great screen(s), just raise the damn thing. If you saw folks vantage points they need the screens inside the stadium. I drive by this huge stadium all the time, it is impressive, but I am curious how the noise will be with this type of design. Reliant rocks when the crowd does. I am not sure if that will happen on board the Death Star?
 
Texaninlild said:
The league needs to force him to do so. You DO NOT change the game for a giant screen. It is a great screen(s), just raise the damn thing. If you saw folks vantage points they need the screens inside the stadium. I drive by this huge stadium all the time, it is impressive, but I am curious how the noise will be with this type of design. Reliant rocks when the crowd does. I am not sure if that will happen on board the Death Star?
Click to expand...

It was deafening at the McCartney concert Wednesday night.
 
If some object exists in the stadium that physically effects the play of the game, then it needs to be moved.

The place looks really nice. Bet its gonna be 1/2 empty and you won't see many of the same people sitting in the same seats with what JJ wants for a PSL and ticket.
 
It's no secret that this should have been anticipated. In the 1976 Pro Bowl, after Guy hit the Superdome screen, the league had the 90 foot clearance increased to 200 feet. It is not for Jeruh to determined who should or shouldn't be able to hit his screen. For some kickers it could tactically change their intended trajectory to a more acute angle with resulting shorter kicks or blocked kicks. Even though there may not be many Guys out there, those that have a "kick ass foot" should not be limited by a TV screen and the arrogance of an egocentric owner.
 
I'm just watching the replay of the game on NFLN....its so damn funny.

So much money, and Jerry can't even figure out a good place to put a videoboard. Its hilarious, and it obviously has to be moved. Just wait for a playoff game to be decided by a poor punt, because the original first good punt hit Jerry's television. I can't believe hes even trying to say it should stay. How about we place a new concession stand on the 20 yard sideline, overlapping a yard into the field. Just play around it...
 
There maybe a simple reason that Jeruh is being belligerent concerning the thought of moving the screen. A friend of mine who is a commercial audeo-visual contractor related to me that the position of the large screen is positioned optimally for the expensive suite patrons. Even though the angle of view would not significantly be changed, it would be changed for just enough "inconvenience" to probably elicit complaints from his cash cows.

BTW, it is not as difficult to hit the undersurface of the video board as Jeruh would want us to believe...........since it gives a ridiculous 10,000 square foot rigging target...............a miniscule of what the two DiamondVision Superdome screens afforded Guy at a measly 29' x 36' dimension.
 
If I was sitting in the upper decks of that stadium, I would not want to be looking straight forward into an enormous big screen TV. If I wanted to watch the game on TV, I would just stay home.
 
The video board was at 90 feet last night which is within the NFL guidelines.

Perhaps that will be changed due to last night's game..I don't know.

They already had plans in place to move it for the upcoming U2 show..apparently they have a huge stage setup.

I imagine it will be moved up and down as needed.
 
Just had an idea if Jeruh wants to go a cheaper route...............lower the field by at least 50 feet. Then, at the end of the season, you can just cover Jeruh and the Girls with the left over dirt and give them a proper burial when again they miss the playoffs.:pirate:
 
I am curious as to what is the point of kicking a ball more than 90 feet high. Is it for hang time, or what? BTW, I like the screen just fine, and I like being there as well. Home entertainment systems just don't provide the same experience for me.
 
StarStruck said:
I am curious as to what is the point of kicking a ball more than 90 feet high. Is it for hang time, or what? BTW, I like the screen just fine, and I like being there as well. Home entertainment systems just don't provide the same experience for me.
Click to expand...

hang time.. if one can get close to a 5 second hang time then coverage has time to get there (I know it is obvious so just saying)

on a side note, i would love to see greg montgomery's kick again against the bronco's in preseason back in the day, I have never noticed a kick that high and that far since then...maybe it wasn't much but it seemed like it
 
The ploblem at hand it strange enough, but Jerry and the boy's reaction is even stranger. Just raise the effing thing!
 
Showtime100 said:
The ploblem at hand it strange enough, but Jerry and the boy's reaction is even stranger. Just raise the effing thing!
Click to expand...

Heard it will be another 2 mil to do. Chump change for the cost but I'm sure it will get done. I think Jerry made some comments about it being a "condition" almost like it was Tal's hill with the flagpole.
 
HoustonFrog said:
Heard it will be another 2 mil to do. Chump change for the cost but I'm sure it will get done. I think Jerry made some comments about it being a "condition" almost like it was Tal's hill with the flagpole.
Click to expand...

Link please. If he really said that he really has a hard........problem with Houston.

BTW, I don't defend Tal's Hill and if that is Jerry's defense he is really off.
 
Last edited:
Showtime100 said:
Link please. If he really said that he really has a hard........problem with Houston.

BTW, I don't defend Tal's Hill and if that is Jerry's defense he is really off.
Click to expand...

No, I compared it to Tal's Hill but his comment was that it was a "condition" like something that both teams have to deal with....to me it came across as that.
 
HoustonFrog said:
No, I compared it to Tal's Hill but his comment was that it was a "condition" like something that both teams have to deal with....to me it came across as that.
Click to expand...

Ok, your camparing it to Tal's Hill and saying Jerry said it is a Tal's Hill in and of itself.

Come on Frog, it's a joke and you know it. It's a joke Cowboy fans are with Jerry on this.

Lame ass attempt at diverting attention. Stick to the subjest for God sake.
 
HoustonFrog said:
No, I compared it to Tal's Hill but his comment was that it was a "condition" like something that both teams have to deal with....to me it came across as that.
Click to expand...

I don't see how it can stay were it is at , esp with jeff fisher (who is part of the competition committee) had to waste a red flag on a ball that hit the screen because the refs are too busy looking at the field for illegal blocks and such.
 
dallas.jpg
 
I hope that the sceen situation is worked out soon. Personally, I love the screen and when comparing plays on it to the one in Texas Stadium the zoom was from perhaps 10 to 100. I found it interesting from my perspective on the 4th level an opportunity to see the plays form, and to see it again magnified in HD.
 
Watching the preseason game....that thing looked monstrous...kind of in a bad way. I'm not just hating on it because I hate the Cowboys and Dallas and blablabla, honestly it looked totally distracting. Doesn't surprise me at all that it could impose itself on a game. I like the idea of having it over the field like a basketball court but it just looks gaudy to these eyes.
 
TimeKiller said:
Watching the preseason game....that thing looked monstrous...kind of in a bad way. I'm not just hating on it because I hate the Cowboys and Dallas and blablabla, honestly it looked totally distracting. Doesn't surprise me at all that it could impose itself on a game. I like the idea of having it over the field like a basketball court but it just looks gaudy to these eyes.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on the ticketholder. It is monstrous, but to me in a good way. I hated the screen in Texas Stadium, and based on what I could see on it, it could have very well not been there at all. The Texans stadium is much much nicer and gives a nice view, though it is on the opposite side of where I sit. The screen in Cowboys Stadium brings the play up close no matter where you sit. Also, guys don't need binoculars to get a good view of the cheerleaders.

In other observations, I hope the 50 yard line "Star" will be installed by the season's opener along with the Ring of Honor and Super Bowl banners. Since the building is complete, it's time to hang the decorations.
 
Last edited:
TimeKiller said:
Watching the preseason game....that thing looked monstrous...kind of in a bad way. I'm not just hating on it because I hate the Cowboys and Dallas and blablabla, honestly it looked totally distracting. Doesn't surprise me at all that it could impose itself on a game. I like the idea of having it over the field like a basketball court but it just looks gaudy to these eyes.
Click to expand...

I agree. Cowboys or not, that thing is just flat out gaudy looking. Maybe it lends a different experience being there in person, but from watching on TV, it's an eye sore.
 
HoustonFrog said:
No, I compared it to Tal's Hill but his comment was that it was a "condition" like something that both teams have to deal with....to me it came across as that.
Click to expand...

But Frog, you can't compare it to Tal's Hill to football. Baseball features "certain" conditions (i.e. the bump to homeplate is 60'-6") to be the same but outfield dimensions and shapes vary (drastically in some cases). Every dimension for football is uniform.

If the league says lift it, the Cowboys will lift it.
 
Texan_Bill said:
But Frog, you can't compare it to Tal's Hill to football. Baseball features "certain" conditions (i.e. the bump to homeplate is 60'-6") to be the same but outfield dimensions and shapes vary (drastically in some cases). Every dimension for football is uniform.

If the league says lift it, the Cowboys will lift it.
Click to expand...

Again, I didn't mean it as a direct comparison...I just used it because Jerry was acting like it was "field condition" that had to be dealt with while playing during a game. Like a quirk. Like the Hill is....stupid if you ask me but oh well. But as much as people want to blast Jones, the people that floor me is the league. They approved it and was 5 feet over their minimum. Hopefully it gets raised and that is it.
 
I think it is funny that the article says the punter will be pumping gas in a few weeks. The guy has actually been very solid and if not on our team he will make another team. I think he was intentionally trying to hit the screen but it shows a flaw in the design that needs to be corrected. As another poster said imagine if this happens in a playoff game? How about if they get a super bowl bid?

Losing Coach:"Well we probably would have won but the punter kept having to shank his punts so the crowd could watch the dot races in HD."
 
HoustonFrog said:
Again, I didn't mean it as a direct comparison...I just used it because Jerry was acting like it was "field condition" that had to be dealt with while playing during a game. Like a quirk. Like the Hill is....stupid if you ask me but oh well. But as much as people want to blast Jones, the people that floor me is the league. They approved it and was 5 feet over their minimum. Hopefully it gets raised and that is it.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the point. There are no "ground rules" in football.

Maybe the league did approve it. That's irrelavent. It creates a hazard to the game, so the league should "un-approve" it which sounds like what they're doing.

As far as the Hill, it's not really stupid. It was done within the designer's vision of creating certain aspects from some old historical ballparks. That hill was inspired by Crosley Stadium in the Natti and the flag pole being in play was inspired by old Tiger's & Yankees Stadium(s).
 
Texan_Bill said:
That's exactly the point. There are no "ground rules" in football.

Maybe the league did approve it. That's irrelavent. It creates a hazard to the game, so the league should "un-approve" it which sounds like what they're doing.

As far as the Hill, it's not really stupid. It was done within the designer's vision of creating certain aspects from some old historical ballparks. That hill was inspired by Crosley Stadium in the Natti and the flag pole being in play was inspired by old Tiger's & Yankees Stadium(s).
Click to expand...

All I've ever seen when looking out if the potential to turn ankles :)

I'm not saying it doesn't need to be raised. I've stated that. But it was approved. They were stupid to do that. For the record the Cowboys punter actually hit a punt 100 feet up when they were testing but they wanted it at 90. To me you are bringing in all types of game changing issues when you have "repunts."
 
Last edited:
you get players injured when you make them sprint down the field multiple times in a row. It's exausting to run gassers in the middle of the game and players get hurt when fatigued.
 
HoustonFrog said:
All I've ever seen when looking out if the potential to turn ankles :)

I'm not saying it doesn't need to be raised. I've stated that. But it was approved. They were stupid to do that. For the record the Cowboys punter actually hit a punt 100 feet up when they were testing but they wanted it at 90. To me you are brining in all types of game changing issues when you have "repunts."
Click to expand...

Yup. Exaclty.
 
Vinny said:
you get players injured when you make them sprint down the field multiple times in a row. It's exausting to run gassers in the middle of the game and players get hurt when fatigued.
Click to expand...

Not only that but on 1560 this morning they were talking about having a big game changed when the second punt is blocked. I'd be peeved it ruined a playoff/SB run.
 
Last edited:
Blazing Arrow said:
I think it is funny that the article says the punter will be pumping gas in a few weeks. The guy has actually been very solid and if not on our team he will make another team. I think he was intentionally trying to hit the screen but it shows a flaw in the design that needs to be corrected. As another poster said imagine if this happens in a playoff game? How about if they get a super bowl bid?

Losing Coach:"Well we probably would have won but the punter kept having to shank his punts so the crowd could watch the dot races in HD."
Click to expand...

He was trying to hit the board..that was really obvious.

They do have a SB coming...2011.
 
Texan_Bill said:
As far as the Hill, it's not really stupid. It was done within the designer's vision of creating certain aspects from some old historical ballparks. That hill was inspired by Crosley Stadium in the Natti and the flag pole being in play was inspired by old Tiger's & Yankees Stadium(s).
Click to expand...
Which has to be one of the most stupidest things ever designed. Tal's Hill really does not belong. Combining two dangerous and ridiculous aspects of an old ballpark into Tal's Hill. I hate it. There are other things that they could have used to recapture the old glory days of baseball if they wanted to. A flagpole on a steep hill in centerfield is not exactly what I'd have envisioned.

flagpole = obstructive to a live ball
massive tv screen = obstructive to a live ball

I think I understood what Frog meant.
 
Silver Oak said:
methinks some of the Dallas fans around here are pretty thin skinned about this new stadium.
Click to expand...

Thin skinned?I said it needs to go up. I do find it funny that the place is pretty bad-a though and yet you won't catch one person here saying anything but that it is a toilet bowl or whatever. Kind of dumb. It's a stadium. To me that is pretty telling at times. I think if it were here people would be pretty proud.
 
NitroHonda said:
Which has to be one of the most stupidest things ever designed. Tal's Hill really does not belong. Combining two dangerous and ridiculous aspects of an old ballpark into Tal's Hill. I hate it. There are other things that they could have used to recapture the old glory days of baseball if they wanted to. A flagpole on a steep hill in centerfield is not exactly what I'd have envisioned.

flagpole = obstructive to a live ball
massive tv screen = obstructive to a live ball

I think I understood what Frog meant.
Click to expand...

First off, for those who think its ridiculous have no sense of the game the way it used to be played. Many parks had hills. (Crosley field happened to be the most prominent). Again, both Tiger's Stadium and Yankee' Stadium had flagpoles in play.... Maybe, just maybe a handull of balls get out there each year. And thats 81 home games x 10 years. Again, more wussification of America.

Second, in MMP's 10 year history, one person has ever hit the flag pole and only a couple of handfull of balls that have made it that far..... because afterall, it's well over 400 feet (430 ish). Not much of an obstacle when that deep.

  • With that said, I would not be in favor of a pole in left field at MMP

Third, the hill is not as steep as people tend to exagerate that it is. Per Lance Berkman the hill is not steep enough so that if a ball rolls up, it will roll back down it. You have to go get it.

PS.... Michael Bourn plays the hill rather well.

**************************************

Back to topic, as far as the Titan punter aiming for or not, the fact that it could be hit is the point.
 
HoustonFrog said:
All I've ever seen when looking out if the potential to turn ankles :)
Click to expand...

There's been many many many more times in the last 10 years (same amount of time Tal's Hill has existed) that someone's been hurt crashing into an outfield wall than have ever been hurt on the Hill. In fact, the only injury on the hill that I can recall was Griffey Jr. tweaking an ankle I think it was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top