Grass v Turf

[Nidaros]

Re: Grass v Turf

I thought it was a stupid idea to start with. IMO they should play on their own field and the Jacks have their own field especially since its grass and not great grass to begin with.. Whats done is done but lets be realistic here- probably the worst field in all of Div.
1 except maybe for the Dome turf in Vermillion.

It depends what the word "it" means. Cant pass judgement on the the stupid idea until you define "it".

[SoDakJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

Had BHS not paid for the lights, they probably would still be only playing afternoon games at CAS. Seems that the status quo was always okay with the previous administration.

My issue isn't with the field or having a high school team play it. The warm-ups before a Jacks game probably do more damage than a high school game. My issue is more to the big picture idea of having someone else "step-up" to pay for it. Sure, it would be great if BHS would just magically give the athletic department $100,000 for a field (not going to happen when the school is scraping by after the cuts) or if some large donor would just write a blank check for a field. I think that many Jackrabbit fans are still not understanding that it is going to be smaller donors like myself and others that will get these projects done.

We can't sit around wishing and hoping that someone else will step up, we as fans are going to need to do the dirty work.

[Nidaros]

Re: Grass v Turf

Had BHS not paid for the lights, they probably would still be only playing afternoon games at CAS. Seems that the status quo was always okay with the previous administration.

My issue isn't with the field or having a high school team play it. The warm-ups before a Jacks game probably do more damage than a high school game. My issue is more to the big picture idea of having someone else "step-up" to pay for it. Sure, it would be great if BHS would just magically give the athletic department $100,000 for a field (not going to happen when the school is scraping by after the cuts) or if some large donor would just write a blank check for a field. I think that many Jackrabbit fans are still not understanding that it is going to be smaller donors like myself and others that will get these projects done.

We can't sit around wishing and hoping that someone else will step up, we as fans are going to need to do the dirty work.

I glad someone is mature to recognize this desparate need. Speed Rabbit is probably a student straddled with student loans, but for him to pop off about someone not doing their part is out of order in my opinion. Come back and tell me about it after you have made your large donation.

I have increased my monthly electronic transfer to the SDSU foundations to 150 bucks a month. I need the tax deductions and can afford it and I dont have to write a check every month. Bob and Van Fishback do that for me. I started an acorn endowment several years ago for the purpose of upgrading facilities. I have over 50 per cent of the way to go before I reach the endowment level, but the money will always be there to help out with facility needs. Yes little people like myself will get these things done.

[SoDakJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

This is great! Glad to hear that you are on the way to seeing that endowment mature!

I have been on my own little fundraising drive amongst my friends. Some of them cannot afford a 100-200 dollar a month donation, but if I can get 4 or 5 of them to give 40-50 bucks a month then it is a win. We, as donors, need to do a better job of letting people know that even 20 bucks a month can make a difference.

[LakeJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

As I think about the Jacks returning to camp--I am excited that camp is here but also I look at the field that the Jacks play on and it saddens me. I give props to the crew that work on the field and they do a great job but I just can't believe the SDSU administration have not put in turf.

Make your check payable to SDSU athletics

[LakeJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

Money....yes.. Everthing takes it...

Crazy how all the d2 and NAIA, even d3 have better fields... how come Brookings schools have not stepped up? Time to crap or get off the pot!

The Brookings School District paid for the lights at CAS, that is why they get to play at CAS. They stepped up.

[jackmd]

Re: Grass v Turf

This is great! Glad to hear that you are on the way to seeing that endowment mature!

I have been on my own little fundraising drive amongst my friends. Some of them cannot afford a 100-200 dollar a month donation, but if I can get 4 or 5 of them to give 40-50 bucks a month then it is a win. We, as donors, need to do a better job of letting people know that even 20 bucks a month can make a difference.

This is key. No matter how often you say it, it isn't often enough. Ask your friends, family, their friends to call and set up an EFT even if its only $20/month if makes a big difference. If you already have one set up and haven't considered increasing you donation, consider it and do it if it makes sense.

In the meantime, the Jacks have to do the best with what they have. Use the uniqueness of CAS as an advantage instead of degrading the facilities as that only further degrades the program and the institution. A solution is in the works, its not as easy to affect change as it is to want change.

[SUPERBUNNY]

Re: Grass v Turf

Ahhhh, the old grass vs. turf thread again.

First question: Are we all thinking back to that one game that we would all like to forget when the field was a sloppy muddy mess? Here's what I'm getting at, I have never heard a single player complain about the field and how it is to play on. Granted I'm not talking to a lot of them and certainly haven't asked about what they thought about Coughlin's field. I have been going to games there for almost forty years so I can bring some longevity to the discussion. Not in all those years did I here a complaint. The field didn't look very good last year which is frustrating given we are an Ag based university. You'd think growing green grass would be as easy at SDSU as anywhere. Maybe it was a conscious decision to save some $$$$. But how did it play? Maybe a few of our former players that frequent the board can chime in.

Second issue: The costs of turf. It isn't just the $million to put it in. I have talked to several people at the top and they all maintain that it costs MORE to maintain turf than grass. There is a perception that turf is easier than grass. Just put it in and forget it like synthetic deck boards. Simply not the case.

Third issue: How is it for the players (injuries)? Since there isn't a cost issue between the two then it would make sense to look into which is going to be better for the players.

I was on the turf bandwagon early and now I'm kind of coming back to hanging on to grass. The more I think about it that makes sense to me. SDSU is a land-grant Agricultural school. We grow stuff here. Frankly, a lot of the stuff our farmers grow is as a result of things that happen at SDSU. When we build a beautiful new stadium it is going to be fantastic. The idea of a grass field just fits better with our school, our city, our state, and our hard-working, no-nonsense kind of mentality. Wouldn't a great looking grass field with some attractive landscaping around it be a perfect compliment to the new stadium?

Either way will work for me but the poster above that noted that once you put the turf in it make it hard to go back makes a great point. Every once in a lifetime you are going to have an event like the 5+ inches of rain the night before game that is going to make us all say "We need field turf!" but in the course of the years has the grass surface served us pretty well? It seems to me it has. Besides, I kind of like seeing a little mud on the jerseys. If we would have only won that damn game!

Looking forward to more debate!

SUPERBUNNY

[SoDakJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

With all the talk of who needs to "step up," have we ever figured out what they would be stepping into? Are we talking $100k? 150k? 200k? Has there been a figure floated out by the department that I just happened to miss?

[SUPERBUNNY]

Re: Grass v Turf

With all the talk of who needs to "step up," have we ever figured out what they would be stepping into? Are we talking $100k? 150k? 200k? Has there been a figure floated out by the department that I just happened to miss?

I was always told around $1 million to do it right and annual maintenance costs that exceed grass. If you have to replace the grass I'm sure that changes but overall it is more expensive than grass to maintain.

SUPERBUNNY

[SoDakJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

I was always told around $1 million to do it right and annual maintenance costs that exceed grass. If you have to replace the grass I'm sure that changes but overall it is more expensive than grass to maintain.

SUPERBUNNY

First off, let me say that I have no knowledge of Field Turf. But, in my simplistic way of thinking a field that doesn't need to be seeded/painted/mowed/fertilized/rolled would be cheaper to maintain. What maintenence am I missing on turf?

[LakeJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

I thought it was a stupid idea to start with. IMO they should play on their own field and the Jacks have their own field especially since its grass and not great grass to begin with.. Whats done is done but lets be realistic here- probably the worst field in all of Div.1 except maybe for the Dome turf in Vermillion.

You haven't traveled much then have you.

[rabbits64]

Re: Grass v Turf

Ahhhh, the old grass vs. turf thread again.

First question: Are we all thinking back to that one game that we would all like to forget when the field was a sloppy muddy mess? Here's what I'm getting at, I have never heard a single player complain about the field and how it is to play on. Granted I'm not talking to a lot of them and certainly haven't asked about what they thought about Coughlin's field. I have been going to games there for almost forty years so I can bring some longevity to the discussion. Not in all those years did I here a complaint. The field didn't look very good last year which is frustrating given we are an Ag based university. You'd think growing green grass would be as easy at SDSU as anywhere. Maybe it was a conscious decision to save some $$$$. But how did it play? Maybe a few of our former players that frequent the board can chime in.

Second issue: The costs of turf. It isn't just the $million to put it in. I have talked to several people at the top and they all maintain that it costs MORE to maintain turf than grass. There is a perception that turf is easier than grass. Just put it in and forget it like synthetic deck boards. Simply not the case.

Third issue: How is it for the players (injuries)? Since there isn't a cost issue between the two then it would make sense to look into which is going to be better for the players.

I was on the turf bandwagon early and now I'm kind of coming back to hanging on to grass. The more I think about it that makes sense to me. SDSU is a land-grant Agricultural school. We grow stuff here. Frankly, a lot of the stuff our farmers grow is as a result of things that happen at SDSU. When we build a beautiful new stadium it is going to be fantastic. The idea of a grass field just fits better with our school, our city, our state, and our hard-working, no-nonsense kind of mentality. Wouldn't a great looking grass field with some attractive landscaping around it be a perfect compliment to the new stadium?

Either way will work for me but the poster above that noted that once you put the turf in it make it hard to go back makes a great point. Every once in a lifetime you are going to have an event like the 5+ inches of rain the night before game that is going to make us all say "We need field turf!" but in the course of the years has the grass surface served us pretty well? It seems to me it has. Besides, I kind of like seeing a little mud on the jerseys. If we would have only won that damn game!

Looking forward to more debate!

SUPERBUNNY

You asked for former players opinion - I love the grass, mind you I was an o-lineman. But I don't recall anyone ever complaining about the field. I recall that even into November the field was soft, never frozen, unlike the practice fields. It was always maintained very well. Do I think it gave an advantage, maybe, but after a few series most players figure out how to make adjustments to any surface. I do remember the old Howard Wood field being a complete disaster after an early storm, destroyed the field for the rest of the year with so many games being played on it. It was so bad where nobody could wear the metal tipped cleats as they wouldn't go into the field you would just slip. I would imagine that would be the concern if that ever happened at Couglin.
I would not be opposed to the new turf. It would allow for the university to host more events, which in turn could gain more revenue and would protect agains a freak weather event (UW LaCrosse). Turf doesn't ever seen to be a discussion for problems the way it used to, remember how often the old Metrodome turf used to be brought up, now it isn't brought up. It is the future, and with our crazy weather recently it seems to be a logical direction.

[SoDakJack]

Re: Grass v Turf

You asked for former players opinion - I love the grass, mind you I was an o-lineman. But I don't recall anyone ever complaining about the field. I recall that even into November the field was soft, never frozen, unlike the practice fields. It was always maintained very well. Do I think it gave an advantage, maybe, but after a few series most players figure out how to make adjustments to any surface. I do remember the old Howard Wood field being a complete disaster after an early storm, destroyed the field for the rest of the year with so many games being played on it. It was so bad where nobody could wear the metal tipped cleats as they wouldn't go into the field you would just slip. I would imagine that would be the concern if that ever happened at Couglin.
I would not be opposed to the new turf. It would allow for the university to host more events, which in turn could gain more revenue and would protect agains a freak weather event (UW LaCrosse). Turf doesn't ever seen to be a discussion for problems the way it used to, remember how often the old Metrodome turf used to be brought up, now it isn't brought up. It is the future, and with our crazy weather recently it seems to be a logical direction.

I don't think that you are goign to see many complaints from the older players because, to a certain extent, natural grass fields and sloppish (new CAS term?) fields were the norm for them. But, as has been discussed, many high schools are moving toward field turf in their stadiums. Perhaps in the near future not having a playing surface that is more stable will hinder our recruitment. IMO, the playing surface makes a bigger difference to a player than having fancy stands.

[jackmd]

Re: Grass v Turf

Some research stating cost is greater to maintain field turf than natural grass. I don't know the methodology or whether there is any bias. Here is the link.

http://turf.uark.edu/turfhelp/archives/021109.html

Maintenance
It is a myth that synthetic fields require less maintenance than natural turfgrass fields or to say that artificial turf fields are maintenance free. Synthetic fields require 1) additional infill, 2) irrigation because of unacceptably high temperatures on warm-sunny days, 3) chemical disinfectants, 4) sprays to reduce static cling and odors, 5) drainage repair and maintenance, 6) erasing and repainting temporary lines, and 7) removing organic matter accumulation. In a recent presentation by the Michigan State University, Certified Sports Turf Manager, she cited that the typical annual maintenance costs of her artificial turf fields ranged from $13,720-$39,220, while the typical annual maintenance costs of her natural turf fields had a similar range of $8,133-$48,960 (1).