Fieldturf vs sod at Jack Trice

[cmoore_23]

i dont have a preference..

i played on both.. they both have goods and bads..

grass doesnt hurt when u slide on and it is fun to get muddy when it rains
but when it rains.. ur field gets torn up and also more chances of small holes turnin bigger and could cause injury

FT is nice because u dont have to worry as much about weather conditions and holes and is really nice looking almost all the time, but those dang rubber pieces drove me nuts, and really the burns werent to bad.. so i think that depends on the player...


like i said i really dont care on the field.. yes its nice to stick to tradtion of grass but some things need to be improved...

my overal opinion

wait a couple years, and see if there is better FT and also ask the majority of the football team what they prefer

[cloneu]

Originally Posted by usedcarguy

Artificial turf of any kind sanitizes the game too much. As a fan, I really enjoy the philosophical concepts of building a team to compete in a variety of weather conditions. I like how strong winds neutralize a passing team, and how a muddy or frozen field slows the speedsters down. And since the teams we play seem to have more team speed than we do, turf in inclement weather would put us at a competitive disadvantage.

Why would we do that to ourselves?


Besides, mud on the uniform is a badge of honor!

I agree, if the weather doesn't come into play, mud or whatnot, having a field that constantly has good footing with any weather is too lame for my liking.

Originally Posted by CRCy17

What's in the Bergstrom building? Is that field turf? I've played a couple of times on that and running wise its not bad, felt very natural to cut and move on. Other than that, it was annoying to have the little chunks of rubber from the field filling my cleats and don't forget about the massive amounts of burns. I played just 3 games and had numerous amounts of burns, im sure players would not be excited about playing on that all season. It may be that Im such a baseball guy, but for me nothing compares to a nice, well kept natural grass.

I have played a handful of games in Bergstrom as well and I preferred playing on any grass fields more. The turf in there isn't bad, but nothing beats the real thing.

[birdflu]

Grass!. ...but as a graduate of ISU's hort dept, of course I am totally biased.

[TedKumsher]

Originally Posted by usedcarguy

Artificial turf of any kind sanitizes the game too much. As a fan, I really enjoy the philosophical concepts of building a team to compete in a variety of weather conditions. I like how strong winds neutralize a passing team, and how a muddy or frozen field slows the speedsters down. And since the teams we play seem to have more team speed than we do, turf in inclement weather would put us at a competitive disadvantage.

Why would we do that to ourselves?


Besides, mud on the uniform is a badge of honor!

And I have the exact opposite opinion. I want football to be a game between 2 teams. Not a game between 2 teams and the environment. I vote for domes and field turf for all football so the competition is solely between the athletes.

I know it's not realistic--but as much as some people love the tradition or nostalgia or whatever of games played in mud or snow (any Green Bay fans?)--it just doesn't seem like the best football in that weather.

Maybe I should watch arena football, huh?

[scottie33]

I prefer there to be no grass at all if you know what I mean lol jk.

On a more serious note, I loved playing on natural grass in High School as our field was natural grass and very nice. We kept it fairly long to even out the playing field against the faster teams considering our HS was the smallest 4A school in the state at the time. Then we had to play on Valley's turf field and I wasn't in favor of it at all. You just weren't able to get the same feel for your cuts as you could on natural grass. the only thing I liked about it was that it cleaned up my shoes real nice...i hated all the little rubber pieces in my shoes, and they scraped the **** out of your arms...but that's just minor.

[scottie33]

Originally Posted by TedKumsher

And I have the exact opposite opinion. I want football to be a game between 2 teams. Not a game between 2 teams and the environment. I vote for domes and field turf for all football so the competition is solely between the athletes.

I know it's not realistic--but as much as some people love the tradition or nostalgia or whatever of games played in mud or snow (any Green Bay fans?)--it just doesn't seem like the best football in that weather.

Maybe I should watch arena football, huh?

Well then if you want to see a game of solely teams players only...go see a game at Carver Hawkeye, because their fans add no home court advantage for the hawkeyes. That'd be a real fun experience...NOT

you think basketball should be played in a neutral court instead of Hilton, so the fans have no influence on the game...just solely the competition between teams only.

Just like Hilton Magic is a home team advantage to us in basketball...the frozen tundra is a home team advantage to green bay as the mile high stadium is home team advantage to Denver.

Regardless of the weather, BOTH teams have to play in the same conditions whether they like it or not. Your an athlete for a reason and you should be able to adjust to anything

[cy1225]

Originally Posted by CRCy17

What's in the Bergstrom building? Is that field turf? I've played a couple of times on that and running wise its not bad, felt very natural to cut and move on. Other than that, it was annoying to have the little chunks of rubber from the field filling my cleats and don't forget about the massive amounts of burns. I played just 3 games and had numerous amounts of burns, im sure players would not be excited about playing on that all season. It may be that Im such a baseball guy, but for me nothing compares to a nice, well kept natural grass.

It is Field Turf an it is almost as nice as grass. However grass is not nice year round thus Field Turf is a better turf for athletic fields unless you are in the south. Try playing baseball in Iowa before April 14th, the grass is brown if it is not covered in snow

[jdoggivjc]

Originally Posted by cy1225

It is Field Turf an it is almost as nice as grass. However grass is not nice year round thus Field Turf is a better turf for athletic fields unless you are in the south. Try playing baseball in Iowa before April 14th, the grass is brown if it is not covered in snow

Considering Iowa State plays the majority of their football schedule between January 1 and April 14

[dunar]

Originally Posted by CyForPresident

As an Ag. major, I'll puke if ISU ever gets rid of natural grass.

I only vaguely remember the "carpet" that was removed on DMac's arival, but I think I'd also be sick if we ever went back to artificial...

[nickwc]

Originally Posted by StormnClone58

unfortunately a football field gets torn up very easily, if anyone has been out to the muscatine soccer complex i would like to see that type of field used, its called grassy turf, its real grass and very well maintained but has similar features to turf, very thin, about 1/4 inch tall, almost fast track like ...

I have never seen any surface as nice as the muscatine soccer complex it was so much fun playing there of the state tourney..it is a shame that they moved it to des moines.

[cybsball20]

Let's have gold turf, like Boise only uglier...