It’s the return of the News Roundup. Here are some of the sports-tech stories we found interesting this week.

ESPN is issuing its first magazine cover featuring eSports. In fairness, it also features running back Marshawn Lynch, as he’s had his likeness added to the upcoming Call of Duty: Black Ops III. We’re not quite to the point where League of Legends players are gracing the front cover, but it’s a start.

The Wall Street Journal has a fascinating look into how the people of Cuba are watching their favorite American television. Basketball, baseball, even HBO — it’s all broadcast not by satellite, but by sneaker.

As a dedicated lazy person and as a golfer that spends a lot of his time criss-crossing the fairways, the GolfBoard might be right in my wheelhouse.

You know all that cool 3D/interactive/holographic stuff that teams and facilities are installing? Soon, all that tech might come from part incubator, part tax write-off known as the Mark Cuban Center for Sports Media and Technology. Say what you will about the man, but sports and technology seem to be two of his stronger suits.

This is technically from last week, but if you didn’t get a chance to see American Pharoah race Secretariat, you should. It’s amazing what a little archival footage and some video syncing can do.

For some reason, people think it’s fun to mock pitcher Alex Torres for wanting to protect his melon. Strides are being taken to maintain protection while making hats look a little less puffy, and perhaps a similar product being adopted by a prominent soccer player will help people wanting to avoid head injuries seem a little more commonplace.

That’s it for this week. Have a great weekend. Be excellent to each other.

At yesterday’s WWDC Keynote, Apple — per usual — announced changes coming to their products. WWDC is, after all, a developers conference, so the usual announcements have more to do with software then announcing a new physical product. Like many recent renditions of the yearly keynote, changes and updates to the OS X and iOS operating systems were featured. Unlike iOS 8 or OS X Mavericks, these updates focus more on usability and less on a new aesthetic. OS X is getting some minor updates, most notably to the way users see and interact with their screens. With iOS 9, iPhone and iPad users will notice changes to built-in apps including a revamped Notes app, a new News app, as well as overhauls and additions to apps like Maps and Passbook (now Wallet). But beyond that, iPad users will probably see the biggest changes as Apple is finally attempting to tackle true multitasking on the tablet. And if one feature ends up being what it’s said to be, it could be a huge boon for sports fans.

While insanely popular, the iPad has always occupied its own space. It’s bigger and (in some cases) handier than a smartphone, but not as versatile as a laptop. In its infancy, it was purely a content-consumption device. It was made for looking at pictures and watching movies and reading articles, books, and emails. One could create on it, but beyond writing a basic message or drawing with a finger, creation was always a frustrating task. This is because while the actual creative act can be done in one app, the act of creation almost always needs multiple inputs. Writing on the iPad usually requires switching back to an article, photo, or notes. Drawing often needs some sort of source material for reference. Creating music could require downloading a sample or looking to other songs for inspiration. Real work can’t be done on one app alone.

And when people decided that they did want to create and not just consume on their devices, Apple was left scrambling for ways to make that easier. The earliest iterations of iOS had no multitasking capabilities. To use another app, one had to go back to the home screen and open another. Often times, you couldn’t even play audio in the background. Luckily, those days are over, but the process still isn’t totally ironed out. A double-click of the home button will present you with an app switcher, but it’s more cumbersome than a simple Alt/Command+Tab keystroke on a computer. And there was no way to view apps side by side. Now, with iOS 9, Apple has finally come up with a solution.

Apple announced a bevy of improvements with iOS 9 for iPad — a smarter Siri, a Notes app that actually seems robust, and a way to turn the virtual keyboard into a virtual trackpad with just two fingers. But the new multitasking features stole the show, and for good reason. For the first time, iPad users will be able to view (and use) two apps at once.

There are three iterations of multitasking in iOS9. Slide Over allows users to use the right third of their screen to check in on other apps. Apple showcased how this could work with Twitter and Calendar. Suddenly remember an appointment you need to add while reading an article? Slide calendar onto your screen, add the appointment, and slide it back. Apple is providing an API for this feature, so that third-party apps can utilize it as well.

Split View offers the ability to have two simultaneous apps running. The split of the screen can be adjusted (a la a Windows 8 tablet) and essentially any app can run side by side with another.

This helps bridge the gap between consumption and creation by allowing the user to do either or both within one view. The catch is that Split View only works on the iPad Air 2, presumably due to the higher processing capabilities needed. But even for those with an iPad Mini or older iPad Air, Slide Over still offers a big upgrade to usability. And luckily, Apple wasn’t so strict as far as supported devices when it comes to the very best feature for sports fans — Picture in Picture.

(via Apple keynote. Muted by default)

This is a pretty big deal. I use my iPad quite a bit for MLB.tv, watchESPN, and NBC/Golf Live Extra. But while using my iPad for those purposes, I was pretty much locked in to that one task. If I wanted to send a Tweet or chat with someone or reply to an email, I either had to quit the app or use another device. When iOS 9 is released this fall, I’ll be able to type to my heart’s content while still watching my event in the floating video window.

This would require MLB, the NBA, DirecTV (for NFL Sunday Ticket) and all the other sports video providers to update their apps to support this function, but I can’t imagine any company worth its salt not having this ready when iOS 9 is released. And, unlike Split View, it will work on all relatively-new iPads.

Proponents of Android and Windows tablets have long used multitasking as a bullet point when lauding the superiority of their favorite ecosystems. And while they still offer some advantages, Apple just cut one of their biggest arguments down at the knees. We’ll have to wait and see how well the feature actually works outside of a meticulously-staged demo, but if I can Tweet about a baseball game I’m watching all within the same screen as well as Apple is saying I can, it will be, for me, the most important feature update by far.

(Header image via John Karakatsanis.)

Facebook recently made headlines by announcing that they would start supporting the embedding of animated version of the Graphics Interchange Format, more widely known as the GIF. This was a big deal, apparently, because people still care about GIFs. But they shouldn’t — at least not in a way specific to the actual file format.

To me, the GIF has become something bigger than itself. Its name has become ubiquitous with the idea of a short video clip that people find entertaining. Just like how we refer to all facial tissues as Kleenex or all large trash bins as Dumpsters (yes, it’s a registered trademark), a GIF doesn’t really need to be a .gif file per se, it just needs to be a short and shareable video. The problem is, the actual GIF format is pretty outdated and inefficient when it comes to embedding video clips. It’s a dinosaur. It’s Windows 95. We don’t need it anymore. We can make GIFs better. We have the technology.

Back in the day, the main pull of the GIF format was that it was supported on all browsers (e.g. Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator). You didn’t need any special plugins or software to see a GIF on a web page because it was an image file, like a .PNG or .JPG. GIFs were special in that one could layer multiple images on top of one another to create an animation effect. As expected, this still lead to large files and long load times for web pages. But it’s all we had.

(Not so) long ago, creating GIFs was a pretty big pain. You had to finagle some software to record the video from your screen, then split up the video into frames with a program like Photoshop or GIMP. The results were rarely the same, and there was usually some sort of stuttering or ghosting or another weird issue that made the thing look off a bit. They were usable, but not always pretty.

Today, Flash is pretty much dead and every major browser supports the most common video codecs. HTML5 ushered in a new way to display video — a way that was baked in to the HTML standard. Long story short — if your computer (or mobile device) has any kind of modern browser installed, it can support HTML5 video. It’s leaner and loads quicker, and we all should be adopting it.

We here at TechGraphs have gotten requests to give a how-to on creating GIFs. But I’m not going to do that. Because, as Managing Editor, I’m making a statement on behalf of the site. We’ve pussyfooted around the issue before, but we’re making a stand. The GIF is dead. It’s time to put in on an ice flow floe and let it float on into the Great Beyond. It’s been supplanted by younger and stronger technology. No, I will not be showing you how to create a GIF. I will be showing you how to create short video clips that are easily shareable on Facebook, Twitter, your Tumblr page or your blog. We’ll be utilizing two different sites for this tutorial — Gfycat and something we’ve featured here before, Streamable.

To create these videos, we’ll first need, well, some video. There are a couple ways to go about this. Both Streamable and Gfycat allow you to simply input the URL of your video and let them do the converting. However, Gfycat only allows 15 seconds worth of upload. Streamable does allow larger uploads and the ability to trim time off, but long videos still lead to long upload and conversion times. It’s probably best to get the video on your computer and work with it from there. To do so, I’ve had good success with a Chrome Extension called Video Downloader Professional. This extension will search the code of the page you are on and will find the source file for any video used in that page. You just click the little green arrow next to your address bar and it will give you the option to download the video. A couple notes: you may have to start playing the video for the extension to pick it up. Also, if the video has an ad, it might show up in the list of available downloads. Just make sure you are grabbing the right video. The file sizes are displayed on this list. You almost always want the longer one.

So, let’s say I want to make a clip of Joey Gallo’s first career home run from last night. (I’m using an MLB clip here, but this will work in many sites, including YouTube). I use the extension to download the video into my Downloads folder. Now, it’s fairly long, so I probably should edit it down a little. How you do this depends on your OS. If you have a Mac, you can use the built-in Quicktime Player to quickly trim down a video. Windows users can download the free Windows Movie Maker and use that to edit the clip. Read the tutorials and get comfortable with the software. You’re not re-making Jaws here. You’re just cutting a single video clip. Remember, Gfycat only allows 15-second clips, so edit accordingly if you’re planning to use that service. Once the clip is edited, save it somewhere. It is now time to upload.

Uploading to Gfycat

Go to Gfycat and click the Upload button in the upper right. Click Browse and find the video on your computer. It will begin uploading and converting.

Click the newly-created link to go the clip page. Here, when you move your mouse to the right, you’ll see a couple buttons. One is to create an actual .gif file (IF YOU MUST), and the other is to grab links.

You can get a straight link, and some code to embed the clip in a webpage. Like this! You can tweak that embed link a little to change the height and width of the clip if your blog has certain size constraints. This creates your standard GIF-looking clip. This is good enough for most applications, but what if you want more an actual video experience? What if you want a little longer clip? What if you want sound? Sure you could use your phone to take a Vine of your computer screen, but we’re better than that. Let’s use Streamable to create a quality clip that’s still shareable.

Uploading to Streamable

Go to Streamable and click the Upload button right in the middle. Again, find your video and Streamable will start uploading and converting. Much like Gfycat, you get options to add a title and share the link.

If you click Share, you again get options to copy a regular link or an embed code. Streamable offers some options to change the height and width of the video as well as enabling autoplay and muting. Clicking both will give you a GIF-like experience, but leaving them off will make it feel more like a video. The choice is yours, but it’s certainly nice to have the choice.

These clips will load faster and won’t bog down the browser. They won’t take up space on your servers. They aren’t quite GIFs, but that’s OK. They’re better. You can have the best of both worlds. Short, shareable clips will be around for a long time, but not in the aging format we’ve been using. You now have the knowlege. The tools are free and easy to use. Be a part of the future.

(Header image via Eric Norris)

If you watch the HBO television program Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, you may be familiar with a reoccurring segment titled “How is This Still a Thing?” in which approximately three to four minutes are used to discuss the merits of some kind of tired tradition that probably needs to come to an end.

With the recent suspension of not one, but two major league pitchers for infractions regarding foreign substances, you may be asking yourself the same question. Sports, of course, loves a good debate, so when the whole issue was brought up again this go-round, the same old questions arose. Does it really help the pitcher? Do the batters really mind? Does anyone really care?

But the most prevalent question seems to revolve around how this issue hasn’t been put to bed already. Major League Baseball — and some certain managers, it seems — think that a pitcher’s employment of certain substances gives them an unfair advantage. This has not stopped the pitchers from disregarding the rules banning those substances, however. A recent segment on ESPN’s Baseball Tonight featuring former big leaguers Alex Cora and Dallas Braden accentuates this fact.

The subject of all this debate is confusing however. The current discussion isn’t revolving around Vaseline or hair tonic or emory boards or gobs of tobacco spit. Less my memory fails me, all the pitchers who have been suspended for abusing the foreign substance rule within the past few years have all used some sort of combination of pine tar, rosin, and sunscreen. These are all substances that can easily be found within the field of play during any baseball game, and, as Braden pointed out, are freely available for the hitter to use.

The quotes from John Farrell used at the beginning of the segment are also interesting.

“I would like to see an approved substance that pitchers can use,” Farrell said. “Because when we take a manufactured baseball and rub it with dirt, it’s going to create a slippery feeling to it. The mud residue leaves a film on it that you don’t necessarily feel a good, consistent grip. Unless you go to a ball like the one used in Japan where it’s got a tacky feel to it. But I’d like to see something that’s approved that everyone can use. I think if you poll any hitter, the hitter wants to know that the ball’s got a grip. The ball’s not going to get away from [the pitcher].”

This seems like an incredibly even-headed idea. Pitchers want a little something to make sure they have a proper grip on the ball. Batters want to make sure that pitchers aren’t throwing balls caked in substance that will make them dart all over the strike zone. Can we not find a happy medium? Lord knows MLB has not been shy about telling players what kinds of other substances they can and cannot use. Were those just picked willy-nilly? There had to be some science involved.

We have the technology to track a balls rotational spin, on either axis, with pretty tremendous accuracy. In today’s installment at The Hardball Times, Jesse Wolfersberger profiles private companies that are doing amazing things in the world of sports tracking and technology. I find it hard to believe that Major League Baseball, with all their resources and their StatCast tech already in place, couldn’t conduct some kind of study on the effects of certain substances on a pitched baseball.

Golf has a whole division devoted to testing clubheads and balls and shafts and putter inserts. While it would be cool to see baseball invent some contemporary to the golf swing robot, it wouldn’t even have to be that advanced. A group of pitchers and a large enough data set should be enough to find preliminary results.

There has to be a happy medium between tactile grip and rotational disruptment. A bevy of tests should be able to shake out the best compromise between pitcher and hitter. Heck, why not get third parties involved and have them submit their best attempt. Who wouldn’t want to be the Official Ball Gripping Substance of Major League Baseball?

There are rules in baseball regarding lengths, widths, and weights of bats. Gloves need to be within a certain size range. Uniforms have to fit a certain regulation. Perhaps it’s time that we adopt a certain substance as part of the pitcher’s equipment. Rosin apparently isn’t cutting it. Let’s do some testing and find some kind of goop that doesn’t skew the advantage too far in either direction. Make the stuff blaze orange so everyone knows it. No more hiding. No more trickery.

In some matters, baseball is leading the charge in technology and science adoption, both internally and through third-party companies. Fixing this silly doctored ball debate with a little number crunching would be a win for everybody. The pitchers don’t get wild, the batters can still barrel the ball, and baseball can point to yet another measure taken to combat cheating. The sports news networks will have to find something else to talk about, but that’s not really our problem.

(Header image via Keith Allison)

Here at TechGraphs, we want to be your source for all kinds of sports-tech information. Much of it is news and commentary, but we also like to give you some good, old fashioned how to articles. We’ve shown you how to be an Excel wizard for stats domination. We’ve shown you how to make a decent sports podcast. We’ve even gone over how to get your Chromecast to work on ATT U-Verse for all your sports streaming needs. We’ve gone over how to get a Retrosheet database on your computer (and we’ll show how to query it. Promise). We want to bring you more, but we want to know what you would like to see.

So, what sports-tech quandaries are sticking in your craw? Want to brush up on more excel stuff? Want to dive into PitchF/X databases? Still struggling to make a decent GIF? Let us know in the form below. We want to make sure we’re bringing you the stuff you want.

Thank you for your support,

Management

(Header image via Leo Leung)

I do this weird thing where I take a GoPro on the golf course. It’s not because I love doing trick shots or utilizing bunkers as launch ramps for my golf cart — it’s because I want to look at my swing. One of my biggest issues this season is transferring success on the range to success on the course. I record portions of my practice sessions, but didn’t have anything with which to compare those recordings. So I now take my GoPro out on the course and record a few shots here and there to see how they compare with my technique on the range. It’s dorky, I know.

And while I like walking a course when I’m by myself, I’ll take a cart if I’m with a group. I don’t get as much exercise, but I’m not slowing everyone else down. The cart makes for an excellent GoPro tripod (quadpod?) so I’ll just clip the camera on there and let the recording roll. When I go through the footage, there’s a bunch where the cart is just rolling along. Some of it is boring, but sometimes the camera catches an interesting view or a pretty sunset as we’re meandering down the fairway. I always think this would be cool footage to share, but, well, it’s so dang long. Unless the viewer has some sort of ASMR reaction to video of fairways and sounds of the wind, no one is going to sit through the whole thing.

I imagine that those who participate in real action sports — you know, the people GoPros are intended for — feel the same way. Footage of downhill skiing can be cool, but it can also be quite long and tedious. Microsoft is working on technology that would help alleviate this situation by shortening and smoothing action video.

The software is called Hyperlapse, which conspicuously shares its name with a similar solution from Instagram. Microsoft takes the technology a little further, however. While Instagram’s Hyperlapse will simply just cut out frames to produce a time lapse, Microsoft’s version will pick out the smoothest and most important frames. According to Engadget:

In the mobile version of the app, instead of speeding up the footage by only keeping every tenth frame (for example) Hyperlapse only preserves frames that appear to visually follow the camera’s estimated path through the landscape. By removing wild card frames with sudden jerks or movements, the sped-up footage ends up being automatically smoothed and stabilized. As a result, the faster you decide to speed up your video, up to 32X, the more watchable the results will be.

Hyperlapse comes in two flavors; a mobile app for Android and Windows Phone, and software for PC. No word yet on iOS compatibility, but given Microsoft’s recent push to embrace the platform, I imagine one is coming soon. The PC version is currently a preview version of professional software, so expect that to cost some kind of money at some point in time. The PC version is the most obvious choice to edit footage from a standalone camera like a GoPro, but GoPro’s app does allow exporting to phones which could theoretically be imported into Hyperlapse. A Dropbox/Google Drive option could work as well, perhaps. You can see how well the software translates what would be puke-inducing time lapse video into something much more watchable.

A lot of action footage videos are a lot like vacation photos — they help you remember great times you had, but no one else really wants to see them. By giving us an easy way to edit and smooth this footage out, Microsoft is helping to create more dynamic and engaging material for us to email or post to YouTube. I’m not 100% sure it will help make my golf footage interesting, but I’ll still probably give it a try. I just finished a round on one of the hilliest courses I ever played. Perhaps that will make for some interesting footage when put through Hyperlapse. If not, it will still be more interesting than the source material. And certainly more impressive than my score that day.

I think it’s safe to say that the Tiger Woods Era is over in golf. Sure, he may find his swing (or a swing), again. We may see him in contention at a major tournament here and there. Hell, he may even win a couple. But personal problems, age, and a slew of injuries has put an end to what can and should be considered one of the most dominating runs in sports history. Although it’s actually been a while, it doesn’t seem that long ago that he was basically unstoppable.

And with the rise of Tiger Woods, golf as a sport saw a rise in popularity. Woods’ presence created must-see TV for even the most casual of golf fans. Woods inspired droves of kids to pick up the sport. EA jumped on the chance to use his likeness in video games. A rising tide lifts all boats, and as Woods lifted trophy after trophy, the PGA Tour’s boat came with.

But now, golf is in trouble. Or at least people think it is. The crash of the real estate market has lead to countless golf course closings. Concerns over environmental sustainability of courses are being raised. Less people are playing, less people are watching. Golf isn’t dead, it’s just less alive than it used to be. I doubt we’ll ever see a talent like Tiger Woods in our lifetime, so it’s safe to assume that golf won’t see another surge in popularity any time soon. But that doesn’t mean they’re not trying. In fact, the PGA Tour is investing big money in technology in hopes to heighten the fan experience.

One of the biggest pushes being made is in the realm of statistics. Baseball fans may be salivating at the thought of what kind of data StatCast can bring to MLB, but the PGA Tour has been utilizing ShotLink technology for some time now. ShotLink brings everything to golf that StatCast promises for baseball. Using a laser system, ShotLink can track hyper-accurate distance and location data for every shot on the course. After these numbers are crunched, essentially any type of stat can be generated and consumed. And the PGA Tour does a magnificent job of this on their own stats page. With a few clicks, fans can find out which player hits the most greens in regulation from 190-200 yards away, who’s best at avoiding three putts from 40 feet away, and who is best at avoiding or finding the rough on the right or left side of the fairway. Baseball lends itself well to statistics due to its individualistic nature. Well, it doesn’t get much more individualistic than golf, and the PGA Tour and ShotLink are showing that seemingly every aspect of the game can be measured, compared, and analyzed.

Another big tech advancement has come with the inclusion of Protracer in TV broadcasts. Through what I can only assume is some version of witchcraft, Protracer hardware and software is able to track a golf ball throughout its flight and graphically display its trajectory. The PGA doesn’t do this for every event, but bigger tournaments — like this past weekend’s Players Championship — utilize the technology. This not only lets viewers see how the path of Sergio Garcia’s 3-wood,

but it can also be combined to show the aggregate of how all players faired on getting their drives to the hair-raising island green of the 17th hole at TPC Sawgrass.

The use of Protracer is not only cool as hell, it appeals to the majority of the PGA’s fans — recreational golfers. This is where the PGA Tour has a huge advantage.

Professional golf is one of those rare sports where fans actually participate in the same sport themselves. Sure football fans might have a backyard game every now and then, and there is certainly no shortage of beer-league softball, but golf is different. We can play with (pretty much) the same equipment as the pros. We can play a lot of the same courses (if we shell out enough dough). While most golf fans can’t match the pros from the tee, all of us know the feeling of sticking an approach shot two feet from the pin or draining a 20-foot putt. Golf fans can do a lot of the things pros can do, just not nearly as often. We know what the trajectory of a perfect drive should look like, and seeing it on our TV screens time after time only solidifies our ideas of just how good these guys are. Football fans know that Aaron Rodgers is good. Golf fans know first hand just how stupid-hard a good golf swing is to make.

With accurate and in-depth metrics, we can know exactly how much better than us they are. We can see shot trajectories that have us yearning for a better swing of our own. If the PGA Tour has their way, these things will keep us coming back for more and more. No, numbers and shiny graphics won’t bring in the same amount of viewers as Tiger Woods once did. But it might be able to reach fans on a more personal level, which just might rekindle or intensify some viewers’ interest in the game. Until another Tiger comes along, that’s probably the best the PGA Tour can ask for.

Podcasts – like blogs, I suppose – are one of those things that get harder to make well the easier they are to produce. Yes, technology has made it MUCH easier to produce serialized audio content for the Internet, but it’s made it that way for everybody (well, everybody with a couple hundred bucks to spend). In the matter of a few years, the amount of people dipping toes into this pool has exploded. Businesses have been built around podcast hosting. There are now advertising houses that cater specifically to podcasters. There are podcasts about other podcasts. There are podcasts about making podcasts. Earlier this month, I paid $30 to watch three dudes tape a podcast live. Slowly yet surely, this medium is penetrating popular culture.

Recently, a true crime podcast called Serial breached the news cycle. I won’t make my opinions about that program known here, because it’s honestly too late to do that. We’ve all moved on to … I don’t know, something else. But a combination of podcasting’s obscurity and general lazy reporting lead many people to believe that Serial was not only telling an interesting story, but telling it on an entirely new medium. This, of course, is silly. Tell this to Jimmy Pardo or Leo LaPorte or Adam Curry or Jesse Thorn. Hell, most of the people who worked on Serial came from WBEZ’s This American Life, a public radio show that had also been a very successful podcast for years.

Podcasting has served different purposes for different content creators. Popular radio shows will often just release recordings of an episode as a podcast so that people can listen any time they want. Tech journalists got it on podcasting early to enhance their cred by talking nerdy things with other nerds over a nerdy distribution channel. Comedians have used it as an alternative means of creation and self-promotion – sort of a SoundCloud for comedy before SoundCloud existed. And then, there were the sports podcasts.

Podcasting lends itself to sports well for the same reason blogging does – new stuff always happens and everyone has opinions about it. There is never a want for content. There are certainly #HotTakes to be considered, but there is so many other things that can fall within the spectrum. Podcasts can cover a whole sport, a specific team, a specific league, or can attempt to cover all major sports if they so choose. The best thing about sports podcasting is the best thing about podcasting in general – you can kind of do whatever the hell you want.

But just because you can doesn’t mean you should, or, more specifically, doesn’t mean you should without giving it some thought. Yes, podcasts are pretty easy to make now, but anything worth doing is worth a little extra effort. To be honest, there are some pretty sucky sports podcasts out there. Here’s how to make one that doesn’t suck.

A note to begin: While I’m not a famous podcaster by any means, I do kind of know what I’m talking about. I have worked at radio stations. I have created material for national air. I have my own sports podcast that, while episodes come far too sporadically, still gets well-reviewed on iTunes. I’m not an authority by any means. But I listen to a lot of podcasts and make my own and think about it quite a bit. These are suggestions, but they’re still suggestions from a somewhat qualified source.

1. Come Up With a Good Idea

Sports podcasts, not unlike comedy podcasts, are chock full of “two white guys talking”-styled offerings. This is not to say that if you are Caucasian or male that you should just give up, but it’s important to consider what’s out there and what you can do to differentiate. It could be a simple fact of the only current podcasts about Local Sports Team aren’t very smart or well produced or whatever. There’s nothing wrong with just making a better mouse trap. But if you want to discuss or cover a popular topic, you might want to try to break from norms a bit.

Comedy podcasts already saw this coming, and many new ones centralize (even if loosely) around some sort of bit or structure. Professor Blastoff mixes intellectuals and comedians to answer some of life’s biggest questions. Who Charted deals with pop culture charts and a funny and irreverent way. The Adventure Zone features three brothers playing Dungeons and Dragons with their dad.

None of these are really applicable to sports podcasting, but it’s something to think about. Maybe you want to feature reoccurring segments or regular guests or something I haven’t even thought of. It’s about information, but it’s also about entertainment. Never forget that.

Segments and pre-determined topics also help eliminate the awkward “so … yeah”s and “um … what else?”s. Those are show killers. There’s nothing wrong with some natural dead air, but it’s heartbreaking to hear two people dance around the fact that they don’t know what they should be talking about. A little research and a little planning goes a long way.

That being said, if you do something that you later realize isn’t really working, don’t be afraid to jump ship. There’s nothing wrong with ditching a segment or bit that wasn’t really jiving in the first place. Change the format little by little until you find something that works.

2. Make Sure You Really Want to Do This

So you’ve come up with an idea and maybe found a cohost. The plan is to have a one-hour podcast every week. Here’s how a one-hour podcast breaks down.

1. The recorded conversation will be at least 90 minutes.
2. There will be at least 10 minutes of technical difficulties that need to get ironed out before recording (at least for the first two dozen episodes).
3. It will take time to lock down a guest. Between all the emails back and forth, let’s say that counts for 30 minutes of work.
4. You’ll need to listen to the whole 90 minutes to make sure no audio weirdness (mic dropouts, lawn mowers, loud cars, babies crying) happens and to find where and when to cut.
5. Add 30 minutes to edit, add the intro and outro music, and compress to MP3 form.
6. Another 20 minutes to upload and write the description.

Your simple one-hour podcast now takes four and a half hours a week to make, and I didn’t even count the time that goes into research and finding topics. This pushes it to around six hours. My podcast, due to its style and format, takes about three hours just to record and edit a 20-minute episode, and about 10 hours total since there’s a lot of research involved.

This is not meant to be discouraging. It’s meant to show you how much effort this project will take. I’m sure some people don’t spend this amount of time on their sports podcasts, and it honestly shows in most cases. Good content takes time, whether it’s graphic art or writing or podcasting. Be prepared to put in the work. If you’re not prepared to do so, maybe think about doing something else.

3. Have a Decent “Studio”

If this list weren’t in a quasi-chronological order, this section would go first. Even if your format is just two-dudes-rambling-about-Local-Sports-Team, you still have a chance if your show sounds decent.

Microphones

The first thing you need is a decent microphone. You don’t need to break the bank, but a good mic is a MUST if you want your thing to be listenable at all. There are two ways to go about this, and they both deal with analog-to-digital conversion.

The first way is to get a good analog mic and an digital audio interface. The mic goes into the interface via mic cable, the interface goes into your computer via USB. I like this method because it gives you a little more flexibility. For up to two people recording at once, the M-Audio M-Track Plus is a great and affordable option for an interface. You don’t need to splurge on a mic either, especially if you’re just starting out. The SM-57 is a good starting point. I started with (and still occasionally use) the MXL 990 which is even cheaper. I’m not going to get into a whole lecture about microphones, but it’s worth doing a little research. People have tested lots of mics for podcasting and even included audio samples. Google “Best Podcast Mic” and look around.

For a simpler (and most likely cheaper) option, you can also consider USB microphones. These do all the converting in one unit, so all you need to do is plug the mic right into your computer via USB. USB mics have gotten much better as far as sound goes, and it’s hard to go wrong even with a mid-priced one. Again, Googling is recommended, but I’ve had success with the Blue Yeti as I know some other people have.

DO NOT use a cheap gaming headset. DO NOT use the headphone/mic cable that came with your iPhone. DO NOT RECORD USING YOUR WEBCAM SPEAKER. This sounds like garbage.

If it’s hard to hear you, or your mic blows out, people will get tired of listening to you and stop downloading. It’s that simple. I’m not trying to be harsh, but if you don’t invest in marginally decent audio equipment, don’t even bother.

Studio Space

No, you don’t need to rent space in a radio studio or anything, but be aware of your surroundings. You probably will be recording at home, so pick the room in your house with the best chance of giving you good audio. If you are using Skype to record conversations (more on that later) picking a room with hard-line access to your router or at least a strong WiFi signal is encouraged. Dealing with garbled audio and Skype dropouts is annoying. If the neighbor’s dog barks all the time, try and pick a room where that doesn’t leak in too much. Finished basements tend to have a nice sound-deadening quality to them. If the room has windows, thicker curtains are better. This is little stuff and sometimes unavoidable, but try and consider it if you can.

Record Skype Calls the Right Way

Skype has its flaws, but it’s one of the better options for recording podcasts if the hosts aren’t in the same city. (If you are in the same city, please record together in person). The technology to record these calls is fairly straightforward. I use a program called Piezo. It’s easy and affordable. It’s Mac-only, but there are certainly options for PC. It may sound complicated at first, but it’s not too bad. Read the instructions. Look for how-tos on YouTube. Get a friend to help you test it so that you have the optimal settings for good sound quality. Whatever you choose, make sure it has the capability to split the recorded call into two tracks, one for you and one for the guest or cohost. This will allow you to edit both people independently. It’s most useful for cutting out the hiss from the guest’s side when you’re talking. It also makes it easy to get rid of coughs, sneezes, dogs, sirens, etc.

If you have your druthers, have the guest use a decent mic as well. You probably can’t force people to buy stuff, but hopefully they have something that isn’t the webcam microphone. Anything is better than the webcam microphone. A gaming/VoIP headset or even (gulp) iPhone earbuds are a step up.

Depending on the guest, the phone might be the only option. Phones don’t sound great, but a little EQ can make them usable (don’t worry about EQ in recording, it can be done in post). The easiest way is to use Skype to call a phone. It costs a little money ($2.99/month), but it will save you a lot of headaches. If you are interested in the free option, consider signing up for a Google Voice account. You can dial right from Gmail, and still use a program like Piezo to record. It’s slightly less elegant, but it’s pretty workable.

If you are going to have two people talk every episode, it’s a really great idea to have both hosts record separately on their own (nice) mics, then combine the two tracks in post.

Say you and Johnny are cohosts of the podcast. You record both ends of the call (you and him), and Johnny uses simple recording software to record just his voice. When you’re done recording, he plops his track into a Dropbox folder or something, and you copy it to your computer. Now, you have a good-sounding you, an OK-sounding Johnny (from the other end of the Skype call), and a good-sounding Johnny. Use Skype Johnny to match up the tracks, but insert Good Johnny instead. It’s easier than I’m making it out to be, and in the end you’ll have a recording that sounds like both of you were in the same room even though you were talking over Skype. This is what professional podcasts do. This is the poor-man’s version of what public radio does. Otherwise, it always sounds like one host is in the room and the other host is talking through a plastic jug.

Learn Basic Audio Editing

You don’t need a $10,000 ProTools rig to make a decent podcast. If you have a Mac, you already have GarageBand, which actually works pretty nicely for basic stuff. I use a program called Reaper. It works on Mac or PC, comes in at $60 for recreational use (so long as your podcast doesn’t gross $20,000), and has a GREAT support section and user forum for helping you figure everything out. There’s also ProTools, Adobe Audition, and a slew of other options. Many have trials you can play around with.

Whatever you end up with, give yourself time to learn it properly. Learn the keyboard shortcuts to save you time in editing. Take a look at the built-in processing options (EQ, compression, etc.) and which settings make your podcast sound best. EQ will help balance the highs and lows, compression helps handle high volumes and even everything out. These are important things to know, don’t disregard them. One solitary hour of playing around with these will help you a great deal.

Learn the proper way to create fades – fade ins, fade outs, crossfades, etc. Learn how to properly mix in music. Audio program companies spend a ton on R&D to make these programs easy to use. Don’t be scared. Save your files a lot and remember that Ctrl-Z is your friend. Think of ALL the people that do this somewhat successfully. They can’t all be smarter than you, right?

Pick Your Hosting

So you’ve worked out all the bugs, and you have a quality-sounding MP3. Now, you just need to post it somewhere. There are basically two schools of thought on this.

There are companies that will host your podcast for you and give you an RSS feed to use (more on this later). For a fee, you can upload your file and let them do all the rest. Libsyn and PodBean are two popular choices, though SoundCloud just got into the game as well. These products sell you on ease of use, analytics, and reliable uptime. There is cost involved, however. Usually bandwidth is included in any package, you just need to pick the storage space you need. Read the options carefully and start small. You can always upgrade later if you want to post more episodes per week/month.

Your other option is to store the files on your own server and create the RSS feed yourself through a platform like WordPress. PowerPress is a popular plugin for creating podcast RSS feeds through WordPress. It’s what we use at The Hardball Times for my podcast. It’s customizable and reliable. The downside here is that you need to host your own files. If you plan to have a corresponding website to go along with your podcast (you should) then you are probably already paying for hosting. Unless your podcast explodes in popularity, whatever hosting package you have should be fine. But beware, if your hosting provider decides that too many people are pulling down files from your server, you may be in line for additional cost. Again, this would most likely be later down the road, but it’s something to think about.

The elephant in the room here is the question of who owns your RSS feed. Your RSS feed is what iTunes and other podcatchers use to see when there are updates to your show. When the program sees an update in the feed, it downloads the new episode. If you host on Libsyn, for example, your feed will be something along the lines of libsyn.com/feeds/yourawesomesportsshow.xml. If you self-host, it will be something like yourawesomesportsshow.com/feeds/yourawesomefeed.xml. If you use the former and decide to move on from Libsyn to another host or self-hosting option, life may become difficult for you. There are ways to “force” podcast apps to update the feed if you change RSS addresses, but it’s not always reliable, and it’s a pain in the ass.

Do your research and make your best educated decision. This is a big question in the world of podcasting, believe it or not, and there’s really no one answer.

And while we’re talking about it, make sure to add your show to iTunes. There are lots of guides for doing so. iTunes is pretty terrible, but it’s still what most people use. In fact, if you’re starting a show, don’t even share via Facebook or Twitter until it’s on iTunes. Wait until people can download the episode. It takes about 48 hours or less to get into the iTunes store assuming you followed all the directions. It’s worth the wait. Hold off on the reveal until you get your podcast into the biggest podcasting platform around.

Listen and Listen and Listen and Listen

If you’re interested in doing this, then chances are you at least have a cursory knowledge of the medium. You probably have listened to a few sports podcasts here and there or may even be a rabid follower of a handful. But even though you want to do a sports podcast, you shouldn’t limit your listening to only that genre. There are lots of great podcasts out there, and some should inspire you and change the way you think about the platform. Don’t limit yourself. Inspiration can come from all sorts of avenues. This is by no means an exhaustive list, but here are some suggestions for non-sports podcasts you should at least check out. See how the other side lives, and all that.

Serial – My reservations not withstanding, podcasters need to hear to at least be part of the conversation. If you say you have a podcast, this is what most people will think of. You should at least know what it is. One million downloaders can’t be wrong, right?

Radiolab – In my opinion, the absolute best radio put out there today. It’s engaging and gorgeous and interesting. And also gorgeous. Please give a listen. One of the hosts won a MacArthur Genius grant for his work on it.

This American Life – The granddaddy of Serial, this show still produces wonderful journalistic storytelling. It’s on the Mount Rushmore of podcasts.

99% Invisible – A podcast about design. It was also behind one of the most successful Kickstarter campaigns of all time – successful enough that they started their own podcast network. It’s a great source of “did you know…” conversation starters.

Love + Radio – From the same network as 99% Invisible. Just immaculate radio. It’s hard to explain, but give it a listen.

Bullseye with Jesse Thorn – originally called The Sound of Young America, Bullseye went from college radio station show to NPR program. If you want a introduction in how to interview a guest, Jesse Thorn will be your professor. He also has a knack for getting the best and brightest in pop culture.

My Brother, My Brother, and Me – This is a great example of what even a loose premise can do for a show. MBMBaM describes itself as an advice show, but it’s really three brothers (Justin, Travis, and Griffin McElroy) riffing and spoofing and transitioning from one bit to another. They are funny guys, but their chemistry is what makes the show. They are cheating because they share DNA, but that’s the way it goes sometimes.

The Todd Glass Show – A master course on how chemistry can help a podcast. There is nothing buy silly banter to go along with Glass insisting they redo bits until they get them right. It’s frantic and disjointed, but it’s always fun and a it’s a good reminder of how strong personalities can steer an otherwise rudderless show.

Good luck to you, future podcaster. It’s a rough world out there, but with some hard work and attention to detail, you could be climbing up the iTunes charts in no time. Put in the time. It will seem dubious at first, because it is. But the finished product will be so much better.

(Image via curtis.kennington)

At this point, we should be talking about what businesses aren’t working with MLB Advanced Media to handle their video streaming needs. Nevertheless, we can now add the PGA to the ever-growing list of organizations and companies piggybacking on MLBAM’s logistics and infrastructure for broadcasting live video over the Internet.

During a press conference at this week’s WGC Match Play Championship, PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem announced that MLBAM will be working with the PGA to broadcast Thursday and Friday rounds of certain events over the Internet. This is not meant to usurp traditional TV coverage that kicks in later in the afternoon, but to supplement it by allowing fans to check in on the action before scheduled broadcasting begins.

PGA Tour Live, as they’re calling it, will charge on a per-event fee, and is expected to cost less than $10 per event. There are still some things left to speculation, but the new service is expected to launch sometime later in the summer. Fans can sign up to be notified when the service is available to the public.

MLBAM has already had their fingers in streaming the NCAA Tournament for Turner as well as WrestleMania using their expertise. Oh, and they also worked on a little something called HBO Now. MLBAM is blowing up, as they say, and their hold on the streaming industry is only getting stronger.

(Image via Ryan Schreiber)

Baseball nerds, start your … right hemispheres? MLB’s new all-encompassing tracking software, Statcast, is finally ready for primetime. The much-anticipated technology will be on display in all its glory during tonight’s MLB Network broadcast of the St. Louis Cardinals v. Washington Nationals bout.

Statcast has been a hot topic in the world of baseball analysis, as it promises unparalleled ability to track almost everything that happens on the field — from baserunning efficiency and batted ball speed to outfield and infield defensive examination, the great StatCast machine looks at it all.

The greatest part of Statcast is also its scariest feature — there is going to be so much data preserved per game. While we don’t know how that will shake out for our brethren at FanGraphs, those of us that like fancy graphics and pretty colors should be perfectly content watching StatCast features on television.

In fairness, this is how MLB is going to gain the most attention to the baseball-watching public. While statistical analysis is certainly making strides these days, many fans don’t know much about it or choose to ignore it. Seeing graphical representation of the numbers and figures stats analysts are looking for will not only create a more engaged fan, it may just help convert a few people into paying more attention to the underlying numbers.

Either way, it should be fun to see how MLB plans to feature Statcast data in real-time, and should give us a look into what all the technology is capturing. The broadcast begins at 7 p.m. ET. For a primer on StatCast, check here.

(Image via MLB.com)