Abstract Evaluation of new technology in sports medicine is supposed to promote improvements in the care of patients. It is also supposed to prohibit technology that can harm patients. This evaluation process is not perfect and at times can promote technology that not only does not help patients but may harm them. Two examples of new sports medicine technology that were widely adopted but eventually abandoned are thermal capsulorrhaphy for treatment of shoulder instability and the Gore-Tex prosthetic ligament (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ) for patients with anterior cruciate ligament deficiency. On analysis of the quick adoption of these 2 failed procedures, certain recommendations are apparent for improvement of the evaluation process. There must be a sound rationale behind any new technology, basic science research into the theory of the medical technology, and demonstrated improvements in animal models and clinical studies that are prospective cohort studies or randomized controlled trials, and finally, there must be careful follow-up and postmarket surveillance.