Paul Myerberg

USA TODAY Sports

College football’s offseasons inevitably have become defined by dissension, with two sides finding opposing viewpoints on a topic and whiling away the days until September in a fog of dispute and discord.

This offseason is no different. The months since Alabama defeated Clemson to win the national championship have been defined by the debate over satellite camps, a back-and-forth disagreement split along geographic borders that particularly agitated members of the Southeastern Conference, who railed against those gatecrashers making inroads in the nation’s most fruitful recruiting area.

Two years ago, another debate — that of “pace of play”— pitted sides along more philosophical lines: Defensive-minded coaches suggested slowing the game to limit the potential for injuries, most notably, and offense-first counterparts questioned the real motives behind a potential rule change aimed at removing an offensive advantage.

Amid this backdrop of dissent, it can be refreshing to find a consensus.

2016 college football TV schedule

Coaches and administrators may have found common ground with the idea that their sport would benefit from the implementation of headset technology, which would allow communication between a coach and an individual offensive and defensive player during the course of a game.

“I would definitely support that,” Pittsburgh coach Pat Narduzzi said. “That's what all the coaches say. There's no question.”

***

There is agreement on the benefits of such technology, which has been in use by NFL teams for more than two decades; the league allowed coach-to-quarterback communication beginning in 1994 and implemented the same technology between coaches and a defensive player in 2008.

Coaches who discussed the topic with USA TODAY Sports were universal in their desire for similar technology in the college game, if only as a way to combat a sideline pursuit: stealing an opponent’s offensive or defensive signals, which Alabama coach Nick Saban called “one of the biggest issues in college football.”

The issue has gained momentum with the proliferation of no huddle offenses, which use coded symbols and signals in plain view on the sideline. According to NCAA rules, teams may attempt to decode the opposition’s play calls during live action, though there is a bylaw prohibiting the use of video to capture signals.

“It’s certainly frowned upon, but not illegal,” Houston coach Tom Herman said of sign-stealing.

The tactic entered the public conversation last November, when Arizona State came under scrutiny for attempting to steal signs from fellow Pac-12 Conference competition — though the Sun Devils nonetheless lost to the two teams most public in their disapproval, Utah and Oregon. “We've had a lot of issues with signals and information being stolen,” said Oregon coach Mark Helfrich, which has led the Ducks to “change how we do things” in terms of offensive signals.

“It used to be that the coach stood there and told the receiver what the play was and he ran it in there, told the quarterback, and they called the play,” said Virginia Tech coach Justin Fuente. “Well, because nobody hardly does that anymore, absolutely it's led to more (sign-stealing). Some people go to great lengths, some people go to medium lengths, and some people don't care about trying to hide the sequence.”

There would be a more concrete benefit to helmet communication. In addition to eliminating the opportunity for sign-stealing, adding this technology would allow coaches to literally talk an individual player through an offensive or defensive series; this would be particularly useful on offense, as coaches can not only clue their quarterbacks into defensive tendencies but potentially script several play calls in advance — a likely benefit for offenses whose success is predicated on pace and tempo.

“The immediate advantages would be being able to communicate with my quarterback in the middle of a drive. That’s really cool,” Herman said. “And to be able to tell him things other than just what play we’re calling, even if he’s just hearing my voice or (offensive coordinator) Major Applewhite’s voice saying, ‘Hey, calm down,’ giving him some form of instruction in the middle of a drive, I think is pretty critical.”

***

Helfrich said Pac-12 football coaches have discussed the idea of coach-to-helmet communication and that “It was pretty much unanimously supported.” But even as coaches favor using the technology, there are numerous questions to be resolved on the topic. The NCAA's Football Oversight Committee plans to discuss the matter next week and then make a recommendation to the NCAA's Playing Rules Oversight Committee about what should be further explored.

For starters, the technology must not only be usable but affordable for each team in the FBS. Though quarterbacks would be in communication on the offensive side of the ball, there remains a question as to which defender would have access to the technology — though most defensive coaches would pick a linebacker, Narduzzi said. There would also be a question as to how long the communication would last before each individual play.

According to the NFL rulebook, the coach-to-player system is cut off when the play clock “reaches 15 seconds or the ball is snapped, whichever occurs first,” and teams are “permitted no more than one player on the field with a speaker in his helmet.”

And whether the headset technology would actually attack the most pressing issue mentioned by coaches — that of stealing signals — is up for debate. Communicating plays directly to a quarterback is one thing; that doesn’t necessarily do much for no-huddle teams, which must then send in signals from the sidelines players located a distance from the football, such as wide receivers.

Florida State doing just fine without satellite camps

“You’ve still got to find a way to get to the other guys on the perimeter” of the field, said Herman. “Whether that’s the coordinator calling his play to the quarterback and hand-signaling to the wide outs or the signal’s coming from the sideline, the risk of your signals being stolen is still going to be there.”

Yet these concerns pale in comparison to the benefits of employing coach-to-player technology — a rule change so rooted in common sense that it provides unity in college football’s dissent-heavy offseason.

“Why are we 20 years behind the NFL in putting a device in the quarterback’s helmet, right, or the signal-caller on defense, where you just talk to the guy until 15 seconds on the (play) clock?” said Saban. “To me, this would be the most elementary thing to do to help the game.”

Contributing: Nicole Auerbach, George Schroeder, Daniel Uthman.

PROJECTING THE 2016 TOP 25