Aaarrrrggghhh!!

[Seattle1]

Another NFL stadium goes down the drain and installs an artificial playing surface! As Charlie Brown might say: "I can't stand it!"


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2661830

Patriots rip out grass at Gillette, installing FieldTurf

FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- The New England Patriots began installing a synthetic field surface Tuesday to be used in time for their next home game Nov. 26 against Chicago.

Heavy equipment scraped the grass and leveled the dirt beneath it in preparation for the installation of FieldTurf, which has become increasingly popular around the NFL. Gillette Stadium has had natural grass since it opened in 2002.

It's the second time in less than three weeks that the field has been worked on following complaints from Patriots players and opponents about the lack of grass and surplus of sand up the middle of the field for the first three home games.

The middle third of the field was resodded from goal line to goal line in time for the game against Indianapolis on Nov. 5. The Patriots played at Gillette Stadium again a week later against the New York Jets. New England lost both games.

Heavy rains before last Sunday's game with the Jets and occasional drizzle during it left much of the center strip of the field muddy.

Before that strip was replaced last month, Patriots spokesman Stacey James said, "We're committed to improve the field and considering all options short and long term."

FieldTurf is a synthetic substance with long green fibers. It has sand for stability and small rubber chips for softness added to it.

The Kraft family, owner of the Patriots and Gillette Stadium, opened the field as a multipurpose venue. The New England Revolution of MLS play their home games there. It also has been the site this summer of concerts by Kenny Chesney, Bon Jovi and the Rolling Stones.

The Patriots have natural grass on their two practice fields and FieldTurf on their indoor practice field, all adjacent to Gillette Stadium.

[efin98]

Another NFL stadium goes down the drain and installs an artificial playing surface! As Charlie Brown might say: "I can't stand it!"

You have no idea what you are complaining about.

[Seattle1]

You have no idea what you are complaining about.

Of course I do. Don't worry this is not an attack on the Patriots.

[efin98]

Of course I do. Don't worry this is not an attack on the Patriots.

No you don't have a clue what you are complaining about, you are sumarilly bashing them for choosing to convert the stadium to field turf without bothering to understand why they are converting in the first place.

They lost a game because of the turn this past week. They have been having alot of trouble keeping the grass in playable shape since the start of the season. It's a recurring problem in New England the past few years, they aren't just dumping the turf for no reason- they need field turf just to make their field playable to NFL standards.

That's why they are converting. They don't have a choice, their field is unplayable with grass. It was a problem in the old stadium as well, but to a lesser extent due to there being less rains and rough weather during home games in the early fall then. They had even less problems with the field a decade and a half before due to the stadium having artificial turf.

You may not like Field Turf but too bad, it's needed.

[Seattle1]

I'm aware of the turf problems they've been having at Gillette, but I don't really care, to me you just make due. That's football, it's meant to be played on grass, even late in the year when it's difficult to maintain. I'm sure Ray Neitchke and Bronco Nagurski had to kick a few clods of mud around in their day, but I bet they never complained about it once. Heck that's part of the fun of watching football late in the year, watching teams have to slog it out in the rain, snow, and mud. Artificial playing surfaces suck, they make the game itself artificial in a way, and I'll never change my mind. But again I'm not attacking the Patriots, really I'm attacking the FieldTurf fad and artificial turf in general.

There should be a rule in the NFL: if you have an open-air stadium, you must have a real grass playing surface. Next step, get rid of the domes too.

[Snake]

I am sure another reason they are going to the turf is the cost effectiveness. Do you have any idea how much it costs to constantly resod a playing field? If you do not like the artificial turf, you may want to stop watching sports. Within 10 yrs, almost all teams will be on it. That Bronco Nagurski comment doesnt really make sense. Times change. If they did have the technology back then, they probably would have had artificial turf. Do you think if Bronco Nagurski was playing today, he would take the same contract he had back then, or one of today's contracts?

[efin98]

I'm aware of the turf problems they've been having at Gillette, but I don't really care, to me you just make due. That's football, it's meant to be played on grass, even late in the year when it's difficult to maintain. I'm sure Ray Neitchke and Bronco Nagurski had to kick a few clods of mud around in their day, but I bet they never complained about it once. Heck that's part of the fun of watching football late in the year, watching teams have to slog it out in the rain, snow, and mud. Artificial playing surfaces suck, they make the game itself artificial in a way, and I'll never change my mind. But again I'm not attacking the Patriots, really I'm attacking the FieldTurf fad and artificial turf in general.

There should be a rule in the NFL: if you have an open-air stadium, you must have a real grass playing surface. Next step, get rid of the domes too.

Kid, you have no idea what you are ranting about. You are flinging around rhetoric and names that you have no concept of. You never played on horrid turf nor had to suffer the injuries that crappy fields produce- which are much worse than artificial turf produces.

And for your information, Bronco Nagurski played on an artificial turf- in the first NFL game played indoors in fact, the 1932 NFL Championship Game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Playoff_Game%2C_1932).

[Seattle1]

Kid, you have no idea what you are ranting about. You are flinging around rhetoric and names that you have no concept of. You never played on horrid turf nor had to suffer the injuries that crappy fields produce- which are much worse than artificial turf produces.

And for your information, Bronco Nagurski played on an artificial turf- in the first NFL game played indoors in fact, the 1932 NFL Championship Game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Playoff_Game%2C_1932).

You have no idea what you're talking about. You're making assumptions about me because you know your argument is weak. I know exactly who Bronco Nagurski was, which is why I referred to him. I've played football on both grass and turf, and I'll take grass any day. And now you've stooped to just flat-out lying too: artificial turf has caused far more, and worse, injuries than grass over the years. And that 1932 championship game was played on dirt, not turf, as if that one anomolous game has anything to do with the price of tea in China anyway.

[Seattle1]

I am sure another reason they are going to the turf is the cost effectiveness. Do you have any idea how much it costs to constantly resod a playing field? If you do not like the artificial turf, you may want to stop watching sports. Within 10 yrs, almost all teams will be on it. That Bronco Nagurski comment doesnt really make sense. Times change. If they did have the technology back then, they probably would have had artificial turf. Do you think if Bronco Nagurski was playing today, he would take the same contract he had back then, or one of today's contracts?


Actually MLB is a sport heading in the correct direction on this. Almost all MLB stadiums are now real grass playing surfaces. Only Toronto, Minnesota, and Tampa Bay are the lone hold-outs. And Minnestoa will be getting out of that crappy dome and into a real baseball stadium with a grass field in a few years.

In the NFL, Soldier Field went from turf to grass some time ago, the Linc was built with grass instead of the infamous turf of the Vet, Foxboro went from turf to grass years ago, Arrowhead made the switch, and there are other positive changes too. Now I was disappointed when they announced Qwest would be built with FiedTurf, but at least if it's an outdoor stadium that can always be corrected at some point.

The contract stuff about Nagurski is an apples and oranges comparison.

[Snake]

Did you notice your list was kind of short? That's because 21 out of 32 (66%) NFL teams now use FieldTurf. The trend is growing , not receding. Whatever your personal views may be, FieldTurf does not appear to be going anywhere anytime soon. I also noticed you choose to ignore my comment about the cost effectiveness of it. As well as my comment about times and technology changing. However, you did manage to zero in on my non relavent Nagursky analogy, lol. I only made that to show you how your Nagurski comment looked to me.

[efin98]

For the nay sayers, look at the highlights from the Bowling Green/Miami(OH) game on Wednesday night and that is exactly what Gillette would look like against the Bears on the 26th.

That field is unplayable.

[D.C.]

Did you notice your list was kind of short? That's because 21 out of 32 (61%) NFL teams now use FieldTurf. The trend is growing , not receding. Whatever your personal views may be, FieldTurf does not appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.

Watching a bit of the Pitt/WVU game from Heinz field and the commentators seemed to allude to the need to install field turf at that venue also. Personally, when it comes to football I don't care what they play on...baseball on the other hand MUST be on grass.

[brady_branch]

100% agree. FieldTurf is better than unplayable grass. The Ravens gave it rave reviews when it was opened here. I've played on both as well, and the amount of injuries that are field-related (not concussions, etc.) are far greater on grass. For example, would T.O.'s foot have broken had they played that game on turf? Maybe, but probably not.

[Willie]

That's because 21 out of 32 (66%) NFL teams now use FieldTurf.

I count only 14.

[brady_branch]

More than 30 colleges currently play their home games on FieldTurf, including Michigan, Wisconsin, Washington, Oregon, Kansas State, Boston College, Syracuse, Missouri, Louisville and Texas Tech. In addition to its growing popularity in the college ranks, FieldTurf has already established itself as the turf of choice in the National Football League. Twenty-two of the NFL's 32 teams currently use FieldTurf at their stadiums and/or their practice facilities.


SOURCE (http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/news.html?d=106905)

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least ten characters. There.

[Elvis]

That's because 21 out of 32 (66%) NFL teams now use FieldTurf.

The source says and/OR practice fields.

19 NFL teams play on natural grass according to this source. You guys should read more carefully. :D

[Snake]

And you dont think that the ones currently practicing on it are going to be putting it in their stadiums anytime soon? :)

[efin98]

And you dont think that the ones currently practicing on it are going to be putting it in their stadiums anytime soon? :)

Or that the owners of their stadiums will go with the cheaper, easier to maintain, and safer to play on surface

[Elvis]

And you dont think that the ones currently practicing on it are going to be putting it in their stadiums anytime soon? :)

Teams have been using fake turf in their practice facilities since the 70s.

Some will, some won't. I doubt that every team in the NFL will abandon grass any time soon.

[brady_branch]

The source says and/OR practice fields.

19 NFL teams play on natural grass according to this source. You guys should read more carefully. :D

But 22 USE FieldTurf.

[Elvis]

But 22 USE FieldTurf.

Actually I see the latest trend in stadium design going the way of Arizona and several newer international stadiums that have retractable grass surfaces.

[efin98]

Actually I see the latest trend in stadium design going the way of Arizona and several newer international stadiums that have retractable grass surfaces.

Expensive retractable surface vs. cheap field turf, little chance they would go with the retractable surface unless they have to.

[brady_branch]

Hate to revisit this thread, but...

Cutting on new artificial turf instead of the mud that was there two weeks ago, Brady set up New England's decisive touchdown in a turnover-filled game and the Patriots beat the Chicago Bears 17-13 Sunday.

"Must be the turf," Brady said. "I don't think that would have happened a few weeks ago."

SOURCE (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=261126017)

[efin98]

Hate to revisit this thread, but...



SOURCE (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=261126017)

Brady isn't lying.

Conditions before the game were similar to the last game, the only affect the field had on the game as a result of the heavy rains before the game was making some of the players wet instead of making them lose their footing, preventing proper foot planting for the QBs and kickers(a 52 yard field goal on it- impossible in the last home game), and forcing bad fumbles(mental mistakes caused the fumbles).

Hate the field if you want, but it held up great and didn't affect the game like the last few home games. They made a smart decision to get rid of the grass.

[Snake]

I thought the field looked pretty nice too. Best I remember ever seeing it there. I know that weather ruining a field is supposed to be part of the game is what the "purists" would say. But I would rather see the field where the guys can play up to their fullest abilities and settle the game that way. I bet more teams will be turning to field turf when they see how the current teams using it do with it.

[Seattle1]

It's mainly the teams in northern lattitudes of course that wimp out and go with an artificial playing surface, since grass slows/stops growing at colder/cold temperatures, making it harder to maintain.

But even then you don't have to go that route, you can install heating coils under the field to keep the soil just warm enough to let the grass/roots keep growing and replenishing itself. Even Green Bay and Chicago, two of the coldest places in the league, haven't installed artificial turf. The other thing you can do is only have the home team play games there. The Steelers shouldn't let Pitt and 50 million high school teams play games on their field, but I guess that was part of the deal for funding the stadium.

Can you imagine the Packers rolling out plastic instead of the legendary "frozen tundra" of Lambeau field? Lol! Ray Nitchke and Vince Lombardi would roll over in their graves!

Natural grass forever! (How else can you get grass stains on your uniform after all? :D )

[Snake]

Seattle, I understand your feelings on the subject, but I still don't see how you can say Nitschke and Lombardi would be rolling over in their graves. From accounts of players that I have seen, they like playing on the FieldTurf. After the New England-Chicago game, Tom Brady even mentioned that the field turf had allowed them to make the neccessary cuts to make plays and win. He even went as far as to say that they might not have won that game on a shoddy natural grass field. I would think Nitschke and Lombardi might like the FieldTurf better as well, if it allowed the players to make better plays. Of course, I really can't speak for them, so I couldn't say for certain ;)

[Seattle1]

Do you remember Art Donovan? He was a defensive tackle with the Colts back in the 50s. He was also a pretty colorful character and used to hit the talk shows like Letterman and Carson during the late 80s. He would scoff and joke about artificial turf and other things about the modern game. I remember one story he told about playing a game a few days after a circus had used the field, and there was still elephant dung on the field that they had to play through. Lol.

[efin98]

It's mainly the teams in northern lattitudes of course that wimp out and go with an artificial playing surface, since grass slows/stops growing at colder/cold temperatures, making it harder to maintain.

But even then you don't have to go that route, you can install heating coils under the field to keep the soil just warm enough to let the grass/roots keep growing and replenishing itself. Even Green Bay and Chicago, two of the coldest places in the league, haven't installed artificial turf. The other thing you can do is only have the home team play games there. The Steelers shouldn't let Pitt and 50 million high school teams play games on their field, but I guess that was part of the deal for funding the stadium.

Can you imagine the Packers rolling out plastic instead of the legendary "frozen tundra" of Lambeau field? Lol! Ray Nitchke and Vince Lombardi would roll over in their graves!

Natural grass forever! (How else can you get grass stains on your uniform after all? :D )

Ignorance is bliss:rolleyes:

[efin98]

Do you remember Art Donovan? He was a defensive tackle with the Colts back in the 50s. He was also a pretty colorful character and used to hit the talk shows like Letterman and Carson during the late 80s. He would scoff and joke about artificial turf and other things about the modern game. I remember one story he told about playing a game a few days after a circus had used the field, and there was still elephant dung on the field that they had to play through. Lol.

Throwing around stories but still have no idea what you are arguing about :rolleyes:

[Seattle1]

Sweet, I have a choice of watching the Packers, Bears, or Browns games right now. All at home in December on grass. Gee how do they ever manage? :rolleyes:

[Seattle1]

Throwing around stories but still have no idea what you are arguing about :rolleyes:

Are you employed by the FieldTurf corporation or something? Relax.

[efin98]

Are you employed by the FieldTurf corporation or something? Relax.

Kid, you have no idea what you are complaining about except that you are complaining for the sake of complaining.

[Seattle1]

Kid, you have no idea what you are complaining about except that you are complaining for the sake of complaining.

You keep parroting that line but it doesn't mean anything. You act like I've insulted your mother by asserting a preference for natural grass over FieldTurf, lol. :rolleyes:

[efin98]

You keep parroting that line but it doesn't mean anything. You act like I've insulted your mother by asserting a preference for natural grass over FieldTurf, lol. :rolleyes:

I give up, no use arguing with someone who has no idea what he is complaining about.

[Seattle1]

http://eteamz.active.com/WarhorsePower/images/MudBowl.jpg

[Seattle1]

http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2004/11/29/1101741811_4487.jpg

[Seattle1]

http://mrnerd2u.tripod.com/pics/cody.jpg

[Seattle1]

http://www.crk.umn.edu/people/athletics/football/FootballNews/Photo%20Gallery/UMC%20vs%20NSU/images/MuddyLine_JPG.jpg

[Seattle1]

http://www.vcc.edu/athletics/football/Vccfb15.jpg

[Seattle1]

http://images.nfl.com/u/photos/pl_198106.jpg

[brady_branch]

What is your point?

[ATLFalcons]

What is your point?
I'm wondering that too!

[Snake]

I think he is proving that he knows how to post pictures to the site. :p

[CCN]

Maybe he's advocating use of full helmets and pads for all backyard games. "Real football is played by 11 men, on grass, in the snow, in full pads, in a cul-de-sac . . . "

[Fumble]

My guess is, he is saying "this is football, it was meant to be played in the elements."

[Seattle1]

My guess is, he is saying "this is football, it was meant to be played in the elements."

Thanks Fumble that is the most obvious interpretation (you'd think) and about sums it up.

When I take my grandchildren to an NFL game, or show it to them on tv, I want it to essentially look and feel like the same game Bart Starr played when he came into the league. That's my opinion.

Somehow the legendary voice of John Facenda talking about "the frozen polyethylene fibers of Lambeau Field" just wouldn't be the same. ;)

[redbuck]

It's interesting that just 10 years ago we were in the middle of a frantic dash in both baseball and football to eliminate artificial surfaces. Then a little mud and a few improvements to field turf and we're back to assuming it's the ultimate solution.

I've always enjoyed sloppy football games, mud on uniforms and slipping players. If played right it can be a real home field advantage. The field turf always looks nice, but it takes away the genuine feeling of watching gladiators crush each other on the gridiron.

At Ohio State this year they struggled mightily with PAT and will soon install field turf. And although it hurt the Buckeyes greatly I'm sad to see the old stuff go. It seems somewhat wrong that most pickup football games I've ever played in have been on a field somewhere, but my team can't create a 320 ft strip of the real stuff.

[Argonaut Fan]

I've always enjoyed sloppy football games, mud on uniforms and slipping players. If played right it can be a real home field advantage. The field turf always looks nice, but it takes away the genuine feeling of watching gladiators crush each other on the gridiron.

I do enjoy a sloppy, messy game where the elements really add another dimension to the game. That being said, I understand the need for FieldTurf in some places. All but one CFL team (Edmonton (http://www.esks.com/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=861)) use Field Turf, because of the fact that it quite often snows in the latter monts of the season, and grass simply wouldn't cut it.

While it is too bad, I understand that it is expensive and extremelt difficult to maintain a natural playing surface in the middle of winter when it's below freezing. While they could install "heating coils" and things like that, it appears that it is simply much easier to install field turf.

I do disagree with places with warmer climates using the stuff though. I don't really see why they wouldn't use natural turf. Actually, I do. The cost. But I wish it weren't that way...

A few sidenotes: #1. Field Turf is many times better than Astro Turf in terms of injuries. It mimmicks the give of natural turf, and in a cold winter can be even better than frozen ground.

#2: Here is good little excerpt from this (http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Nylon/AstroTurf-Always-Greener20apr03.htm)article (sorry if someone has already posted this article on PSF):

FieldTurf, the product, consists of individual blades, about two and a half inches long, of a polyethylene-polypropylene blend, woven inseparably into a carpetlike backing. (FieldTurf's corporate office is in Montreal, though the stuff itself is made, as is AstroTurf, in the factory town of Dalton, Ga., aka ''the carpet capital of the world.'') Poured onto this backing is an ''infill'' mixture made of finely ground silica sand and so-called cryogenic rubber or recycled rubber that has been frozen and smashed into tiny particles. A phalanx of 37 current and pending patents, and Lord knows how many patent lawyers, surround the specifics of this process.

A result is an awesome triumph of the ersatz: it gives beneath your feet, it provides some cushion when you run and fall on it and, unlike the more traditional asphalt-backed surfaces, it doesn't heat up like a giant frying pan in summer weather. The fake grass blades are oil-coated to prevent the scourge of turf burn; one FieldTurf sales rep, in fact, a former N.F.L. player, is well known at trade shows for stripping down to his shorts and taking a running dive onto the stuff. The improved drainage capacities of that infill material mean that only an eight-inch crown is required, as opposed to 30 inches on older fields. Lines are marked on it with water-soluble paint; if a player should bleed or throw up into it, a small vacuum removes the offending patch of infill, which is then replaced. The turf has to be brushed every month or two, like a shag rug, to keep the nap up. Total maintenance runs about $3,000 a year. (Compare that with the $35,000 that one high school in Amarillo spent yearly just to water its football field.) The only drawback, according to some players, is that FieldTurf's little granules of rubber (nontoxic, Prevost swears) can, in the course of a game, pop up and leave unnerving pellets on players' mouth guards and faces.

More than anything else, though, FieldTurf resembles grass -- not just on TV, as important as that is, but up close -- in a way that the AstroTurf many of us remember from our high-school athletic careers never seemed close to doing. For a couple of thousand dollars, FieldTurf's installers will even throw in a special spray that makes the rows of petroleum-derived blades smell like a freshly cut field. Several clients requested that its FieldTurf be installed in wide strips of alternating shades of green -- to resemble the marks left by a lawn mower.