Helmet communication is coming to college football – perhaps sooner rather than later – and the key might rest on the cut-off time between plays.
The Terrapins were one of a handful of teams that used in-game communication during bowl games last season. Maryland used helmet communication with their two quarterbacks, center, linebacker and safety against the Tigers – and with no cut-off time on the communication, Maryland coach Mike Locksley saw the immediate on-field advantage, even if he did not have the direct communication with his quarterback. Offensive coordinator Josh Gattis did, however.
"I would definitely think you need to have a cut-off," Locksley told Sporting News. "I mean, it was almost like playing video games to a degree where if you are talking to the quarterback you can say, 'Hey, throw the ball to 13. Throw it to 13!' It becomes a nuance – an advantage. Figure out the cut-off time and what it is and go from there."
The NCAA Football Rules Committee will meet Feb. 28-29, and according to one source, rule changes related to helmet communication and tablet technology will be discussed. Whether that leads to rule changes for the 2024 college football season remains to be seen, but six bowl games used coach-to-player helmet communication and tablets in those games. The reviews for those coaches who used those changes were positive – even if there was some trial and error.
"There is no reason why we shouldn't have this implemented for the fall," West Virginia coach Neal Brown said. "There is plenty of time. … I think there is overwhelming support for this from the coaching fraternity. I think this is something we can get done sooner rather than later."
MORE: Updated Way-Too-Early Top 25 for 2024
West Virginia and North Carolina used CoachComm for the player-to-coach communication and DVSport tablets in the Duke's Mayo Bowl. North Carolina offensive coordinator Chip Lindsey said he loved the supplemental communication, even if it did not change the way the Tar Heels call plays too much. He also is in favor of a cut-off time in communication.
"We could talk all the way up to the snap," North Carolina offensive coordinator Chip Lindsey told SN. "Do you really want to do that? Sometimes that might mess your guy up because you're talking in his ear up until the last minute. It took the whole element of sign stealing out of it, y'know?'"
Why NCAA is considering helmet communication
When Locksley asked whether the college game should move to helmet communication, he had a direct response.
"It has to," Locksley said. "We're following the same path of the NFL game, from the time model of it and now the player-coach comms. There's no doubt it's something that benefits the games; helps with some of the things that happened in college football a year ago with taking signals and stuff like that."
Maryland is in the Big Ten with Michigan, a school that is being investigated by the NCAA as part of an in-person scouting and sign-stealing scandal that led to the firing of staffer Connor Stalions and assistant coach Chris Partridge, a three-game suspension for then-coach Jim Harbaugh, and potential future penalties for the Michigan program.
Brown is a proponent for the rule changes. Brown is on the AFCA rules committee, and the Mountaineers have been a beta school for helmet communication at spring practice the last two seasons.
"One advantage it does have is you cut out on all this stuff that's happened on the sideline where you have to have curtains, and where you have all these different people in different color shirts," Brown told SN. "It's become kind of a circus, and it cleans that up.
"I think to some extent sign stealing is like it is in baseball, it's somewhat gamesmanship, but it's become so much more sophisticated," Brown said. "Now, support staffs are bigger, there are some things that are borderline unethical in terms of how they are obtaining things. This cleans it up. It eliminates some of that."
Sign communication, however, will still be part of the game. North Carolina and Maryland are among the teams that still use a no-huddle offense – and that requires the use of hand signals from the sideline and on the field.
"The elaborateness of some of the schemes of taking signals – from guys looking at the TV copy and matching it to what they see or what they have – you will still have those if you're going to be a no-huddle team outside of saying or yelling it," Locksley said.
How bowl games used helmet communication
North Carolina and West Virginia each had eight players that could use CoachComm. The Tar Heels had four quarterbacks use it and four defensive players. West Virginia had two quarterbacks and six defensive players use communication.
Lindsey said it did not change too much in terms of play-calling – but it helped streamline the process through the quarterback.
"Instead of signaling the play to the quarterback I verbally told him then he fed all the information to everyone else," Lindsey said. "In other words, if I had a play call that A, B, C, D and E – but only the receivers need to know the A and the o-line needs to know the B. That's the way we fed it."
The Mountaineers also did not change too much in terms of how they relayed play-call information. Brown noticed another trend during the game that is beneficial.
"It allows younger people to play earlier because you can simplify how you're calling it," Brown said. "When I say younger people, I'm talking about whoever wears the headset. You can give them more reminders as they play."
Maryland had the advantage of having former Washington Commanders coach Drew Hampton on staff along with co-offensive coordinator Kevin Sumlin, who used the technology with the Houston Gamblers of the USFL. Locksley said there were mix-ups on the sideline at times, and he recalled a situation where safeties coach Zac Spavital was screaming 'Get the safety down!' repeatedly.
"I'm like, 'Use your coach-to-player and tell him,'" Locksley said. "Of course, we had a young safety in the game who did not have it in his helmet."
The bowl-game experimentation did not have a cut-off time for communication like the NFL – which allows quarterbacks and one defensive player (the green dot) to use helmet communication during games. Locksley said this innovation might force teams to huddle more, but that is an adjustment the NFL made. ]
MORE: Expanding CFP from 12 to 14 in 2026 would be a mistake
FBS coaches want tablet technology
The use of iPads – which is permitted in the NFL and several states for high school football – were a hit among the coaches.
Lindsey used that during the bowl game with the Mountaineers to make in-game adjustments and come back to plays that would work later.
"It was direct, immediate feedback in between series to use," Lindsey said. "I really enjoyed that. In between they would hand me the IPad, and I was able to flip through that entire series of plays. It really helps you confirm things that you have your spotters looking at.”
Locksley also said that was the most-useful coaching tool during the Terrapins’ bowl game.
"The iPads were unbelievable," Locksley said. "To have the immediate feedback, the teaching for us playing a lot of young players in a bowl game – in between series the ability to make corrections, the ability to know exactly the looks we were getting and to coach through it, you couldn't put a price tag on that piece of it."
Brown also used that technology, and if the NCAA approves in-game wireless communication, then the offseason could be spent on how to maximize that tablet technology.
MORE: Tracking every FBS coaching change for 2024
Will NCAA approve helmet technology?
The NCAA Football Rules Committee will discuss those issues, and this would be the second impactful change on the field in as many seasons. In 2023, the NCAA passed a series of changes to clock rules, including one that keeps the clock running on first downs. The college game continues to make changes that are closer to the NFL game, and Locksley hopes helmet communication is the next change.
He also wants that cut-off time added.
"We didn't have a cut-off switch, it's like going down a rabbit hole with the (CoachComm) system," Locksley said. "Sometimes too much information is not good, too. We tried to have it in the center and quarterbacks' helmet. We wanted to talk to the quarterback because we didn't have a cut-off like they do the NFL. In practice, our center – it kind of screwed him up because he could hear the chatter when he was trying to make calls. It took a little bit of getting used to it."
Would that mean one helmet on offense and one on defense like the NFL? That is the most-reasonable starting point, especially for coordinators.
"I think one is fine. I like having the quarterback with it and having one on the field. I think that's the way to go. One on defense, too. I don't want multiple ones on defense, personally, as an offensive coordinator. One is fine, but I don't want 10 of them over there with it on."
Costs for schools will be a question, and the implementation would have to be somewhat uniform across the board. Brown said the committee should strongly consider bringing this to the game next season.
"I think the Power 4 could mirror what the NFL is doing because the rules are already in place and the technology is already in place," Brown said. "I'm not sure G5, FCS, etc. could do that. It's easier to get it done without regulation, and it gives people an opportunity to use it how they wish. I'm a proponent of OK-ing it, then figuring it out."