Football's future upgrades

[Jacks-D1]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Nebraska is a land grant / ag school. Never had grass, never will.

[Rabbitlivinginverm]

Re: Football's future upgrades

SFSD, I believe, is the original SDSU beat writer. The one, and only, Chris Solari. I hope it's okay that I ousted you...

[filbert]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I do know who sfsd is, and he has some degree of credibility with me. I do know that Michigan State has one of the world's premier programs in turf management and research, so that would definitely enter into it in their case.

SDSU, on the other hand . . . doesn't. Although there may be people who are thinking along those lines (and good for them!)

So I therefore withdraw my dismissive "uh, no" remark to joeboo22, and will instead direct my derisive ire towards anybody silly enough to suggest that SDSU's academic/research turf management program should have any weight AT ALL in the decision regarding what is the best turf for Coughlin-Alumni Stadium. I do know that the words "field turf" have been mentioned in significant conversations within the HPER building.

Put me in the "for field turf" column, personally. I would however be sympathetic to arguments that the Development Center, Fieldhouse, finishing the softball and baseball stadiums, and re-building the Coughlin-Alumni grandstands may all be ahead of the field turf in the funding priority list.

[Rabbitlivinginverm]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Put me in the "for field turf" column, personally.  I would however be sympathetic to arguments that the Development Center, Fieldhouse, finishing the softball and baseball stadiums, and re-building the Coughlin-Alumni grandstands may all be ahead of the field turf in the funding priority list.

Put me in Filberts column.

[Jacks02]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Put me in the opposite Filberts column.

Down with fieldturf >

Say yes to grass! ;D

[jackmd]

Re: Football's future upgrades

[quote author=filbert link=1165242043/150#152 date=1181312830]

Put me in the "for field turf" column, personally.  I would however be sympathetic to arguments that the Development Center, Fieldhouse, finishing the softball and baseball stadiums, and re-building the Coughlin-Alumni grandstands may all be ahead of the field turf in the funding priority list.

Put me in Filberts column.
[/quote]

Filbert's column for me, too. 10 years ago I would have said no way but the recent improvements in turf have created durable and useable surfaces. The current turf at CAS was in bad repair all of last season and didn't look much better at the spring game this year. That is not a knock on the ground crew, they do a as good a job as they can. If someone can control the weather then we probably don't need turf but I haven't met anyone like that, yet.

[JackJD]

Re: Football's future upgrades

When natural turf is in good shape, it is the model all artificial surfaces try to approach. The field turf surface is impressive...most like natural grass I've seen and been on.

I continually hear the injury rate on artificial surfaces is higher than on grass. I wonder what the experience has been with the relatively new field turf.

I like grass but I watched what happened at CAS early last season.

[JACKGUYII]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I'm definitely in the camp for field turf. There is so much more capacity for what could be hosted at Coughlin ie, Band practice and competitions, more area high school and playoff football games, soccer and on.

[jacksfaninne]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I prefer it remain natural. But I could live with field turf -- as long as it's football only. What I can't live with is the field at CAS being lined for football and for soccer like Howard Wood. We're DI, not high school.

[GoJacks]

Re: Football's future upgrades

[quote author=D-town link=1165242043/135#147 date=1181273592][quote author=sfsd link=1165242043/135#145 date=1181272194][quote author=joeboo22 link=1165242043/135#139 date=1181239438]From what I have heard on here, friends at SDSU and other people through out the state. Money isn't the reason that artificial turf hasn't been installed. The problem is SDSU is a Land Grant college and with the grant they use it for turf and it just doesn't look good when you have an artificial turf on your football field....

He's somewhat right about this. Michigan State had turf for a number of years, even though it has one of the best turfgrass management programs in the nation (which installed the natural grass in dome stadiums when the U.S. hosted the '94 World Cup). However, in recent years, there was a push to switch the football stadium back to grass because of this reason - why isn't an ag school using one of its best resources with the most visible part of the university? Spartan Stadium has had grass, and beautiful grass at that, for the last five years.[/quote]

Source Please
[/quote]

D-Town mussn't know who I am...but here you go:http://www.statenews.com/article.phtml?pk=6277 and http://wkar.org/specials/backtotheroots/
[/quote]

You are correct I have no Idea who you are. I try NOT to figure out who someone "might" be. Thanks for your source. Both are interesting reading.

[jackrabit1]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I smell another poll brewing!

Either that, or I really need to back off the buritos! ;D

[joeboo22]

Re: Football's future upgrades

i'm not trying to start anything and no i didn't know that there was that many land grant school the way I understood it, it was like an honor and only a select few schools got them. First of all I think the #1 problem with SDSU's grass field is they let the high school play out it. I have seen it at BHSU the high school plays on it friday night and gets it loose then saturday its torn all to hell and if it rains it makes it worse. I like grass and I like the new field turf also I don't think SDSU would be wrong to go to field turf in any way.

[SD-STATE]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Ideally, I think grass would be the way to go. Problem here at State is that we have a grounds crew that is probably has a lot on their plate and not enough qualified staff to take care of the field the way it should be. Maybe bid out the care of the field to a private turf management firm where people that specialize in turf management can keep the field in tip top shape. Instead of some workstudy kid spraying the field with round-up left in the sprayer tank like a few years ago. BHS is going to be here to stay at Coughlin, but SDSU should have priority over a high school game. If we get dumped with rain, then BHS should have to post-pone their game or move it to another location. Their are a half-a-dozen other football fields with in a half-hour drive of Brookings that can be played on.

[GoJacks]

Re: Football's future upgrades

BHS is going to be here to stay at Coughlin, but SDSU should have priority over a high school game. If we get dumped with rain, then BHS should have to post-pone their game or move it to another location. Their are a half-a-dozen other football fields with in a half-hour drive of Brookings that can be played on.

You are right CAF is also home to BHS. There is absolutely no way you can "kick off" BHS because of inclement weather. There maybe a half-dozen fields within 30 miles, but SDSU could not force them to postpone games or switch locations. Be realistic, it is not fair to fans, game management staff, teams, officials etc. Besides any other field could say sorry not today we have to also had inclement weather last night. Tearing Sioux Valley's field would be fair either. Also, who would pay to rent these other facilities?

SDSU and BHS are contractually binded I believe for 25 years. Then we will see. My guess it will be renewed as the arrangement is beneficial too SDSU, BHS and the City of Brookings.

[1bunnies]

Re: Football's future upgrades

When the game that is not to be mentioned again was played, BHS had offered to postpone their game until the following Monday. People should not be to critical of the decisions that are made if they do not know that facts.