92% of NFL players want grass fields

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Not arguing against grass fields altogether. Just norther domed stadiums.

that article as you can easily see is speculative. Grow lights are a big operation. The lights need to be as close to the surface as possible. To maintain a turf field 100% is theoretically possible but swapping out turf indoors and out is not an equal proposition. Outdoor fields don’t need massive lighting systems rolled over them constantly to provide light and outdoor fields (believe it or not) sometimes need no irrigation.

when someone accomplishes this feat then that would be something. Now? Chicago building a non retractable dome will not have real grass.

Yes, many of your arguments are applicable to all grass fields especially when you dismiss the fact that major soccer leagues around the world mandate it's use and the fact that several domed stadiums in the US are installing grass to hold the 2016 FIFA World Cup

The use of grow lights is NOT speculative. It's been done for years.

The more you put out these lame arguments the more you illustrate constipated mindset that narrow minded fools have shown for decades (and in reality, centuries).

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Sounds like you just have to go to some trouble and expense to swap out the turf, something as stated is already being done. Not buying this is that complicated. Expensive? Probably not that either when the increased cost of injuries is factored in.

I think if the teams were FORCED to do it they'd get this sorted pretty quickly. This isn't John Kennedy saying we're going to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely in < 10 years.

It's ALL about the money. Period.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Seems Vegas is saying it’s about being green vs energy intensive grow lights.

besides you seem to think swapping out turf every couple of weeks is a wash as far as money goes.

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Seems Vegas is saying it’s about being green vs energy intensive grow lights.

besides you seem to think swapping out turf every couple of weeks is a wash as far as money goes.

That is SO DUMB.....incredibly imbecilic.

Phoenix and Las Vegas (the two stadiums that use a tray system) are ranked #1 and #3 in MOST SUNNIEST CITES IN THE U.S. It's not about "being green" it's about all that "free" sunshine!!! Using grow lights in these two cites would be stupid beyond measure.

Many NFL stadiums ALREADY "swap out turf every few weeks" and doing so in a dome would be no different.


Like I said, it's ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!!!

Your arguments are silly and not very convincing.....unless one is a cheapskate owner or a Luddite.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

So money to swap out is the same outdoors or indoors … why have expensive tray rail systems when grow lights are just as effective?

Vegas chose to not use lighting. There has to be a reason other than green energy requirements.

if you are seapping out turf on a tray or in open air stadiums that is a wash. Why the trays ? Can’t say money is the root of this. Notarized grow lighting systems have to be less expensive to use verses moving the entire mass of the field outdoors.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

So… the fact that the newest dome chose not to
use grow lights is my evidence that grow lights aren’t the same as sunlight in maintaining football turf .

your evidence that dome stadiums can maintain turf using grow lights is what exactly? The owners are greedy?

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Jesus sukie, you are going round and round with the same failed arguments. I've already refuted all your lame arguments many times over. You simply refuse to accept the facts and reality.


You lost this one. Take the loss and move along.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

You have not. Why did Vegas opt for the expense of a tray rail field system when a grow light system would be just as good?

is Chicago even thinking about real turf in its plans for downtown stadium?

why has it not been attempted inside a dome anywhere other than temporarily for word cup events?

(your own words would be fine.)

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

You have not. Why did Vegas opt for the expense of a tray rail field system when a grow light system would be just as good?

is Chicago even thinking about real turf in its plans for downtown stadium?

why has it not been attempted inside a dome anywhere other than temporarily for word cup events?

(your own words would be fine.)

Yes, I have. Just stop it.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

All you said was owners are greedy.

I’m all for natural grass and glad Bills will be playing on it but there will be no league mandate unless it includes exemptions for domed stadiums.

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Great article from Rich Florio stating the GLARINGLY OBVIOUS....

NFL is committed to safety — when it doesn’t cost money to be

As momentum was building over the weekend for a ban on the hip-drop tackle, a current head coach made an important observation.

Basically, as the league wraps itself in the “player safety” flag, it continues to ignore the basic fact that playing on grass is better for the human body than playing on an artificial surface.

It’s undeniable. The forces, on a grass field, go into the ground. On a turf field, they bounce back into the body. Anyone who has ever played on an artificial surface knows that. The NFL nevertheless tries to concoct a phony debate, and to bolster the pro-turf position with warped and misleading stats.

Frankly, the NFL supports safety only when it doesn’t cost any money to do so. And, alternatively, when it doesn’t get in the way of the ongoing obsession to maximize revenue.

Grass fields in all stadiums would create an expense that the league doesn’t want to incur, especially at a time when it’s pinching pennies with NFL Network programming and luring long-time employees to take buyouts and leave.

The NFL also will not hesitate to make the inevitable push for an 18-game regular season. That’s coming. It’s just a question of when. And when it does, it will result in more revenue. Regardless of whether it’s good for the players to play 18 regular-season games.

That’s a safety issue that doesn’t matter, because making it matter would mean making less money. Thus, look for any and all ongoing safety advancements to be made only as to items that aren’t hazardous to the health of Big Shield’s bottom line.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

It is glaringly obvious that playing on grass is superior. No one is arguing that point. Especially when avid horticulture expert and Uber successful hydroponics enthusiast Mr Florio weighs in with bold fonts and stuff.

[notacon]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

It is glaringly obvious that playing on grass is superior. No one is arguing that point. Especially when avid horticulture expert and Uber successful hydroponics enthusiast Mr Florio weighs in with bold fonts and stuff.

As usual, you miss the point entirely.

Yes it IS "glaringly obvious that playing on grass is superior", but the POINT is that glaringly obvious that THE reason that owners and NFL is pushing back against doing what IS glaringly obvious to better ensure player health and safety is ABOUT MONEY.

The other point is that the NFL and NFL owners supposedly being "committed to safety" ONLY when it does not cost money.

What else is glaringly obvious is that you inexplicably are taking the side and defending filthy rich owners and parroting their specious dishonest baloney so they can retain even more of their obscene wealth.

[sukie]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

I am not missing the point. The one you side stepped by not mentioning Domes. Any proclamation to play on grass would hold an asterisk for Minnesota, Detroit, NO, Atlanta And Indy plus whatever fully domed stadium I am missing.

[Historian]

Re: 92% of NFL players want grass fields

Yes it IS "glaringly obvious that playing on grass is superior", but the POINT is that glaringly obvious that THE reason that owners and NFL is pushing back against doing what IS glaringly obvious to better ensure player health and safety is ABOUT MONEY.

The other point is that the NFL and NFL owners supposedly being "committed to safety" ONLY when it does not cost money.

What else is glaringly obvious is that you inexplicably are taking the side and defending filthy rich owners and parroting their specious dishonest baloney so they can retain even more of their obscene wealth.

Key word: Obscene.

This is what I don't get, and I agree with you 100% on this.

How would this even affect their pocketbooks?

The teams split the tv money equitably, and that money pays all salaries and operational costs. (At least I thought it did)

Most stadiums are built and maintained with taxpayer funds in the first place. (aka corporate welfare)

This league makes BILLIONS. How does any of this hurt their revenues?

Seems to me that it would be a drop in the bucket to do the right thing.