I wonder if we will ever go back to natural grass at BDS

Not sure we can pin that one on Collins, more likely Stansbury or above.

We’ve gone grass to turf to grass before, maybe we’ll do it again when the current turf needs replacing. Can’t imagine it’s a priority with everything else going on, like a reported $20.5M budget shortfall predicted for these upcoming player payments. (Source: GT faculty town hall on athletics, 1/17/25)

JRjr
 
Something something concerts which nev happened due to Covid! Had GnR tickets myself that still have till this day w GT logo on them! But I agree grass is way to go.
 
We should possibly get a female to answer this question... they have far more experience in this area
 
GoJackets7567 said:
This is something I really wish would change. Not quite sure why GC ever went to turf. I think it's terrible. Is there any chance that we would ever go back to grass? I'd imagine Key prefers it.
Click to expand...
Agree. If you live in Boise, Idaho I get it. But anyone can grow grass is in Atlanta, GA. Plenty of warm, rain, and sunshine.
 
Tampa Jacket said:
Agree. If you live in Boise, Idaho I get it. But anyone can grow grass is in Atlanta, GA. Plenty of warm, rain, and sunshine.
Click to expand...
Negatives:
  • Much higher operating cost
  • Much more significant impact of weather events, like giant mud bowls after thundershowers. Thus, more impact of weather on gameday due to footing differences in a less-even field. Kicking and punting especially affected.
  • Can't practice as much in BDS
  • No other events at BDS (could be a positive in some minds, I guess)
  • Profit!!
 
BuzzCzar said:
Negatives:
  • Much higher operating cost
  • Much more significant impact of weather events, like giant mud bowls after thundershowers. Thus, more impact of weather on gameday due to footing differences in a less-even field. Kicking and punting especially affected.
  • Can't practice as much in BDS
  • No other events at BDS (could be a positive in some minds, I guess)
  • Profit!!
Click to expand...
1) disagree. In fact, before we went to artificial, our system for maintaining and watering our field was lauded for how innovative it was. We were so good, our head of grounds was hired by Alabama to keep their field

2) one of the best drainage systems in CFB. Didn't turn into a mud bowl during the UNC monsoon.

3) we have a practice facility

4) profit for Shaw Industries.
 
Seems like when we went to carpet, the cost of maintaining grass was given as one of the rationales. I'm pro-grass, but just bringing that up as a point of conversation.

Never mind...cost was mentioned above while I was posting.
 
JJacket said:
1) disagree. In fact, before we went to artificial, our system for maintaining and watering our field was lauded for how innovative it was. We were so good, our head of grounds was hired by Alabama to keep their field
Click to expand...
You have to hire a company that maintains the field, not just mowing and such but also reseeding, changing the blend btwn Bermuda and Fescue, continuously patch it up, and returf. It's much more expensive over the long term
 
BuzzCzar said:
You have to hire a company that maintains the field, not just mowing and such but also reseeding, changing the blend btwn Bermuda and Fescue, continuously patch it up, and returf. It's much more expensive over the long term
Click to expand...
Fescue? In those conditions?
 
JJacket said:
1) disagree. In fact, before we went to artificial, our system for maintaining and watering our field was lauded for how innovative it was. We were so good, our head of grounds was hired by Alabama to keep their field

2) one of the best drainage systems in CFB. Didn't turn into a mud bowl during the UNC monsoon.

3) we have a practice facility

4) profit for Shaw Industries.
Click to expand...
+1 on #2. Never had slipping or mud issues on the grass field since we returned to grass in 1995. Chris May and his staff consistently had a top 5 surface in the nation. The only couple times I remember the field showing wear was in 2007 during a major drought and several home games in November (3 of 4 wks?); the other was in late 2019 when I feel Toad sabotaged the surface or let it waste away knowing we were going to replace it in the offseason.
 
BuzzCzar said:
You have to hire a company that maintains the field, not just mowing and such but also reseeding, changing the blend btwn Bermuda and Fescue, continuously patch it up, and returf. It's much more expensive over the long term
Click to expand...
We already have a grass practice field, baseball field, track & field, golf facility (and I assume softball field?) Yes, it would obviously add costs but whatever company/employees we'd need, we must already have them to a large degree.
 
gtleviathan said:
We already have a grass practice field, baseball field, track & field, golf facility (and I assume softball field?) Yes, it would obviously add costs but whatever company/employees we'd need, we must already have them to a large degree.
Click to expand...
For practice fields. Not for a TV-ready playing surface that isn't supposed to look like a, well, practice field
 
ramblin_wreck08 said:
Would like to see a study, but it feels like turf leads to more injuries than grass.
Click to expand...
Turf Injury Studies
Studies have shown varying results regarding the likelihood of injuries on modern turf compared to natural grass. However, several studies indicate that modern turf may still pose a higher risk of injury, particularly in non-contact scenarios.

For instance, a study published in the Journal of Sports Medicine in 2013 found that artificial turf is three times more likely to cause foot and ankle injuries compared to natural grass. Another study showed that playing football on turf increases the likelihood of a posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury by three times compared to playing on grass.

In the context of the National Football League (NFL), a study conducted between 2012 and 2016 found that if every game had been played on grass, at least 300 fewer foot and leg injuries would have been expected. This study also noted that about 20% more non-contact injuries occurred per play on turf compared to grass.

More recently, data from the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) in 2022 showed that an injury occurred almost 0.013 more times per 100 plays on turf than on natural grass, a significant increase from the previous year. This trend aligns with the NFLPA’s long-held stance that grass is a significantly safer surface than turf.

However, it’s important to note that the debate is complex, and some studies suggest that certain artificial turf surfaces have a lower injury rate than some grass fields. The NFL and NFLPA continue to work together to improve player safety on all surfaces, acknowledging that there are no simple answers to this issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top