Depth-First: The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?

The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?

Rich Apodaca — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:46:00 -0400

A vivid example of the pitfalls of sticking to the conventional game plan in times of change occurred in [American] football just after the turn of this century. In 1905, football was a low-scoring game of running and kicking. Guys in leather helmets and a smattering of padding plodded down the field toward the goal line. The offense consisted of formations like the "flying wedge," in which seven players ran together into the middle of the opposition in the hope of gaining three or four yards at a time. It was a tough, gritty game.

Then, in 1906, the forward pass was legalized, making it possible to gain 40 yards with the flick of a wrist. During the fist season, however, most teams stayed almost entirely with their conventional, tried and true running game.

Recognizing that they were entering a new era in which the old strategy of "three yards and a cloud of dust" would fast become obsolete, St. Louis University's coaches adapted quickly, switching to an offense that used the forward pass extensively. That season they outscored their opponents 402-11!

-Robert J. Kriegel and Louis Patler, If it Ain't Broke...Break It!

I'm normally not one for sports analogies, but this one just seems to fit so well.

Somewhere around 2005, science was a low-scoring game of trying to get the most publications into journals nobody had the time or money to read. The first-line offense consisted of "The Communication", which was often combined with the "Salami Slice". Not content to work just one channel, guys and gals clad in business suites toured the country trying to get attention and funding for the research few followed. Their most effective weapon was the much-feared "PowerPoint Slide." It was a tough, gritty game.

Then, in 2006, a few scientists discovered, more or less by accident, that new, virtually free technology enabled the direct publication of their scientific findings. It was now possible to interactively reach an immediate, worldwide audience through the world's most powerful computer networks and search engines. All it took was a tap of the "Enter" key. During the first season, however, most scientists stayed almost entirely with their conventional, tried and true game.

Information technology has changed the rules of the scientific game. Most players are still acting as if nothing has happened. How long will you continue to follow the pack?

image credit: bamakoder

"The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?" by Pedro Beltrao

Fri, 14 Sep 2007 09:40:45 -0400

Great analogy (even if I know nothing about football). At least we see a larger group of people discussing the ideas and some trying it out. It will be exciting to see where this goes in the next couple of years.

"The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?" by Rich Apodaca

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:59:10 -0400

Noel -

Great question - the players are as you suggest both the scientists and the publishers. Both groups continue to act largely as if the game hasn't changed.

I think of Google's PageRank system as a network. AdSense and PayPerPost are networks. Digg and reddit are also networks. Technorati is a network. So is FeedBurner. RSS agregators are also networks. All of the incoming and outgoing links of a site or page are also a network.

These are all part of the "secret sauce" that make it possible for an average Joe like Michael Arrington to build a media empire from essentially nothing.

Maybe "computer network" wasn't the best choice of term. What I'm thinking of is all of the systems an author becomes part of when they decide to directly publish their work through, for example, a blog-like system.

"The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?" by Rich Apodaca

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:46:46 -0400

Egon -

Keeping score in science is a tricky business - even with h-indicies and impact factors, the issue is vigorously debated. PageRank and Alexa have both fans and detractors as well.

What I'm suggesting is that if your goal is to make your work available and known to the widest possible audience, then using journals (open access or otherwise) may not the best way to do it. There are certain kinds of results where publishing in a journal is the worst way to do it.

I'm actually not advocating publishing in Open Access journals. I see them as, well, more of a variation on the "flying wedge" than the forward pass. A doomed effort to save a dying medium.

The forward pass is the direct publication of scientific results - bypassing the publisher middle-man altogether.

I'm not sure how this happens - the passing game took a long time to evolve, partly because old ways of thinking had to be unlearned. But I think if we look at the reach and immediacy of blogs as publishing platforms, we may have part of the answer.

"The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?" by baoilleach

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:34:40 -0400

Nice argument. But who are the players? The publishers, or the scientists?

To extend the analogy further, when you say "the world's most powerful computer networks", are you referring to the "grid" :-)

"The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?" by Egon Willighagen

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 03:27:12 -0400

The big question is: how do we measure our outscore. The other football teams would not have switched too, if the success of the St.Luois team if the outscore was obscured.

In openaccess publications, there is a slight outscore: higher impact for openaccess publications. But I do not feel this effect is as pronounced as in the football example.

You got a good statistics to impress people new the forward-pass in science?

"The Forward Pass Has Been Legalized: Will You Use It?" by Ryan Sasaki

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:47:12 -0400

Wow!

Terrific analogy Rich.

I enjoyed that post very much.