Campbell and the field
- Thread starter 2speedy1
- Start date
There are two big advantages for having real turf:
1. Almost no one else has it, so it is a foreign surface for visiting teams.
2. Unless the rules have changed, teams can adjust the height of the grass, within limits, to slow down super athletic teams.
Because nobody has acknowledged his question and rather took it as we suck, or turf sucks or something other than the question - is there something that can or should be done to help whatever field surface we have be the best throughout the season.
A long-ago post by a turf master from ISU (like 3 hours ago) said the foundation of the field was not "fixed" 8 years ago which lead to compaction/drainage issues that created a black zone for the roots which made it difficult for the roots to grow deep this year which resulted in our field being shredded for the last 4 home games. Weather was not the problem but the inner workings of grass field systems maybe was.
How often do we practice on grass vs. some sort of field turf?
Not a challenge - just a question.
I think we might have different perspectives on the word “big”
1. Grass is not a foreign surface to anyone.
2. What are the limits, seems like it’d have to be a big difference to matter. Do the coaches actually dictate grass length from team to team? ISU has those athletes now, which seems like the way to go instead of relying on slightly longer grass.
Not trying to come off like a ****, maybe I’ve failed, but I just don’t see why people are so passionate about grass if it provides no or a minuscule advantage occasionally? Especially when the last month is the downside in comparison.
I am assuming that the team practices a lot of the turf in the practice facilities, but also does practice on Jack Trice a fair amount. Someone closer to the program probably has a better idea.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
ok..... how many Big 10 or Big 12 schools , MVC or others in the north have natural grass?
WHAT do the coaches and what do the players and recruits want? Natural or artificial? Is it worth rolling the dice at the end of season games every year and then get the snake eyes like we did this year with the weather?
It would seem to me that any team's play calling and ability to execute on field conditions like today requires:
-limiting your offense scheme
-limiting your defenses scheme and response
-risks player's safety
Player safety is the one that I wonder if players or recruits consider or would consider if they saw the conditions today. I am sure many players have to be worried enough about playing today's non-con game and how it could hurt them in the bowl game and/or the draft if they got injured. Now add in their concerns with the increased potential to get hurt playing in the field conditions today. A lot of risk for little reward. Why roll the dice for November and other later season games with natural turf. Sure some years will be okay but the potential pifalls of bad turf years might not be worth the risk.
Makes me wonder if today's modern turf systems are where this should go. Of coursed, if CMC wants it, give it to him. It makes sense to me.
It would seem to me that any team's play calling and ability to execute on field conditions like today requires:
-limiting your offense scheme
-limiting your defenses scheme and response
-risks player's safety
Player safety is the one that I wonder if players or recruits consider or would consider if they saw the conditions today. I am sure many players have to be worried enough about playing today's non-con game and how it could hurt them in the bowl game and/or the draft if they got injured. Now add in their concerns with the increased potential to get hurt playing in the field conditions today. A lot of risk for little reward. Why roll the dice for November and other later season games with natural turf. Sure some years will be okay but the potential pifalls of bad turf years might not be worth the risk.
Makes me wonder if today's modern turf systems are where this should go. Of coursed, if CMC wants it, give it to him. It makes sense to me.
Thanks, I didnt see that post from the turf master, that makes things a little more clear. I do wonder what that means now, I do feel that something is going to have to be done to rehab the surface/subsurface or move to an artificial surface. Which was is what brought on my original question, wondering what CMC's preference is and if it will make a difference in the immediate future as to what happens. I personally want to stay with a natural surface, but is that what the department/coaches want and is it what is best for the program as a whole? I think there is definite pros and cons on both sides, but that wasn't really my original question.
And with all that do we stay with the natural grass but add "some" tech similar to Green Bay, as in the synthetic weave in the natural surface, and upgraded subsurface systems such as drainage and irrigation.
I am sure there have been and will be some serious discussions between the turf managers, CMC and JP with what are the problems and what is the solution. Just wondering what that will be.
They have two grass practice fields. One immediately outside the football complex and one across the street next to G7.
I hope we can find money to maximize every advantage we can think of from coaches and coaching, to recruits and development to academics to field surface - whatever it takes to give these young men the best chance to succeed.
If we were in San Diego , I understand having this natural grass and being proud about it. This is Iowa , with terrible winters and not suitable for grass in the winter.
I am sure the field managers will do everything in their power to fix it. If you are still un satisfied call the AD. The people in charge their have busted their ass all year. By all means keep ********.
