NFLPA Calls for Natural Grass in all NFL Stadiums

[Vic Mackey 47090]

This has been a huge discussion for years at all levels of football. That artificial turf is much worse than grass. It's now getting a lot more traction after the Rodgers injury. NFLPA usually is very weak and submissive so no idea where this goes.

 

[cmontexas 3272]

How much time did Aaron Rodgers spend in the weight room this off-season?

[MrBig 5423]

Aaron Rodgers is the perfect Achilles sacrifice to get grass fields.

[Pam Cummings 9646]

I'm of the opinion that playing on grass is better. That said, i don't see how it is feasible.

 

When football players get injured, how about we attribute it to the fact that they are playing football instead of blaming grass.

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

Is grass always superior or is it just superior to shitty turf, or is it that all turf is shitty? 

[NorthLoop 14218]

Yeah I'm sure Jerrah will give up hosting T Swift concerts and the like because some washed up qb blew his knee out. 

[Foosters 17858]

2 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

I'm of the opinion that playing on grass is better. That said, i don't see how it is feasible.

 

When football players get injured, how about we attribute it to the fact that they are playing football instead of blaming grass.

Other than a true dome, how is not feasible?

Yes, the injuries are occurring because its a contact sport. Does not mean it cannot be made safer.

[Pam Cummings 9646]

Just now, Foosters said:

Other than a true dome, how is not feasible?

Yes, the injuries are occurring because its a contact sport. Does not mean it cannot be made safer.

First if all im not an expert about turf or grass or any of that. Just me thinking.

 

But, when an NFL game is played on a grass field, i would imagine there is a lot of damage done to the playing surface. And a lot of these places are hosting more than just NFL games, they have college and juco games as well as concerts and such.

 

So after you play a game, i guess my question would be how long does it take for the grass to re-grow and be manicured as such to where you can play another game on it? How much does weather affect this? I just feel like a week isn't enough time to get the field into playable condition again. There will be divots and holes, no? Is that not dangerous?

 

And you could resod, but it takes time for those roots to get in there. You'd have a really slippery surface every week if you did that. It was, IIRC, what players complained about in the super bowl.

 

And the Rodgers injury just didnt have anything to do with field surface imo. He got tackled in a weird way and his ankle planted in the wrong direction. I just dont see how the turf made a difference there.

[lilMAC25 3801]

Lots of domes out there that won’t support this.

[C-Man 27237]

9 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

First if all im not an expert about turf or grass or any of that. Just me thinking.

 

But, when an NFL game is played on a grass field, i would imagine there is a lot of damage done to the playing surface. And a lot of these places are hosting more than just NFL games, they have college and juco games as well as concerts and such.

 

So after you play a game, i guess my question would be how long does it take for the grass to re-grow and be manicured as such to where you can play another game on it? How much does weather affect this? I just feel like a week isn't enough time to get the field into playable condition again. There will be divots and holes, no? Is that not dangerous?

 

And you could resod, but it takes time for those roots to get in there. You'd have a really slippery surface every week if you did that. It was, IIRC, what players complained about in the super bowl.

 

And the Rodgers injury just didnt have anything to do with field surface imo. He got tackled in a weird way and his ankle planted in the wrong direction. I just dont see how the turf made a difference there.

This argument might make more sense if there weren't quite a few NFL stadiums that are grass already. They seem to make it work.

[Foosters 17858]

6 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

First if all im not an expert about turf or grass or any of that. Just me thinking.

 

But, when an NFL game is played on a grass field, i would imagine there is a lot of damage done to the playing surface. And a lot of these places are hosting more than just NFL games, they have college and juco games as well as concerts and such.

 

So after you play a game, i guess my question would be how long does it take for the grass to re-grow and be manicured as such to where you can play another game on it? How much does weather affect this? I just feel like a week isn't enough time to get the field into playable condition again. There will be divots and holes, no? Is that not dangerous?

 

And you could resod, but it takes time for those roots to get in there. You'd have a really slippery surface every week if you did that. It was, IIRC, what players complained about in the super bowl.

 

And the Rodgers injury just didnt have anything to do with field surface imo. He got tackled in a weird way and his ankle planted in the wrong direction. I just dont see how the turf made a difference there.

This all makes sense, but what about the many NFL and NCAA stadiums that already use grass? About half of all NFL stadiums have natural grass. Don't they all have to deal with the same issues that you're describing? 

[Pam Cummings 9646]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

This argument might make more sense if there weren't quite a few NFL stadiums that are grass already. They seem to make it work.

Yes, like Baltimore. Who saw 6 of their starters get injured on Sunday. But i dont see anyone blaming any playing surfaces.

1 minute ago, Foosters said:

This all makes sense, but what about the many NFL and NCAA stadiums that already use grass? About half of all NFL stadiums have natural grass. Don't they all have to deal with the same issues that you're describing? 

Yeah i mean you're probably right. For me personally, i just don't like how wasteful it seems.

[Rimbo 26015]

9 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Lots of domes out there that won’t support this.

Not with THAT attitude.

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

8 minutes ago, C-Man said:

This argument might make more sense if there weren't quite a few NFL stadiums that are grass already. They seem to make it work.

Agree there is some workaround.  I'm guessing that turf fields may have the ability to host more stuff, but I don't give a shit about Jerry Jones' ability to pocket more money.  That being said for this to come to fruition the NFLPA will probably agree to an 18th game, completely mitigating any potential safety gains. 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Gene Parmesan

[Texas Wahoo 3402]

11 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Lots of domes out there that won’t support this.

[Foosters 17858]

2 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Yes, like Baltimore. Who saw 6 of their starters get injured on Sunday. But i dont see anyone blaming any playing surfaces.

Sounds like your issue is more with the conclusion that grass is safer. FWIW, the NFLPA is basing that on the number of injuries over a 10 year period. Feel free to take a look at the numbers. You're a smart poster, so I know you're not trying to say that because there were numerous injuries on a grass field, the conclusion that grass is safer is incorrect.

[Jkwellborn 6713]

NFLPA is going to fuck the players again if they keep it up. I mean, unless the fields are like that shit hole in Missouri, you probably can’t prove it’s that much safer with grass. Not like we haven’t seen fields that were sodded and torn up all along the seams.

[Hiphopopotamos 20876]

6 minutes ago, C-Man said:

This argument might make more sense if there weren't quite a few NFL stadiums that are grass already. They seem to make it work.

I don't know about 'making it work'.  Soldier Field's turf after Friday night high school football games is trashed.  They usually getting it looking pretty for kickoff - but the field is torn to hell.  Now it hasn't mattered for the Bears - that fandom has been the bane of my existence for 37+ years - but I know Bears players and opponents have complained about the shit turf during pre-game walk-through.

 

[C-Man 27237]

5 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Agree there is some workaround.  I'm guessing that turf fields may have the ability to host more stuff, but I don't give a shit about Jerry Jones' ability to pocket more money.  That being said for this to come to fruition the NFLPA will probably agree to an 18th game, completely mitigating any potential safety gains. 

They can cover the grass for events if they have to, or come up with slide-out fields like they have in Arizona. Hell, I saw a video today about the Real Madrid's new pitch at the Bernabeu and that field is mechanically pulled apart in sections and then stored under the main surface when not in use. It's air-conditioned and has UV lights on it to keep it "alive."

[lilMAC25 3801]

15 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Purpose designed when the stadium was built. Where is the space for Dallas or Minnesota or Atlanta to do that?

 

aside from that, nearly every year I see people complain about the state of that field during the season, and especially during college bowl games.

Edited September 13, 2023 by lilMAC25

[C-Man 27237]

 

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

5 minutes ago, C-Man said:

They can cover the grass for events if they have to, or come up with slide-out fields like they have in Arizona. Hell, I saw a video today about the Real Madrid's new pitch at the Bernabeu and that field is mechanically pulled apart in sections and then stored under the main surface when not in use. It's air-conditioned and has UV lights on it to keep it "alive."

Super cool. Retrofittable?

[Foosters 17858]

2 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

Super cool. Retrofittable?

Depends on whether the owner can convince the local gov't to make the taxpayers pay for it.

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

10 minutes ago, C-Man said:

They can cover the grass for events if they have to, or come up with slide-out fields like they have in Arizona. Hell, I saw a video today about the Real Madrid's new pitch at the Bernabeu and that field is mechanically pulled apart in sections and then stored under the main surface when not in use. It's air-conditioned and has UV lights on it to keep it "alive."

Slide out fields after the fact probably aren't going to happen.  As far as converting domes to grass I don't know enough about it to know if it's doable long term or if it's only doable for one time events.

[C-Man 27237]

1 minute ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Slide out fields after the fact probably aren't going to happen.  As far as converting domes to grass I don't know enough about it to know if it's doable long term or if it's only doable for one time events.

Hey, it's another way these guys can say, "See, I need a new stadium."

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

Just now, Foosters said:

Depends on whether the owner can convince the local gov't to make the taxpayers pay for it.

Well, depends on whether the owner can convince the local voters to have the local taxpayers foot the bill, but yeah. Seems like a pricey retrofit, even though it’s very cool and grass almost assuredly has to be safer for joints and noggins. 

[lilMAC25 3801]

1 minute ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Slide out fields after the fact probably aren't going to happen.  As far as converting domes to grass I don't know enough about it to know if it's doable long term or if it's only doable for one time events.

Didn’t work for the AstroDome.

[futureman 22507]

as long as we’re on the subject can we talk about why DKR doesn’t have natural grass? 

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

1 minute ago, futureman said:

as long as we’re on the subject can we talk about why DKR doesn’t have natural grass? 

 Because it’s not 2026, yet. This is exactly the kind of stuff futureman should know. 

[cmontexas 3272]

Arizona's field was a total disaster for the Super Bowl. Grass can work but people are like just do what Arizona does

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/12/sports/football/super-bowl-turf-grass-state-farm-stadium.html

[futureman 22507]

1 minute ago, Doc Daneeka said:

 Because it’s not 2026, yet. This is exactly the kind of stuff futureman should know. 

oh is there a plan in place for 2026?  

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

5 minutes ago, futureman said:

oh is there a plan in place for 2026?  

There is, I believe, a tweet from CDC talking about breaking ground for the new practice facility in 25 (?) and turf install in 26.

[Wilcox Cummingtonite 3028]

No reason for DKR not to be natural grass by next year. This shit is a problem.

Alabama's bermuda field looked absolutely perfect. I was shocked at how great it looked- even in 4k.

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2023/08/bryant-denny-stadiums-new-grass-surface-earns-positive-reviews-from-alabama-football-players.html#:~:text=The new surface has some,sidelines are now artificial turf.

[Macklemore 2873]

When the Texans had natural grass at NRG with the large tray system, it had seams that caused a lot of injuries and was easily torn up. Once they moved to artificial turf, it has become a much safer surface. The key is to have artificial turf surface without a lot of black pellet infill like they have at MetLife or at DKR. Texans and Cowboys have the best product available when it comes to artificial turf.

[Pam Cummings 9646]

26 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Sounds like your issue is more with the conclusion that grass is safer. FWIW, the NFLPA is basing that on the number of injuries over a 10 year period. Feel free to take a look at the numbers. You're a smart poster, so I know you're not trying to say that because there were numerous injuries on a grass field, the conclusion that grass is safer is incorrect.

I don't know how they gather that data. But we've established that most of these teams play on turf. So unless your home field is a grass field, the majority of your games will be played on turf. It isn't like every player has a perfect 50/50 split for games played on grass vs turf. So that means that most players will simply have more opportunities to get injured on a turf surface vs a natural grass surface. IMO that skews the "more people getting hurt on turf" data point.

 

But also, it just feels like we blame the turf a LOT for injuries. It's just kinda a natural part of being bummed out that a player you like got hurt, I suppose. I find it curious that the NFLPA has never said a thing about this turf issue, but suddenly when 40 year old Rodgers has an injury where contact is involved as he's being slung around by the human giant known as Leonard Floyd, NOW the NFLPA speaks up. Just weird to me.

[0xdeadbeef 1651]

Real grass would look so much better at DKR.  No more of those stupid rubber pellet clouds.   Maybe I'm the only one who those bug. 

 

[C-Man 27237]

11 minutes ago, futureman said:

as long as we’re on the subject can we talk about why DKR doesn’t have natural grass? 

Agree. I hate that we have turf at DKR. Was hoping the SEC was making us get rid of turf along with Lowell Galindo upon entry into the new conference.

Do any SEC teams currently play on turf? Is Mizzou still concrete? Ole Miss or Vandy maybe?

[JBJ 3663]

 

46 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

First if all im not an expert about turf or grass or any of that. Just me thinking.

 

But, when an NFL game is played on a grass field, i would imagine there is a lot of damage done to the playing surface. And a lot of these places are hosting more than just NFL games, they have college and juco games as well as concerts and such.

 

So after you play a game, i guess my question would be how long does it take for the grass to re-grow and be manicured as such to where you can play another game on it? How much does weather affect this? I just feel like a week isn't enough time to get the field into playable condition again. There will be divots and holes, no? Is that not dangerous?

 

And you could resod, but it takes time for those roots to get in there. You'd have a really slippery surface every week if you did that. It was, IIRC, what players complained about in the super bowl.

 

And the Rodgers injury just didnt have anything to do with field surface imo. He got tackled in a weird way and his ankle planted in the wrong direction. I just dont see how the turf made a difference there.

It is this.

Natural turf is pretty widely considered the superior playing surface when it is good shape.  But it's better to play on artificial than Mizzou's old grass.

The transition to artificial turf is both about domes and the number of events that you want to hold on the surface.  Grass needs to recover and it takes weeks to root when re-sod.

[Js1 85449]

29 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Agree. I hate that we have turf at DKR. Was hoping the SEC was making us get rid of turf along with Lowell Galindo upon entry into the new conference.

Do any SEC teams currently play on turf? Is Mizzou still concrete? Ole Miss or Vandy maybe?

Vandy, Mizzou, Kentucky 

[Underdog 28753]

UK installed new field turf this off season.  I don't see FT going away anytime soon, seems a lot of schools on many levels have switched to it. 

[Foosters 17858]

33 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

I don't know how they gather that data. But we've established that most of these teams play on turf. So unless your home field is a grass field, the majority of your games will be played on turf. It isn't like every player has a perfect 50/50 split for games played on grass vs turf. So that means that most players will simply have more opportunities to get injured on a turf surface vs a natural grass surface. IMO that skews the "more people getting hurt on turf" data point.

 

But also, it just feels like we blame the turf a LOT for injuries. It's just kinda a natural part of being bummed out that a player you like got hurt, I suppose. I find it curious that the NFLPA has never said a thing about this turf issue, but suddenly when 40 year old Rodgers has an injury where contact is involved as he's being slung around by the human giant known as Leonard Floyd, NOW the NFLPA speaks up. Just weird to me.

14 teams use turf. 14 use natural grass. 2 use some weird hybrid. 

FWIW, European soccer is pretty much exclusively grass and they balk at the prospect of their players having to play on field turf. This summer, UNC was forced to truck in pallets of sod to cover their turf field for an exhibition between Chelsea and Wrexham because the two UK clubs refused to play on the artificial surface. The point being, the issue of safety predates Rogers's injury. Also, here's a link to an essay by the NFLPA President from April, 2023 where he discusses the issue. This also is prior to the Rogers injury.

https://nflpa.com/posts/nfl-approach-field-surface-uneven

Quote

It makes absolutely no sense for European soccer clubs to visit the U.S. every year – including this upcoming summer – and play exhibition games at NFL stadiums on high-quality natural grass while NFL players are subjected to greater risk on artificial surfaces. And it is absolutely appalling that owners are more willing to provide safe fields for soccer players than for the football players who are the primary workers on those fields -- and who, in many cases, helped pay for the stadiums where those fields lay.

 

[ousux 5601]

Is grass always superior or is it just superior to shitty turf, or is it that all turf is shitty? 

Well maintained grass is superior, but in high school I played on a couple shitty grass fields that were either watered too much, (not naturally) too little or not cut short enough. Whoever maintains the field must know their shit.

[ousux 5601]

First if all im not an expert about turf or grass or any of that. Just me thinking.
 
But, when an NFL game is played on a grass field, i would imagine there is a lot of damage done to the playing surface. And a lot of these places are hosting more than just NFL games, they have college and juco games as well as concerts and such.
 
So after you play a game, i guess my question would be how long does it take for the grass to re-grow and be manicured as such to where you can play another game on it? How much does weather affect this? I just feel like a week isn't enough time to get the field into playable condition again. There will be divots and holes, no? Is that not dangerous?
 
And you could resod, but it takes time for those roots to get in there. You'd have a really slippery surface every week if you did that. It was, IIRC, what players complained about in the super bowl.
 
And the Rodgers injury just didnt have anything to do with field surface imo. He got tackled in a weird way and his ankle planted in the wrong direction. I just dont see how the turf made a difference there.

Imagine the high school championships in Jerry world..like 3 days straight of back to back games. That's simply not doable on grass.

[ousux 5601]

Unless that part where the field is wheeled out on a tray also becomes parking on gameday...many stadiums simply don't have the real estate for this.

[JBJ 3663]

Soccer is a different animal altogether.  It's more like tennis surface in the sense that it changes the way the ball bounces and rolls.

MLS uses artificial turf, but it isn't the type that NFLPA is trying to ban. It kind of important to note that NY(J) doesn't either.

[lilMAC25 3801]

1 hour ago, Foosters said:

14 teams use turf. 14 use natural grass. 2 use some weird hybrid. 

FWIW, European soccer is pretty much exclusively grass and they balk at the prospect of their players having to play on field turf. This summer, UNC was forced to truck in pallets of sod to cover their turf field for an exhibition between Chelsea and Wrexham because the two UK clubs refused to play on the artificial surface. The point being, the issue of safety predates Rogers's injury. Also, here's a link to an essay by the NFLPA President from April, 2023 where he discusses the issue. This also is prior to the Rogers injury.

https://nflpa.com/posts/nfl-approach-field-surface-uneven

 

The 2021 study showed something like 0.01 increase per 100 plays in chance of injury for FT vs grass.

The next year “rocketed” up to 0.013 greater chance of injury over 100 plays.

https://sports.yahoo.com/nflpa-says-new-data-shows-turf-fields-still-cause-more-injuries-than-natural-surfaces-171352790.html

Thats a small number.

 

 

[UpperWestside 6171]

Turf is just horrific for the career these guys chose. If it can be done you spend the more year to get a grass field again. My old high school is still playing on the same grass field they have been on since FDR was in his first term in the 30’s. Grass is superior in every way to turf. Watching football on a grass field is better and the injuries are fewer. That the owners won’t just do this on every field where it is possible is insane.

[Foosters 17858]

26 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

The 2021 study showed something like 0.01 increase per 100 plays in chance of injury for FT vs grass.

The next year “rocketed” up to 0.013 greater chance of injury over 100 plays.

https://sports.yahoo.com/nflpa-says-new-data-shows-turf-fields-still-cause-more-injuries-than-natural-surfaces-171352790.html

Thats a small number.

 

 

Fair enough

[LonghornBreeder 550]

3 hours ago, Pam Cummings said:

And the Rodgers injury just didnt have anything to do with field surface imo. He got tackled in a weird way and his ankle planted in the wrong direction. I just dont see how the turf made a difference there.

Rodgers' age, pre-existing injury and long standing douchiness aside, this actually the exact kind of injury that could be reduced by playing on natural grass. His ankle/Achilles was likely injured because the artificial surface didn't tear or sheer to release pressure on his foot like grass would have.

[Nueces River Rat 5539]

2 hours ago, C-Man said:

Agree. I hate that we have turf at DKR. Was hoping the SEC was making us get rid of turf along with Lowell Galindo upon entry into the new conference.

Do any SEC teams currently play on turf? Is Mizzou still concrete? Ole Miss or Vandy maybe?

Lowell first please.   Turf second.