No it was my bad for assuming that was part of it. Additionally I should not have hi-jacked the topic.
Back to the original intent of the topic. I agree with Zero that too much tech would mitigate the home field advantage.
Further, if you did have all players with listening devices, I think you would want to limit the number of coaches who could directly communicate with players. We would not want 11 coaches speaking with all 11 on the field.
Originally Posted by: Martha Careful
I'm glad you mentioned Zero's comment. I was going to look last night but got busy and forgot.
Crowd noise is a home field advantage. My contention was IF the league is looking for more offense and pushing for even more parity the additional mics and speakers might help.
As far as how would it impact the Packers- there are 5 fixed dome stadiums. 2 in the NFL North. Plus the Bears are considering one too. 5 more retractable domes. Seattle has an unique design to hold in crowd noise.
Even if the Packer fans are 50% of the crowd at an away game, and they wouldn't be, all the domed stadiums would have more noise than Lambeau on average. Especially in the winter months. People clapping with gloves and some of them with scarves over their mouths has the potential to greatly limit the noise.
As far as stadium size, Lambeau is one of the larger stadiums. That would certainly help generate noise.
GB is going to be somewhere around 10-15 in generating noise. It's possible all three division opponents will have a dome in the near future. Taking away the crowd factor would benefit them more than it would hurt them.