Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The turf debate


ladypanther
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Charlotte isn't really the north.  According to that article I found KC, Baltimore, Washington, and Tennessee all have Bermuda grass fields.  Surprising to me.

I'm talking Greenbay  Chicago Pittsburgh Boston Seattle etc.

Charlotte should have Bermuda plain and simple.

UNC had that season they rolled out a new field every week and had no issues. Why can't Tepper use that?

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 4Corners said:

I wouldn’t use Bermuda as a homeowner in the north. Golf course, sports fields, etc places with the resources the maintain it and work on it is ok. A place like a professional football field with millions of dollars to keep an eye on it and engineer a system to help with it is a good example. 
 

but if you some dad living in Cleveland or Minnesota, you probably an idiot to use Bermuda or southern grass for your house. 

I live in the northeast now and KBG and Perennial Rye seem to be the best picks here.  Tall fescue can work but I haven't many fescue yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I live in the northeast now and KBG and Perennial Rye seem to be the best picks here.  Tall fescue can work but I haven't many fescue yards.

KBG is good and what I would do in NE. I did Rye here once to fill an unsightly bare spot and it was great for about a month. Some of my buddies cut their tall fescue with rye when overseedimg 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tbe said:

I don’t get it. If the difference between real grass and fake is how much ‘give’ each has, why can’t fake be engineered with more padding and flex?

Seems like an easy thing to do.

There's only so much flex you can engineer into a product and have it withstand safety standards and durability for transport and installation. It also has to be stapled/staked into place to keep it locked down and prevent the product sliding. Weight alone won't do it. Grass roots tear in small areas or stretch like a mesh,  but the product as a whole still retains it's rigidity, unless it's a sopping wet monsoon. Then the roots actually lose their hold in the soil. With proper drainage and vacuum systems underneath, water can be sucked out from underneath the field to keep it relatively dry. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WUnderhill said:

I think it’s more about the concerts and other events at BOA, which is ridiculous because BOA is first and foremost a football stadium.

Unfortunately, we have an owner who’d rather put a feather in his cap and sit at a podium and brag about how he single handedly “brought music to Charlotte” because we were all such uncultured savages before who had never been to a concert.

Spectrum Center says hello Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They both have their pros and cons. Grass can be just as dangerous if quality people are not in charge. There's new technology out there and it's not like playing in SEA in decades past where the "turf" was just carpet hiding cement. There are a whole bunch of contact injuries caused by grass too where the foot gets caught in the dirt and hyper extends the knee and ankle. I think the NFL should really invest in companies trying to improve turf and good things will happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The challenge is the amount of natural soil/dirt that is under the grass to act as a cushion..............in nature there is an average of 30 inches of soil below the surface with 8 to 10 inches being top soil.

On a grass football field inside stadiums these days there is 16 inches total with 6 inches being top soil.

It offers far more cushion than any artificial surface but fall well short of the cushion that grass grows naturally on. 

Edited by PghPanther
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • We've never seen them outside of the structure of two very well ran organizations I'll give you that. And yes they are long in the tooth. I do think they are more than capable of getting a franchise turned around in short term capacity though. They are by no means a long term solution.
    • You're not making a good-faith argument by blaming literally everything on the quarterback when the defense gave him a fat 38 seconds to overcome its ineptitude, but it seems you're dead-set on blaming him for any problem the team encounters. In this case, it's not warranted. Sometimes it is. But he had no time to throw (pressured on 46% of all dropbacks, an insane amount) and that's simply not all his fault -- particularly when they rush 4 or less and are in the backfield in 1.5s or less. Should we have gotten more than 0 yards? Sure! But he hit a WR in the hands on fourth down and it was dropped. Not his fault. He missed one throw on second down but I attribute first down to a bad play call and third down to poor pass protection. I would've called some quick slants, personally, but it really seems you're saying: - playcalling: Bryce's fault - poor pass protection: Bryce's fault - defensive choking away a lead: Bryce's fault, not the defense - Horn dropping a pass: Bryce's fault It's a great way to garner support on here, because when it comes to Bryce, logic takes such a backseat to context that it's not even in the same vehicle. Plenty of games can be attributed to him. Can't take anyone seriously who solely blames him for that one. 
    • I don't see how you can logically make that argument when the team beat two of the top teams in the entire league during the regular season.  Now imagine the additional games we would have won against absolute tip top competitors like SF and SEA had we had a professional QB.  You can throw any random stat at the problem you want, but the proof is in the pudding.  We all watched it live.  This roster would have produced 13 wins (wins against SF and SEA, two wins against NO, and would have swept the Bucs) and (almost certainly) a #1 seed with a remotely competent QB.  Those were not games where we needed an all star performance to win.  Those were games where a very, very modest stat line would have netted us an easy win. Nearly every measurable aspect of the team would have been significantly improved with a competent QB.
×
×
  • Create New...