Turf vs. Grass: Angelo undecided

think the time has come- if the players want it, think will make them better and team "shifting" to a faster players...time to make the change as the City said the other day if bears want it, they would do it- take advantage of the window

Turf vs. Grass: Angelo undecided


By Neil Hayes on January 6, 2011 5:09 PM

Bears general manager Jerry Angelo has heard team leaders such as Jay Cutler and Brian Urlacher criticize the turf at Soldier Field. He has watched late-season games against the Eagles, Jets and Patriots, but nothing he has seen or heard makes him feel as if a new surface is a priority.

"The surface is the surface," he said

. "You've got two seasons here in Chicago. As the year goes on, the surface isn't going to be as good. The bottom line is that it's a safe surface and that's what we're fixed on, making sure we play on a safe surface. We've been able to win on that surface; we've lost on that surface. I don't see it being an advantage to anybody. It's the teams that play well that win."

Angelo said team president Ted Phillips is focused on learning more about the safety of natural grass versus artificial surfaces before any decision is made.

"We'll talk about it," he said. "We talked about it last year. I know Ted's said that he wants to get more comfortable in the research. I'm not ruling it out and we'll do our due diligence with the research. Everybody wants a fast surface. I don't think any NFL team wants to play with 3 inches of grass on the field. Every team is looking for that and we're no different. So we'll go through that again and see what the results are based on the research and going forward."

I don't have to play on it so it is merely my opinion. I rather grass than turf. I will prefer what the players feel comfortable playing on and what would be less of an injury risk.

There's been a number of studies done that suggest that turf is worse for injuries. But you get injuries on all surfaces.
I do prefer grass myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mancunian

There's been a number of studies done that suggest that turf is worse for injuries. But you get injuries on all surfaces.
I do prefer grass myself.

---

Turf is worse for injuries, but not so much the tackling on it. Looking at Andre Dawson, his knees were shot from years of playing on turf when he was with the Expos.

While the normal football career is usually half the time of baseball career, you may not see the same results as you would in baseball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mancunian

There's been a number of studies done that suggest that turf is worse for injuries. But you get injuries on all surfaces.
I do prefer grass myself.

---

Agree pure astro-turf concrete alot worse( like what used to have in soldier in 1980's) and what most studies are done on- but not talking that anymore, but the 'field turf" that is a synthetic weave with a rubber under filler so much better on knee's and bodies, like have at quest field, the linc and lameblow

http://www.fieldturf.com/artificial-...eldturf-works/

They claim iys much safer, but as they commissioned the study, got to take with a grain of salt- but because its still reletively new, long term studies or data hard to come by

http://www.fieldturf.com/football-turf/safety/

An independent, three-year study of competitive college football showed that when compared to natural grass the FieldTurf system leads to:

• 74% Fewer Muscle Tears
• 42% Lower ACL Trauma
• 32% Fewer Ligament Tears
• 22% Fewer Severe Injuries
• 19% Fewer Substantial Injuries
• 12% Fewer Concussions
• 10% Less Injury From Shoe Surface Interaction during Contact
• 8% Less Injury From Shoe Surface Interaction during Non-Contact
• 7% Fewer Total Injuries

An independent, five-year safety study of competitive high school football showed that when compared to natural grass the FieldTurf system leads to:

• 55% Fewer Neural Injuries
• 47% Fewer Cranial / Cervical Injuries
• 38% Fewer 3rd Degree Injuries
• 45% Less Time Lost to Long-Term Injuries (Lasting 22+ Days)Tests Show FieldTurf has the Best Head Impact Response
  
  http://www.fieldturf.com/images/uplo...d_impact_2.jpgLaboratory impact tests compared the head response of three artificial turf systems: FieldTurf; a system comprised of rubber and sand infill; and a system of all-rubber infill. Drop tests were done from various heights, with impacts to a mannequin headform. The results were clear
  
  

Are there people out there that still don't understand that FieldTurf is vastly superior to playing on grass? That pretty much ever poll taken of NFL players since FieldTurf was introduce says they prefer to play of FieldTurf? The Bears players themselves say they hate their own field, that should be reason enough to switch!

Keep it grass.

If Chicago Bears stars Jay Cutler and Brian Urlacher dislike the playing surface of their home field, they should talk to team management, said Soldier Field general manager Tim Lefebvre.


Last week, Urlacher said "the footing in Soldier Field has been horrible. You watch us on film, just slipping. We're a fast team, and when you get us on a surface like that, it kind of takes a little bit of our speed. The field has been so bad we haven't been able to do what we normally do."

On Dec. 8, Cutler called Soldier Field "one of the worst fields in the league at this point," adding "We've got to deal with it, and our guys know it."


Lefebvre has heard the talk about replacing the grass field with synthetic turf -- which he would be fine with -- but he said that's not what the Bears want at this point.


"It's a confusing message because you hear from Cutler and Urlacher and yet the Bears tell us the majority of players still want to play on grass," Lefebvre said Tuesday on "The Waddle & Silvy Show" on ESPN 1000. "These are your two team leaders. I think they need to sit down with the coaching staff and Bears administration, and if that's truly how they feel, and other players feel that way, they should have a discussion about changing to synthetic."


Soldier Field, which is owned and operated by the Chicago Park District, is re-sodded three times a season, according to Lefebvre, meaning on average, the Bears play three games on a field. Lefebvre said the Bears' last two home games -- a win over the New York Jets and a loss to the New England Patriots -- were played on a re-sodded field.


He's confident the field will be in good shape for the Bears' divisional playoff game on Jan. 16.

"I think it's going to play fine," Lefebvre said.


Criticism of the turf at Soldier Field, which also hosts other events such as high school football games during the NFL season, is nothing new, but Lefebvre would rather see Bears players focus on their own jobs.


"It's unfortunate. You see them spending too much time talking about conditions rather than just playing the game," Lefebvre said. "If that's the case, it's something that should continue to be looked at. I know [Bears President] Ted [Phillip's] response at the time was they were waiting for an NFL player injury report to come out and we would discuss it after that. But it's something that will stay a priority with the city and Soldier Field so there is the best surface out there."

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nf...ory?id=5988252

I wonder if the turf will hold up under all the activities that are held at Soldier field? That should be a concern too. I am sure turf is more costly to repair than to just resod. Granted the players health should be #1, but we all know that is not how things work.$$$$$ if you know what I mean.

I like Grass better but what we have is not grass, its just BAD