Field Turf at UNH.

[UNH 40]

Head Coach Sean MacDonnell announced yesterday at the UNH football banquet that UNH is to install field turf on there game field for this up coming season. Hopefully this is just the start of a complete face lift for Cowell stadium.:thumbsup:

[Umass74]

Head Coach Sean MacDonnell announced yesterday at the UNH football banquet that UNH is to install field turf on there game field for this up coming season. Hopefully this is just the start of a complete face lift for Cowell stadium.

That's great! Hope they can get rid of the track. The track really give lousy views from the visitor's side. The field is so far away.

As I have stated before, I live in the great Granite State. I'd vote to spend some of my tax money for a UNH stadium upgrade.

Why can't some UNH alumni get after their state representatives and get a bill on the ballot in '08???

Do I have to do everything?:D

[MplsBison]

Every football stadium in America, indoor or outdoor, is going to have artificial turf by 2015.


Mark it.

[GannonFan]

Every football stadium in America, indoor or outdoor, is going to have artificial turf by 2015.


Mark it.

Nah, there will always be places with plenty of green, natural grass. The Northern climes certainly need it (UNH, UMass for example), and places where they need to use the gameday field everyday need it (W&M for instance), but other than that it's just a matter of choice. Why would Georgia switch to artificial? Florida? The Rose Bowl? Many more to add to that list.

[MplsBison]

there will always be places with plenty of greenbrown, torn up, muddy, natural grass

Fixed.

[Cobblestone]

We're mostly an agriculture school so I doubt we'd go to artificial turf.

I am glad to hear that UNH is upgrading their field and I agree with the poster who made the comment about the track going around the field, hopefully by 2015 we won't see any more stadiums like that.

Now I hope UNH can upgrade the visitor’s side. I haven't been to a game at UNH in a few years but plan on going this season. The last time I was there I noticed the stands needed a serious upgrade; also some rest rooms on the visitor’s side would be nice.

[GannonFan]

Fixed.

It's called football. Sometimes the playing surface is less than perfect (but then again, a wet Field Turf can be kinda slick to play on so I'm sure you knew that already in your quest for variable free football). And if we're striving to keep the field in absolutley perfect condition, how about getting rid of sun glare, wind, cold, hot, etc - every game should be played in a hermetically sealed box with no weather impact whatsoever. Then we can really get down to brass tacks and take care of these annoying fans who insist on making noise during football games as well - remember the motto, NO VARIABLES!!!!!! If we stick to that then we'll eventually get there. :rolleyes:

[DrG]

This is a good move by UNH, but for the long-term, they need an entirely new facility rather than band-aid improvements to Cowell. As I've said before, pass the hat around and I'll drop something in - even though I live in Mass.!

[Umass74]

This is what the action looks like from the visitor's side. Not a great view of the game...

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6712/1164/400/construction%20040.3.jpg

[henfan]

A great decision by UNH.

Any school that doesn't install a new generation artificial surface is just pxssing money away, unless your school happens to be in a region that makes growing a decent natural surface economically feasible. It also helps if your AD has unlimited funds to water, feed and maintain the natural surface, and pay a full-time staff to do it. Don't know of many FCS programs to which this would apply. This is probably why so many NCAA and NFL teams have gone to artificial surfaces.

Oddly, two of the schools in the CAA who've had the most problems growing grass (Rhody & Delaware) still think they're smarter than Mother Nature. xidiotx Thank goodness neither school plays NCAA hockey. They'd have trouble getting the ice to form over their ponds in November and March.

[MplsBison]

A great decision by UNH.

Any school that doesn't install a new generation artificial surface is just pxssing money away, unless your school happens to be in a region that makes growing a decent natural surface economically feasible. It also helps if your AD has unlimited funds to water, feed and maintain the natural surface, and pay a full-time staff to do it. Don't know of many FCS programs to which this would apply. This is probably why so many NCAA and NFL teams have gone to artificial surfaces.

Oddly, two of the schools in the CAA who've had the most problems growing grass (Rhody & Delaware) still think they're smarter than Mother Nature. xidiotx Thank goodness neither school plays NCAA hockey. They'd have trouble getting the ice to form over their ponds in November and March.


Absolutely!

Very well put.

[MplsBison]

We're mostly an agriculture school so I doubt we'd go to artificial turf.

There's no shame in it.


After all, it's not like you don't have the knowledge to grow grass.


It's simply the enormous amount of money and time required to do it that is the limiting factor.

[Col Hogan]

We're mostly an agriculture school so I doubt we'd go to artificial turf.

The Patriots held out for years, believing they could keep natural grass...and look what they finally realized. And this is from an organization with lots more resources than URI, or UMass or UNH. Bottom line...a natural grass field in the New England climate starts to go down hill fast in October/November with the use football give it. UMass started out as an agriculture school and still has the Stockbridge School of Agriculture, and we saw the light. Come on over, it's not bad.;) ;) ;)

[MplsBison]

Absolutely.

NDSU is a ag school and we had artificial at the old outdoor stadium.

SDSU is going to be getting artificial soon.


No shame in it at all.

[GannonFan]

There's no shame in it.


After all, it's not like you don't have the knowledge to grow grass.


It's simply the enormous amount of money and time required to do it that is the limiting factor.


I've never heard an argument that over time an artificial field is that much cheaper than a natural grass field. Normally the debate is left that the costs are actually pretty even. Again, of course the more Northern schools probably will go with the fake stuff - that actually makes sense since natural fields in October and November start to suffer, but that's only half the country - the other half of the country has good grass even well into December. Tell me again why Georgia and Florida and the Rose Bowl need to go to artificial grass?

[henfan]

Gannonfan, do you work for Scott's? :smiley_wi Schnikees!

Advantages to Grass: It looks real purty.
Makes traditionist fans feel like they're watching the game played the way it was invented (minus minor changes like pads & helmets, the forward pass, 4 downs, 11 players per side, differently shaped ball, etc.)

Advantages to Artificial Surfaces: Low water required.
Comparatively little maintenance needed.
Requires no nitrates & other chemicals be dumped back into the local water supply.
A surface that's available for constant use.
Doesn't require separate practice fields be constructed.

One of the few disadvatages to an artificial surface is the higher installation costs... and the static during warmer months.

[Cobblestone]

A great decision by UNH.

Any school that doesn't install a new generation artificial surface is just pxssing money away, unless your school happens to be in a region that makes growing a decent natural surface economically feasible. It also helps if your AD has unlimited funds to water, feed and maintain the natural surface, and pay a full-time staff to do it. Don't know of many FCS programs to which this would apply. This is probably why so many NCAA and NFL teams have gone to artificial surfaces.

Oddly, two of the schools in the CAA who've had the most problems growing grass (Rhody & Delaware) still think they're smarter than Mother Nature. xidiotx Thank goodness neither school plays NCAA hockey. They'd have trouble getting the ice to form over their ponds in November and March.

Hey xidiotx , when is the last time you went to Meade? Our field looks pretty damn nice, thank you very much.

http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/schools/uri/galleries/meade-073106/DSCF3024-lg.jpg

[Marcus Garvey]

Every football stadium in America, indoor or outdoor, is going to have artificial turf by 2015.


Mark it.

Not in the desert southwest. Some high schools will, as the heavy use of the fields makes it attractive. 2 high schools in Tucson already have it. But the U of Arizona will never put it in. I've not heard one single argument by a fan or media member stating the case for artificial turn in Arizona Stadium. All they do is play a handfull of games a year in their stadium, and there's this weird sub-culture out here about growing grass. Besides, artificial turf in an enclosed stadium get's reall f'ing hot.

[Marcus Garvey]

Gannonfan, do you work for Scott's? :smiley_wi Schnikees!

Advantages to Grass: It looks real purty.
Makes traditionist fans feel like they're watching the game played the way it was invented (minus minor changes like pads & helmets, the forward pass, 4 downs, 11 players per side, differently shaped ball, etc.)

Advantages to Artificial Surfaces: Low water required.
Comparatively little maintenance needed.
Requires no nitrates & other chemicals be dumped back into the local water supply.
A surface that's available for constant use.
Doesn't require separate practice fields be constructed.

One of the few disadvatages to an artificial surface is the higher installation costs... and the static during warmer months.

I've taken the liberty of highlighting the most important factor that plays into the decision to install artifical turf. If the field is not being used for multiple purposes, and the weather allows for easy care, such as at the Rose Bowl, then artificial surface won't happen. Besides, in 10 years, players will be bitching about the bits of rubber that keep getting into their shoes!

Let's not forget the potential "snob" appeal of maintaining grass, if artificial surfaces become the norm again. Do you really think Notre Dame will chuck away the tradition of playing on grass? If they don't put any markings on the field, you know they take it seriously. Anyway, some well-heeled donor to schools like ND, Penn St. and the like will pony up the cash so they can maitain grass, should it become a financial burden.

[GannonFan]

Gannonfan, do you work for Scott's? :smiley_wi Schnikees!

Advantages to Grass: It looks real purty.
Makes traditionist fans feel like they're watching the game played the way it was invented (minus minor changes like pads & helmets, the forward pass, 4 downs, 11 players per side, differently shaped ball, etc.)

Advantages to Artificial Surfaces: Low water required.
Comparatively little maintenance needed.
Requires no nitrates & other chemicals be dumped back into the local water supply.
A surface that's available for constant use.
Doesn't require separate practice fields be constructed.

One of the few disadvatages to an artificial surface is the higher installation costs... and the static during warmer months.

Nope, just keeping the discussion grounded - pun intended! Everyone bemoans the cost of maintaining grass, but they just discount the higher installation costs for artificial - it's that high upfront cost that, at the end of the analysis, means that it doesn't cost that much more to maintain a grass one than it does to install an artificial one, especially keeping in mind that the artificial has a life span that requires successive installations. From a cost standpoint, they aren't all that different. Like Marcus says, one of the key determinants to go artificial other than natural is frequency of use - the more you use it, the more you should have artificial. The other determinant is geography - the colder it gets earlier in the fall, the more you should have artificial. Other than that, it's simply a preference since cost doesn't matter.

[henfan]

Everyone bemoans the cost of maintaining grass, but they just discount the higher installation costs for artificial - it's that high upfront cost that, at the end of the analysis, means that it doesn't cost that much more to maintain a grass one than it does to install an artificial one, especially keeping in mind that the artificial has a life span that requires successive installations.

Don't know about that. As we full well know, grass surfaces are just as prone to successive installations. UD has installed 3 1/2 different surfaces and 2 sub-surfaces in the last 14 years. They've wasted tens of thousands fighting off disease and drought back in the late '90's.

I'm no expert, obviously, but I'd wager that any reputable new generation artificial surface would have outlasted that.

[MplsBison]

http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/schools/uri/galleries/meade-073106/DSCF3024-lg.jpg


Oh right, I'm sure it looks like that halfway into the season.


xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx

[EKU05]

Every football stadium in America, indoor or outdoor, is going to have artificial turf by 2015.


Mark it.


That's probably not much of an exageration. I went to a football powerhouse high school that is currently building a new stadium with field turf...and also a new baseball stadium with it as well.

I like natural grass, but the new stuff is just so practical you can't blame schools for going to it.

[EKU05]

Oh right, I'm sure it looks like that halfway into the season.


xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx


I agree...the EKU staff does a great job with our field too, but some wear and tear over the course of the season is inevitable.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

Oh right, I'm sure it looks like that halfway into the season.


xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx

That's not the way it looked on November 11th:smiley_wi

[Mountaineer]

ASU was the first college in either NC or SC to install turf way back in 1970. Not sure if I'd want to brag about that old rug though. xlolx

The new fieldturf went in for the 2003 season and it's pretty neat. I walked on it before the scrimmage last year and was surpised at how spongy it felt. Cool stuff!

The new baseball field App is building is also going to fieldturf.

http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=111240


BOONE, N.C., Jan. 4, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) (PRIMEZONE) -- Yet another NCAA baseball program has selected FieldTurf for installation at its stadium as Appalachian State became the most recent university to join the FieldTurf family. The announcement was made jointly by ASU Athletics Director Charlie Cobb and FieldTurf CEO John Gilman.


The FieldTurf installation at Appalachian State's newly named Jim and Betty Smith Baseball Stadium will be in place for the 2007 season. The Mountaineers will play their first home game on their new FieldTurf surface on March 10 when they host Farleigh Dickinson.

[Cobblestone]

I agree...the EKU staff does a great job with our field too, but some wear and tear over the course of the season is inevitable.

My point exactly. BisonBoy wasn't able to comprehend.

[YoUDeeMan]

I miss the old Vikings (NFL) playoff games in the snow and mud. Now that was football! :thumbsup:

For all of you turf fans, are you looking to put it onto golf courses anytime soon? xlolx

[Marcus Garvey]

For all of you turf fans, are you looking to put it onto golf courses anytime soon? xlolx

Well put. These modern turf's are not so superior that EVERYBODY should rip up their sod and dirt and put it in. The need for artificial turf has to be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Here's a point that nobody has illustrated yet. These newest generation turfs are only about 4 years old, right? Will they really have a lifespan as long as their manufacturers are claiming? We don't know that yet. If they turn out to be lasting 30%-40% shorter than anticipated, that can be a problem.

[henfan]

For all of you turf fans, are you looking to put it onto golf courses anytime soon? xlolx

Don't laugh. I was just reading an article on that very topic over the weekend. It's already happening.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/Australias-first-synthetic-golf-course/2006/10/26/1161749232759.html

I wouldn't advocate the artificial stuff 100% of the time in every situation. It's just common sense that schools with limited FB budgets (read: every FCS school) and those not in places with temperate climates should seriously consider artificial stuff. It makes absolutely no sense/cents to cling to the romantic notion that FB can only be played on grass.

[GannonFan]

Don't know about that. As we full well know, grass surfaces are just as prone to successive installations. UD has installed 3 1/2 different surfaces and 2 sub-surfaces in the last 14 years. They've wasted tens of thousands fighting off disease and drought back in the late '90's.

I'm no expert, obviously, but I'd wager that any reputable new generation artificial surface would have outlasted that.

UD's hardly the model to follow - their problems with grass surfaces had more to do with incompetence and poor management as opposed to the surface in question. You don't hear of such problems elsewhere, especially in more southern climes.

[YoUDeeMan]

Don't laugh. I was just reading an article on that very topic over the weekend. It's already happening.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/Australias-first-synthetic-golf-course/2006/10/26/1161749232759.html

I wouldn't advocate the artificial stuff 100% of the time in every situation. It's just common sense that schools with limited FB budgets (read: every FCS school) and those not in places with temperate climates should seriously consider artificial stuff. It makes absolutely no sense/cents to cling to the romantic notion that FB can only be played on grass.

Synthetic greens have been around for a while. It will be interesting to see if they make it big on the pro circuit. But I was referring to the whole golf course, including fairways. Until they make the product better, everyone would be hitting 400 year drives. Hey, wait, that might help me break 80! ;)

[henfan]

UD's hardly the model to follow - their problems with grass surfaces had more to do with incompetence and poor management as opposed to the surface in question. You don't hear of such problems elsewhere, especially in more southern climes.

Agreed, which is why I suggested that schools in more temperate climes would really have to lend more consideration to artificial surfaces than would a vast majority of the schools located in the north.

But climate and geography aren't the only considerations, even for schools in the south. Budget has a huge impact. It's just more cost-effective for schools to replace one surface with the artificial stuff, to play and practice on it, than it is to replace and maintain two separate grass surfaces (one for play & one for practice.) As well, many schools need their surfaces for multi-purpose use.

IMO, UD continues to mismange its FB resources, as evidenced by the ridiculous decision to install grass in its FB stadium, while letting its practice fields go to hell. They could have easily killed two birds with one stone and been on the hook for maintaining one facility rather than two.:bang:

[GannonFan]

Agreed, which is why I suggested that schools in more temperate climes would really have to lend more consideration to artificial surfaces than would a vast majority of the schools located in the north.

But climate and geography aren't the only considerations, even for schools in the south. Budget has a huge impact. It's just more cost-effective for schools to replace one surface with the artificial stuff, to play and practice on it, than it is to replace and maintain two separate grass surfaces (one for play & one for practice.) As well, many schools need their surfaces for multi-purpose use.

IMO, UD continues to mismange its FB resources, as evidenced by the ridiculous decision to install grass in its FB stadium, while letting its practice fields go to hell. They could have easily killed two birds with one stone and been on the hook for maintaining one facility rather than two.:bang:

Preaching to the choir on the reasons - obviously for someone like W&M, they needed to play and practice on the same field - you can't do that on grass. Multiple use almost always means you need to go with artificial stuff. If the football field only gets used 8 or 9 times during the football season, then you can entertain the idea of grass as long as you are the Mid Atlantic states and further South.

[MplsBison]

And you have the resources to accomplish such a thing realistically.

[GOTOREROS]

San Diego practices on a FieldTurf field and plays on natural grass......

[EKU05]

San Diego practices on a FieldTurf field and plays on natural grass......


So does EKU.