Field Turf vs. Natural Grass

[RiverDog]

Following Aaron Rodgers season ending Achilles tendon injury, the turf-grass debate flared up again, with the players union renewing their demand that all NFL stadiums convert to a natural surface. Here's an article from the Atlantic that gives some good background information. It's worth a read:

New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers’ season-ending injury refueled a debate over playing surfaces across the league. After Rodgers tore his Achilles against the Buffalo Bills on “Monday Night Football,” some of his former teammates shared strong anti-turf sentiments on social media.

Jets coach Robert Saleh said in a news conference Monday that if Rodgers’ injury were non-contact, he would be more concerned about the turf at MetLife Stadium and “I think that was trauma-induced” — but that he knows “the players prefer grass.” Rodgers was sacked by Bills outside linebacker Leonard Floyd when he suffered the injury.

This offseason, MetLife Stadium’s turf was changed from a slit-film surface to a multilayer dual-polymer monofilament fiber called FieldTurf Core. Slit-film surfaces, which are created by cutting “blades” into a single piece of material, resemble netting upon close view designed to keep infill in place. Players have referred to such turf as “grabby,” where a monofilament surface can be “harder and faster” but designed to release cleats.

Some Jets players reiterated their preference for natural grass Monday night, but some did note that the new field at MetLife felt like an improvement to the previous slit-film surface.

The NFL found a significant statistical difference in non-contact injury rates on slit-film surfaces versus natural grass and even other synthetic surfaces from 2018-21. League spokespeople cited data acquired through IQVIA, a health technology company jointly appointed by the NFL and NFLPA and compensated by the league.

The NFL also maintained throughout 2022 that it found a “statistically insignificant” difference between injuries on synthetic versus natural grass surfaces during the 2021 season, citing the same data gathered by IQVIA. Players and personnel across the league have said they don’t trust the NFL’s data, or believe it lacks clarity and transparency.

Asked Tuesday afternoon about the renewed outcry over playing surfaces, NFL executive vice president Jeff Miller said the league had not found a difference in the injury rate for Achilles injuries on natural grass surfaces versus synthetic. Miller cited data collected on the matter since 2015.

“It is always difficult when talking about Achilles injuries, which are such substantial injuries, to see two players in the first week go down with those,” Miller said, referring to Rodgers and to Baltimore Ravens running back J.K. Dobbins. Dobbins tore his Achilles tendon Sunday at M&T Bank Stadium, which has a grass surface. “So that is an important area to continue to research, but because an injury happens on a surface doesn’t mean that injury was caused by that surface. And in this case, we haven’t seen a data difference for Achilles injuries. So there’s a lot more work to do. We don’t want those injuries in the game.”

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell addressed the turf controversy during an appearance on ESPN’s First Take on Wednesday.

“What we want to go on is science, we want to go on what’s the best from an injury standpoint,” Goodell said per multiple reports.

The NFL and NFLPA meet with manufacturers of artificial turf twice a year to examine injury rates on those surfaces.

Many players believe that the less forgiving turf fields lead to serious injuries, especially non-contact injuries. Players across the NFL have been outspoken in their belief that owners are motivated by money because synthetic surfaces enable them to save on long-term maintenance costs and to better host non-football events such as concerts without having to deal with traffic damage on the playing surfaces. The NFL has denied such claims.

The outrage from NFL players over playing surfaces has also flared up as major soccer tournaments either are hosted at stadiums, or some stadiums prepare plans to host the upcoming World Cup.

SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles, which is shared by the Los Angeles Rams and the Chargers, switched to a natural grass playing surface for the CONCACAF Gold Cup over the summer. Their football surface is a synthetic material called Hellas Matrix turf. Last year, Bank of America Stadium hosted an exhibition match between MLS club Charlotte FC and English Premier League team Chelsea and installed a natural grass surface for the match before switching back to an artificial surface for football season.

NFL stadiums that wish to host FIFA tournaments such as the World Cup must adhere to the rigorous field testing standards of its Quality Programme. Any stadium with an artificial surface hosting a competitive FIFA match must meet Programme standards — or switch to approved grass, at least temporarily.

On a club level, most top European leagues, like the English Premier League, choose to play on natural surfaces “mostly following players’ preferences,” Programme director Mickaël Benetti said last winter.

There is only one league-standardized test required to approve the use of NFL playing surfaces: firmness. This evaluation, called a Clegg test, is conducted by each team’s own field management lead and reported to the league in the days ahead of a scheduled game. Individual team personnel must also check infill.

Miller has reiterated that the NFL and NFLPA are looking to lower injury rates on both natural grass and synthetic surfaces. Using the data collected by IQVIA and a group of biomechanical engineers, the league studies variables such as cleat type, weather, type of movement when the injury occurs and more. IQVIA deploys an electronic health record system to all 32 NFL teams and relies on them to self-report injuries. IQVIA also monitors participation data (snap-to-snap “football exposure”), game statistics, player tracking, stadium surface and footwear.

Asked Tuesday whether the NFL has the ability to determine specifically how much a playing surface factors into an Achilles tear, Miller said, “When we take a look at major injuries that lead to substantial time loss, and therefore are our priorities from a research perspective — things like Achilles, ACLs, high ankle sprains — a team of biomechanical engineers will study on a frame-by-frame basis those injuries to better understand what we can about them and what the contributing factors are.”

https://theathletic.com/4858011/2023/09 ... n-rodgers/

[NorthHawk]

I still maintain that the problems may occur on grass at a similar rate, but the underlying cause is in part to artificial turf. Meaning the damage has started to be done from the turf but it's close to random when the final physical failure happens.

[RiverDog]

I'm leaning towards changing back to grass where it's feasible simply because the players seem to prefer it. If the Packers can maintain a natural grass field in the environment they have to deal with, places like Seattle and Cincinatti can, too. Not sure about the fixed roof domed stadiums like they have in New Orleans. They might have to bring in the turf for each game on pallets and piece them together like a jig saw puzzle unless they can rig up something like Arizona and Las Vegas has. It seems like a huge pain in the rear but they can afford it.

[Uppercut]

Arizona's grass slides out like a giant drawer

I think Lumen is a injury maker

[c_hawkbob]

Field turf is actually not that bad. Certainly better than the old astroturf rug they had in Veterans stadium or the natural turf disaster they had in RFK that RG III tore up his knees on. Some people just gonna b**** no matter what.

[RiverDog]

Field turf is actually not that bad. Certainly better than the old astroturf rug they had in Veterans stadium or the natural turf disaster they had in RFK that RG III tore up his knees on. Some people just gonna b**** no matter what.

RG3 was just one player that tore up his knee on that field at FedEx. If I remember correctly, Chris Clemons tore up his knee on that field, too, as did Adrian Peterson. That was probably the worst playing surface this century, natural or artificial.

There's also the issue of which field can best hold up under a heavy rainfall. My gut instinct tells me that an artificial turf drains much better and, of course, doesn't get muddy or sloppy. But then, again, perhaps they should do as baseball does and cancel games when the weather conditions aren't acceptable.

But in this case, I don't think it's just random bitching. There seems to be some evidence that shows the number and severity of injuries are less on grass than turf.

[Oly]

If soccer pitches in the UK can be grass, then they can be in Seattle, as well. The issue is less the rain drainage (newer systems have improved that dramatically) and more whether Lumen can continue to host the number of events it does and maintain the surface. I think that the Seahawks and Sounders could both play on grass without it becoming FedEx levels of atrocious, but the number of concerts and other events will either need to decrease or they'll have to find ways of covering the field for other events. Those seem challenging.

[RiverDog]

If soccer pitches in the UK can be grass, then they can be in Seattle, as well. The issue is less the rain drainage (newer systems have improved that dramatically) and more whether Lumen can continue to host the number of events it does and maintain the surface. I think that the Seahawks and Sounders could both play on grass without it becoming FedEx levels of atrocious, but the number of concerts and other events will either need to decrease or they'll have to find ways of covering the field for other events. Those seem challenging.

I agree. If Green Bay can grow a grass field in the environment they play in, then they can do it in Seattle.

Seattle has a bad reputation when it comes to rain. It was something like 5 years after they opened the new stadium before they had a game played in the rain. Besides, with the relatively small amounts of daily rainfall Seattle has to deal with, it's not a problem for a modern field to drain. The real problems come when you get hit by a deluge as happens in the Midwest and Southeast, where the rainfall overwhelms the field's ability to absorb/drain. In Seattle, it seldom rains more than 1" in a day.

That's the big challenge, dealing with the thunderstorms, hurricanes, etc, that can dump 5" of rain in a few hours. In those conditions, they probably shouldn't be playing, anyway.

[NorthHawk]

The bottom line is the owners are too cheap to spend on the best playing surface for their $250M payroll to play on. They don't even have cameras along both sides of the goal lines and both sides of the sidelines in all cases, and they don't cost much.
Things can be done to both use the location for non sports activities and have a less dangerous playing field if they want to do it.

[RiverDog]

The bottom line is the owners are too cheap to spend on the best playing surface for their $250M payroll to play on. They don't even have cameras along both sides of the goal lines and both sides of the sidelines in all cases, and they don't cost much.
Things can be done to both use the location for non sports activities and have a less dangerous playing field if they want to do it.

It wasn't that long ago that teams and players were lobbying for artificial turf instead of grass.

I voted on the statewide initiative which created what we now know as Lumen Field. The original plan sold to the voters stipulated a natural grass surface so as to get the soccer community on board as even then, ie late 90's, the World Cup would not play any of their contests on an artificial surface.
While the Seahawks were playing in their temporary venue at Husky Stadium, Paul Allen, as a thank you to the university, bought what was then a revolutionary product called Field Turf. Mike Holmgren and the Hawks were so impressed with it that they insisted that it be included in the new stadium that was still under construction. Allen was able to convince the stadium board to install it by promising that if they ever had the opportunity to host a World Cup game, that he'd pay to have a natural grass surface temporarily installed. The stadium board agreed.

Point is that it wasn't installed simply because owners wanted to make more money by being able to host more events. Now, we've come full circle as the preferred surface is natural grass.

The other thing here is that very few teams actually own their stadiums. Most are publicly owned. Not all of the non-football events held in the stadiums are for the financial benefit of the owners, at least not directly.

Having said that, there are ways that owners, if they wanted to, could mollify their landlords' concerns. All it takes is money, something of which they have plenty of. If it was do-able enough for Paul Allen to have committed to it back in 2002, it's certainly do-able now.

One of the things that I've complained about for years, if not decades, is that both the players association and the owners agree to jointly contribute a certain percentage of revenue/benefits to a stadium fund through which new stadiums can be financed. Split up the revenue like a pie, with this piece going to the players, this piece to the owners, and this piece to stadium improvements.