When people discuss great/fav fields it is so easy to bring up the turf fields,same thing comes up when talking baseball.Natural Grass fields are my favorite. Just responding to question asked. There are not many, if any left in my area that HS teams play on.
If that makes me an old man, I’ll take it.
There are a number of us who would disagree. If I see a team has a grass field, that tells me that program is either a) poor, b) doesn't care, c) is stuck in the past, or d) some combination of the above. These days, you have to have an artificial surface just to be taken seriously.When people discuss great/fav fields it is so easy to bring up the turf fields,same thing comes up when talking baseball.
Are they nice? Sure. They are sweet.
But, to me, a turf field tells me someone has money, but a well manicured and taken care of natural surface shows me a program that takes pride in the day to day maintenance and upkeep of a facitily because those take work.
Kirtland, with their worn uniforms and grass field, likely says ‘get bent’.There are a number of us who would disagree. If I see a team has a grass field, that tells me that program is either a) poor, b) doesn't care, c) is stuck in the past, or d) some combination of the above. These days, you have to have an artificial surface just to be taken seriously.
This stadium is state of the art! St.Marys is D-III ,needs some work on the visitors side parking lot.
And the MAC, where only 1 school has turf on a shared stadium. Or both Pickerington schools with natural grass nicer than any turf surface on Earth... Guess they all don't care and are stuck in the pastKirtland, with their worn uniforms and grass field, likely says ‘get bent’.
To each his own I guess.There are a number of us who would disagree. If I see a team has a grass field, that tells me that program is either a) poor, b) doesn't care, c) is stuck in the past, or d) some combination of the above. These days, you have to have an artificial surface just to be taken seriously.
Well there it is. The dumbest thing I’ve read today. Bravo.There are a number of us who would disagree. If I see a team has a grass field, that tells me that program is either a) poor, b) doesn't care, c) is stuck in the past, or d) some combination of the above. These days, you have to have an artificial surface just to be taken seriously.
Kirtland, with their worn uniforms and grass field, likely says ‘get bent’.
Guess no MAC teams should be taken seriously.There are a number of us who would disagree. If I see a team has a grass field, that tells me that program is either a) poor, b) doesn't care, c) is stuck in the past, or d) some combination of the above. These days, you have to have an artificial surface just to be taken seriously.
football is meant to be played on a patch of land that's 120 yards long and 53 and third yards wide. who gives a damn if its grass, carpet, dirt, snow, rocks, or the left over bits of the easter bunny. can it old man
I remember when Carick HS in Pittsburgh was the same way. They had really cool stands build into the side of the hill though.Trona Sandmen (Trona, California) is just outside Death Valley and has a dirt field. No grass whatsoever.
Oh yes, let's reference an extreme outlier. That always helps these kinds of arguments. Reference the MAC too.Kirtland, with their worn uniforms and grass field, likely says ‘get bent’.
Would you prefer Mogadore, Lucas, or Trimble?Oh yes, let's reference an extreme outlier. That always helps these kinds of arguments. Reference the MAC too.
Mogadore has turfWould you prefer Mogadore, Lucas, or Trimble?
My mistake. Mogadore is listed as grass on ohiostadiums.com. The point stands, though. There are plenty of schools that aren’t ‘poor’ and do care but still have grass. Turf simply doesn’t make sense for many smaller schools.Mogadore has turf
I do agree with you. Plenty of schools with rich traditions that play on grass.My mistake. Mogadore is listed as grass on ohiostadiums.com. The point stands, though. There are plenty of schools that aren’t ‘poor’ and do care but still have grass. Turf simply doesn’t make sense for many smaller schools.
Turf fields for HS is becoming a 'status symbol' for many programs under the guise that is is much better financially for a school. That is generally how it gets sold to those shelling out the bucks.16 of the 30 NFL stadiums have grass.. and it's not b/c they're poor lol
There's also many schools that play on turf fields that do not give a crap about their program. I can count on 1 hand the number of grass fields I've been to in Northwest Ohio (grass still largely outnumbers turf) where I thought the field was not well kept or outside of an extremely rainy night hindered the quality of the game. Many schools that can afford turf choose not to install it because they prefer grass, that's their own decision. It doesn't diminish their program or mean that they care any less than the suburban school outside of Columbus or Cleveland that's got money to piss into the windAnother thought I had - there are a lot of schools that have grass b/c frankly, they just don't care about football or athletic success. I hate to say that, but I see that a lot. Horrible stadiums with horrible fields that never see the slightest improvement from year to year? To me that just screams that the community doesn't really think athletics is a priority.
16 of the 30 NFL stadiums have grass.. and it's not b/c they're poor lol
Lake played a game there...it also happened to be the first time the Wooster band debuted script Woo...lolAmong defunct stadiums Maurer Field in Wooster was my favorite.
100% agree.Any stadium that doesn't have a track around it.
Compare apples to oranges a little more.