Favorite HS FB stadium?

Moeller plays a fair amount of home games at UC. Second nicest college stadium in the state IMHO.

That Marietta stadium has a nice setting. Cannot find a good picture but reminds me of Ambridge High School's setup near Pittsburgh.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
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.
 
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’.
 
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.
To each his own I guess.
 
Kirtland, with their worn uniforms and grass field, likely says ‘get bent’.

as do a growing number of NFL teams.

A good grass field has as much beginning expense as a turf. Getting a good draining base.... The Browns helped several districts install them. But it also takes a district willing to actually mow and care for it regularly. I've seen more than one really good field go to hell because of administrative neglect.
 
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

Trona Sandmen (Trona, California) is just outside Death Valley and has a dirt field. No grass whatsoever.
 
Trona Sandmen (Trona, California) is just outside Death Valley and has a dirt field. No grass whatsoever.
I remember when Carick HS in Pittsburgh was the same way. They had really cool stands build into the side of the hill though.
 
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.
I do agree with you. Plenty of schools with rich traditions that play on grass.

Another 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.
 
I think the common denominator is the grass field schools do not have lower levels or other sports playing on them. At large schools they need the surface to be able to take Freshmen, JV, Varsity football along with the same levels of soccer for both boys and girls in the fall. Then in the spring they need to be able to take lacrosse over multiple levels for both genders. Yeah you can move many of the lower level games to a different field but then again who wants their kid playing at a second rate facility, especially in this day and age when levies are passed by the skin of their teeth in some Districts. The day of the HS stadium only hosting varsity football is long gone.
 
16 of the 30 NFL stadiums have grass.. and it's not b/c they're poor lol
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.

Much of the 'savings' to a program comes from the fact the initial field is donated $$ from the community, businesses, etc. That makes it essentially 'free' for the school.

If schools do not put away the necessary funds for repair, replacement, and upkeep then they are left holding their richards when it all comes to roost. They roughly need to put away each year the same, or more, what it costs to keep an grass field in tact.
If a school would raise a boatload of money for a new stadium, grass, to make it 'free' for the district then the end result is going to be a wash no matter which way you do it.

but turf is much more wicked cool.


However.....Turf fields can be extremely benefical to a school. The places that waste their time with midget football can be played on the field. You can also play soccer, practice baseball/softball, host tournament games, LAX, etc, etc etc. The benefits of a turf field are endless for a district, no doubt about that.

I think the rewards of a turf field outweigh those of a grass field in terms of community and school use of the facility.


Bet yall thought this was gonna be all negative towards turf, didnt ya?

I am all for a turf football field although I prefer grass. Same with baseball diamonds. A well manicured baseball diamond is a work of art, and the fruits of labor for a program to take immense pride in.



......just dont try to argue the $$$$$$ side of the benefits......
 
Another 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.
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 wind
 
Both turf and grass, obviously, have negative and positive qualities both. I believe it's as has already been stated; it rests with what is preferred by the decision-makers. But I tell you-- that heady smell of new-mown grass, along with the scent of sausages and popcorn and high anticipation, make sweet, sweet memories. It's just one more good thing that will soon go the way of the dinosaurs. Until then, I do love grass!
 
Last edited:
Jackson’s alumni stadium is the best to watch a game

EF9CE6BD-3F5E-46A4-A756-AF6F6EE97743.jpeg
 
Top