The turf debate

[SmokinwithWilly]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Ricky Williams agrees

So does Josh Gordon 

[tukafan21]

People can't have it both ways.

They complain when the fields are torn up at the end of the season and how it's a risk to player safety, but then the same people also complain that the turf is less safe for players and want grass.  Fact of the matter is, that there are very few stadiums/arenas for any professional team that are used ONLY  for that team's games and nothing else, especially in this day and age where stadiums cost an exorbitant amount of money to build and thus need multiple revenue streams to make it work.  

If you had football stadiums that were used ONLY for NFL football, then it would be much easier to have grass, but are there any where that is the case?   Maybe Green Bay since it's a pretty small town that likely doesn't get much there other than the Packers, but I'm pretty sure all the other NFL stadiums are used for other events almost year round.

Plus the idea of making all stadiums being forced to have grass fields just couldn't ever happen anyways.  How is that going to work in Detroit, Minnesota, Indy, Atlanta, Dallas, New Orleans, Houston and LA where they have indoor stadiums?  Sure some of them have retractable roofs, but they weren't built in a way where they open enough to allow for proper sun coverage to get in there to keep it up to an NFL quality level field.  

That's 9 of the 32 teams who couldn't even have grass fields if they wanted to, sure the Raiders and Cardinals have indoor stadium with grass, but they're very unique in how they have grass, the stadium obviously had to be built with the ability to roll the grass outside, you can't retrofit that into existing stadiums, particularly as some of them wouldn't even be able to have any place to roll the field out to if they wanted to (like Detroit).

[Mr. Scot]

18 minutes ago, onmyown said:

Bad wording but my point was if it was all grass they could stop revisiting the issue and spend time on other things.  

There is no need to keep revisiting the subject, change it all to grass. Turf is made to resemble grass and the natural feeling of ground below it as closely as possible…which clearly means grass is better.

That's not happening though.

Until it does, and as long as guys keep getting injured on turf, I expect this subject to be "revisited".

[unicar15]

Multiple guys last few years with basically stress foot injuries (likely from playing on turf repeatedly)….you’d think this would be top of mind for Tepper. Lost our 1st round pick last year and he’s still a little hobbled. Lost our drafted QB this year. I don’t get the turf dogma.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, unicar15 said:

Multiple guys last few years with basically stress foot injuries (likely from playing on turf repeatedly)….you’d think this would be top of mind for Tepper. Lost our 1st round pick last year and he’s still a little hobbled. Lost our drafted QB this year. I don’t get the turf dogma.

I'm not sure anything much ever displaces dollar signs in the "top of Tepper's mind".

[Aussie Tank]

Get a nice buffalo going

[PghPanther]

They need to get a natural grass field and hire me to maintain it...............here's the lawn I created from seed back when I had a house..............

 

 

 

 

 

[ncstatekwi]

Football should be played on real grass!!!!

[Catsfan69]

15 hours ago, tukafan21 said:

People can't have it both ways.

They complain when the fields are torn up at the end of the season and how it's a risk to player safety, but then the same people also complain that the turf is less safe for players and want grass.  Fact of the matter is, that there are very few stadiums/arenas for any professional team that are used ONLY  for that team's games and nothing else, especially in this day and age where stadiums cost an exorbitant amount of money to build and thus need multiple revenue streams to make it work.  

If you had football stadiums that were used ONLY for NFL football, then it would be much easier to have grass, but are there any where that is the case?   Maybe Green Bay since it's a pretty small town that likely doesn't get much there other than the Packers, but I'm pretty sure all the other NFL stadiums are used for other events almost year round.

Plus the idea of making all stadiums being forced to have grass fields just couldn't ever happen anyways.  How is that going to work in Detroit, Minnesota, Indy, Atlanta, Dallas, New Orleans, Houston and LA where they have indoor stadiums?  Sure some of them have retractable roofs, but they weren't built in a way where they open enough to allow for proper sun coverage to get in there to keep it up to an NFL quality level field.  

That's 9 of the 32 teams who couldn't even have grass fields if they wanted to, sure the Raiders and Cardinals have indoor stadium with grass, but they're very unique in how they have grass, the stadium obviously had to be built with the ability to roll the grass outside, you can't retrofit that into existing stadiums, particularly as some of them wouldn't even be able to have any place to roll the field out to if they wanted to (like Detroit).

Ok I'll say this again.

UNC a few years ago had a new field installed in Kenan stadium every single week for a season.

That's possible. 

[NAS]