Interesting. Curious if the new turf on the field/practice field is not to the football staff's liking, or is it not performing to the ISU turfgrass standards they thought it would.From what I have heard in the grapevine at least practice field wise it was an unplanned necessity.
I heard it is the primary cause for our 2 yard drag routes on 3 and 9 failing.Interesting. Curious if the new turf on the field/practice field is not to the football staff's liking, or is it not performing to the ISU turfgrass standards they thought it would.
Only one of those statements matter.Interesting. Curious if the new turf on the field/practice field is not to the football staff's liking, or is it not performing to the ISU turfgrass standards they thought it would.
This and the following posts tell me nothing, from a horticultural or usability standpoint. Anyone have any factual info to share?The best natural field in all of college football just got better.
Apparently our soil, weather and cultural practices, on their own, don't provide a satisfactory playing surface?
I heard it is the primary cause for our 2 yard drag routes on 3 and 9 failing.
Good info!The practice fields see activity pretty much every day. When the weather is wet it can get torn up pretty bad even if well maintained. I could see the stitched field being a huge benefit in keeping it playable with such heavy use. If you are adding it to the practice fields it seems like a no brainer to add to the stadium turf to help keep it pristine when you have back to back to back home games and the weather is being hard on it. I have been a fan of this and hoping ISu would get it since I saw something similar (Grassmaster) on the Lambeau field a decade or more ago.
One huge benefit of the stitched fields is that it adds stability to the sand substrate. Since these fields are built on pretty much straight sand, 300+ pound bodies pushing on each other can move the sand around under the grass resulting in an uneven playing surface over time. The stitching goes deeper than roots alone and also encourages the roots to go deeper adding stability to that substrate.
Interesting. Curious if the new turf on the field/practice field is not to the football staff's liking, or is it not performing to the ISU turfgrass standards they thought it would.
No, he is solid, I watched the field being laid down. The jts field will be a mix.of grass.and sythetic grass.sown in next year. The Broncos field is what our field will look like.Firetom manningthe turf manager!
Isn't that what they just did? Or is there something different?No, he is solid, I watched the field being laid down. The jts field will be a mix.of grass.and sythetic grass.sown in next year. The Broncos field is what our field will look like.
This likely was planned from the get go, especially since the Iowa Cubs turfgrass people (Iowa Sports Turf) has been kind of spotlighting it lately and has been installing it other places as well. Iowa State's turfgrass team has a good relationship with them. Issue with laying it down is that it takes a long time (they said about two weeks). They obviously needed time to let the roots take to the substrate, and by then, they couldn't put it down because the team wanted to get as much stadium practice time in as possible. They're doing it now because it's the first big window between uses.I'm pretty interested the actual cause for this. I can understand if there's a lot of pride in the Turf Management program to have a completely natural field, but from the outside and no knowledge of the situation/turf knowledge, hybrid stitching seems like an overall benefit to the health and condition of the turf.
Isn't that what they just did? Or is there something different?
313-150 + 184-92 + 129-58 + 38:15-21:45 = 10-7
They've installed this in several Premier League Stadiums and others in Europe like Real Madrid over the past few years. Only a matter of time before it becomes the thing here. Minnesota United FC has it.