Grass field possibility

[Glasgow Seahawk]

They are currently taking out the grass from the world cup. Last season the Hawks players gave lumen an F for field quality. The sounders have wanted grass for years (until they move to Renton with this out of touch ownership that no fan wants).

Do you think with new Hawks ownership, grass becomes a possibility? Would be a quick win for the owners to keep players happy if its done right but obviously makes things like concerts and monster trucks rallies more difficult.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Just don't think it's doable with the weather out here. Sure looks nice though.

 

[SeahawkSteve80]

I don’t understand this hate on field turf. There’s an older thread here with an article that argues field turf is just as safe as grass: https://www.seahawks.net/threads/field-turf-vs-grass-injury-debate-interesting-results.205336/

Grass would be very difficult to upkeep here. It would be a disaster past mid November and more unsafe than the field turf. It would get too moist, the drainage would suffer, and players would be slipping all over the place.

 

[HawkFreak]

I don’t understand this hate on field turf. There’s an older thread here with an article that argues field turf is just as safe as grass: https://www.seahawks.net/threads/field-turf-vs-grass-injury-debate-interesting-results.205336/

Grass would be very difficult to upkeep here. It would be a disaster past mid November and more unsafe than the field turf. It would get too moist, the drainage would suffer, and players would be slipping all over the place.

Hmmm. It's almost like there was a logical reason they went with field turf.

 

[Glasgow Seahawk]

I don’t understand this hate on field turf. There’s an older thread here with an article that argues field turf is just as safe as grass: https://www.seahawks.net/threads/field-turf-vs-grass-injury-debate-interesting-results.205336/

Grass would be very difficult to upkeep here. It would be a disaster past mid November and more unsafe than the field turf. It would get too moist, the drainage would suffer, and players would be slipping all over the place.

It's still possible with grow lights and good drainage though. Grass grows fine for soccer events in Northern Europe outside of summer for example. Issue would be the sheer number of events.

 

[sutz]

It's also a different game. Soccer/futbol, everybody is on the move. NFL football, you have 250-350 pound guys digging in and trying to leverage each other out of position. Huge guys digging their cleats in and chewing up the turf trying to push each other out of the way.

More than one game a week - which you have with additional events during the year - and you have a mud pit. Even one game a week in the rainy season would be difficult to maintain.

 

[Hawkstorian]

The Seahawks were the first team to have field turf when the new stadium opened, and it was lauded by the players. The biggest issue seemed to be the little plastic bits flying into guys' eyes.

Interesting article from 2001:

Showdown looms over turf in new stadium

A major dispute between soccer and football camps looms over whether the field surface...

www.seattlepi.com

The Seahawks played on field turf at Husky Stadium in '00 and '01 and there was quite a debate over turf vs. grass headed into '02.

Quotes from Robbie Tobeck:

He was supported by Seahawks center Robbie Tobek, who told the board that playing on the FieldTurf in Husky Stadium last season helped him recover from a knee injury. The turf was rated the top artificial surface in the NFL last season, by player vote, and the 12th best field in the league.

Tobek suggested that rating will improve once more teams and players experience the surface, a combination of artificial grass rooted in a mixture of ground rubber and sand. The new surface is needed in the new stadium, he said, because the field will be open to the elements and will take a beating under normal NFL conditions.
"Grass will not hold up," he said. "I've played in places where they have grass and either snow and rain. By the end of the season, the grass is all torn up."

 

[flv2]

It's doable if the powers that be want to do it. The rest of the World plays sports in worse conditions than those that occur in Seattle - and they do so on grass. I'm not saying the stadium in Seattle should or shouldn't have grass. Artificial turf allows for faster, more dynamic, and exciting play. That in turn leads to more injuries.

Ultimately sport 'businesses' will decide such things based on financial implications. Where you have players on long-term guaranteed contracts owner/controllers will opt for grass. Where you have disposable players on short-term non-guaranteed contracts they'll opt for an artificial surface that helps generate more money through more excitement.
...but i'm just a cynic.