Is it just me, or does it drive anyone else crazy that you rarely get to see the play coverage of wide receivers, and who is open? The camera always zooms in on the quarterback or running back, and stays there until a ball is thrown. It drives me crazy, because I don't need to see a zoomed in image of the quarterback scrambling on every single play. All the stations are the same. I want to see where the receivers are, and what the quarterback is missing when he gets zoned in on one guy.
Yeah, they could fade out more at first then zoom in if it's a run -- they seem to just stay focused tight on the QB then cut to whichever WR is being thrown to.
I'd have to see consistent footage of what you're after to decide if it's a better approach. Sometimes you get it with that overhead wire camera. It seems good for a change of pace but I think the combo of angles they currently use is pretty solid. Always room for improvement, but it is a bit nit picky. I feel like i can usually get a good feel for most of the field out 7-10 yards. On deeper plays they move pretty fast to the receiver being thrown to. No you do t get the QB perspective or Madden perspective but it seems to work.
Go to the game. You're right, you can never see the whole play develop on television, camera follows ball.
They should have the all-22 view on an alternate channel. You can get it from NFL Game Pass, but I believe that is a subscription service.
For the primary broadcast, following the ball is clearly the best, and most popular way to show the game. The only alternative would be to show the all 22 wide angle, because those routes can go deep. Then cut to a different camera following the back if it's a run. Zooming in on the action mid-play isn't feasible, and having quick cuts immediately as the ball is handed could get tricky as well. They aren't gonna make a major change to please the minority when the majority simply want to stay on the ball. An alternate broadcast with the long angle like you are in the stadium would be a good idea though.
Staying with the ball also adds drama. They know something you don't. It's a Tarantino technique. And then they reveal it. Plus the closer you get the more intimate the shot, another movie effect. So from an entertainment perspective, it's not only comfortable, it works. But I think you are onto something because we all want to know what's going on down the field. There was a point when Warren Moon released a ball I just assumed it would be complete because I had full trust in him to only throw to an open receiver, and I distinctly recall thinking about this issue at the time, all the way back in the 90's, and here we are still. Even more I find myself still playing video games on classic view ( the tv angle ) when I have so many more options that would reveal so much more to me in all sports games.
I don't remember what Stadiums it was at, but I recall the ability to watch a feed that was from atop the press boxes etc of stadiums last season. It showed the entire field, neat to see the formations in their entirety.
It would be great to be able to choose the overhead view. I would really enjoy being able to watch our receivers running routes more. I somehow doubt only a few would rather just see a one-sided view of the ball instead of the "feel like you are there" look. I think they have it backwards. They should zoom in on rb when he has the ball, but who needs to see a zoom of the qb throwing or scrambling.
